"A Dutch Guy Is Disgusted By America, But He Has A Hell Of A Point"

On Sunday, September 29, 2013 7:45:50 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:

Granted I've not been back to America for quite a while but when I was
there I can't remember ever hearing that tripe. We had target
shooters, trap and skeet shooters, hunters and some collectors. I
never heard anyone extol the M-16, for example.

I think it _is_ different now. Examples: I play traditional tunes with various friends. I ran into one fellow musician at a concert of Irish traditional music, and he bragged that he was packing a firearm. What the hell? You need a gun to go hear jigs and reels?? Another guy at one get-together proudly showed me photos of his "new baby": an assault rifle. (BTW, when I told that guy about our bike tour this summer, he said he'd never be out on a bike without his biggest pistol and his combat knife in a hidden sheath. What the hell??)

Gun fans who were content with a shotgun and a pistol a generation ago now don't seem to feel "safe" unless they've got a 30 round capacity, and the ability to slam 30 more in at a moment's notice. What the hell??

My dislike of the "anti - gun" laws is firstly, that it is another
freedom that the government seem intent on denying the population and
secondly, historically gun laws haven't solved anything. Read up on
the New York "Sullivan Law" enacted a some years ago to deny hand guns
to New Yorkers in reaction to an assassination , or attempted
assassination. And we all know that New York is, as a result, gun free
and no more gun deaths. New Hampshire, on the other hand, has
practically no gun laws and gun deaths in that state are among the
lowest in the nation.

The gun murder rate is influenced by many variables in society, to be sure. It's not surprising to me that there would be fewer gun murders per gun owner in rural states with high popularity of hunting, few large cities, homogenous populations and less desperate poverty. And when a segment of society sinks so low that large numbers of its young guys think dealing drugs is the path to riches, it's not surprising that gun murders rise among competing gangs.

But I think it's wrong to pretend that gun laws don't work. My understanding is that after some mass killings, Australia clamped down on firepower, and - son of a gun! - pretty much stopped the mass killings. (James can confirm or deny, I guess. Or we could look it up...)

The obvious problem with New York, Chicago, DC or other cities enacting gun control laws is that they are islands in a "no control" sea. If the average gang-banger can ride a bike out of the city limits and legally buy a person-killer, it's hard to keep that thing out of the city. And with the NRA pulling in big bucks by convincing duck hunters that the black helicopter guys are after their shotguns, it's _really_ tough.

But it's not hard to see a strong correlation between guns-per-person and murders-per-person among the world's nations. I've got that data as an X-Y graph and the correlation is striking, but I can't seem to locate the site I got it from. But http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...hip-world-list has the same information in table form.

Apparently no one in the U.S. realizes that you can't legislate
safety. they Tried eradicating the Devil Rum - yup, no more alcohol in
the whole country, and as a result the Mafia went from a local
neighborhood activity to a major crime threat. They tried eradication
the Demon drugs and now have the largest prison population in the
world, I've read. On the way they have outlawed gambling,
prostitution, bigamy, and a whole host of bad things, which, of course
no longer exist in America.

.... and when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs! (An English friend of mine used to use that to mock the NRA crazies.)

More seriously, the items you list above are practically impossible to outlaw, BUT that's because any hillbilly in a holler can brew his own white lightning. Any guy living in a trailer park can brew up some meth, or plant a patch of weed. Gambling requires only a pair of dice, and prostitution requires no equipment at all, if you keep it simple enough.

Guns are different. Sure, we may not be able to prevent a gang member from fabricating a zip gun that's lethal (with luck) at three feet. But we certainly _should_ be able to keep macho, para-military, rapid-fire guns in the military, and off the streets. Nobody needs 30 rounds to hunt anything.

- Frank Krygowski

On 30/09/13 13:05, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Sunday, September 29, 2013 7:45:50 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:

Granted I've not been back to America for quite a while but when I
was there I can't remember ever hearing that tripe. We had target
shooters, trap and skeet shooters, hunters and some collectors. I
never heard anyone extol the M-16, for example.

I think it _is_ different now. Examples: I play traditional tunes
with various friends. I ran into one fellow musician at a concert of
Irish traditional music, and he bragged that he was packing a
firearm. What the hell? You need a gun to go hear jigs and reels??
Another guy at one get-together proudly showed me photos of his "new
baby": an assault rifle. (BTW, when I told that guy about our bike
tour this summer, he said he'd never be out on a bike without his
biggest pistol and his combat knife in a hidden sheath. What the
hell??)

Gun fans who were content with a shotgun and a pistol a generation
ago now don't seem to feel "safe" unless they've got a 30 round
capacity, and the ability to slam 30 more in at a moment's notice.
What the hell??

My dislike of the "anti - gun" laws is firstly, that it is another
freedom that the government seem intent on denying the population
and secondly, historically gun laws haven't solved anything. Read
up on the New York "Sullivan Law" enacted a some years ago to deny
hand guns to New Yorkers in reaction to an assassination , or
attempted assassination. And we all know that New York is, as a
result, gun free and no more gun deaths. New Hampshire, on the
other hand, has practically no gun laws and gun deaths in that
state are among the lowest in the nation.

The gun murder rate is influenced by many variables in society, to be
sure. It's not surprising to me that there would be fewer gun
murders per gun owner in rural states with high popularity of
hunting, few large cities, homogenous populations and less desperate
poverty. And when a segment of society sinks so low that large
numbers of its young guys think dealing drugs is the path to riches,
it's not surprising that gun murders rise among competing gangs.

But I think it's wrong to pretend that gun laws don't work. My
understanding is that after some mass killings, Australia clamped
down on firepower, and - son of a gun! - pretty much stopped the mass
killings. (James can confirm or deny, I guess. Or we could look it
up...)

The obvious problem with New York, Chicago, DC or other cities
enacting gun control laws is that they are islands in a "no control"
sea. If the average gang-banger can ride a bike out of the city
limits and legally buy a person-killer, it's hard to keep that thing
out of the city. And with the NRA pulling in big bucks by convincing
duck hunters that the black helicopter guys are after their shotguns,
it's _really_ tough.

But it's not hard to see a strong correlation between guns-per-person
and murders-per-person among the world's nations. I've got that data
as an X-Y graph and the correlation is striking, but I can't seem to
locate the site I got it from. But
http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...hip-world-list
has the same information in table form.

Apparently no one in the U.S. realizes that you can't legislate
safety. they Tried eradicating the Devil Rum - yup, no more alcohol
in the whole country, and as a result the Mafia went from a local
neighborhood activity to a major crime threat. They tried
eradication the Demon drugs and now have the largest prison
population in the world, I've read. On the way they have outlawed
gambling, prostitution, bigamy, and a whole host of bad things,
which, of course no longer exist in America.

... and when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs! (An
English friend of mine used to use that to mock the NRA crazies.)

More seriously, the items you list above are practically impossible
to outlaw, BUT that's because any hillbilly in a holler can brew his
own white lightning. Any guy living in a trailer park can brew up
some meth, or plant a patch of weed. Gambling requires only a pair
of dice, and prostitution requires no equipment at all, if you keep
it simple enough.

Guns are different. Sure, we may not be able to prevent a gang
member from fabricating a zip gun that's lethal (with luck) at three
feet. But we certainly _should_ be able to keep macho,
para-military, rapid-fire guns in the military, and off the streets.
Nobody needs 30 rounds to hunt anything.


I agree but I think the Govt went a touch too far here when they banned
semi auto 5 shot shotguns - a favorite of small game shooters here.

They also banned a favorite firearm of mine. I had a Browning .22 semi
auto, that took about 10 rounds up a tube through the stock. It only
used .22 shorts, and was a lovely rabbit rifle for walking quietly
around blackberry bushes. Made in the early 1900s, I restored it and
had it working beautifully. Then some nutcase went and killed some poor
folks with people killing firearms [1], and little John Howard ordered
me to hand my little pea shooter in. I haven't forgotten nor forgiven him.

Christ, it barely had enough grunt to kill a rabbit at 25 yards!

What would have been better was a more strict control of who could
obtain a license, and the type of firearms they could own.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Ar...28Australia%29

--
JS

On Sun, 29 Sep 2013 20:05:14 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Sunday, September 29, 2013 7:45:50 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:

Granted I've not been back to America for quite a while but when I was
there I can't remember ever hearing that tripe. We had target
shooters, trap and skeet shooters, hunters and some collectors. I
never heard anyone extol the M-16, for example.

I think it _is_ different now. Examples: I play traditional tunes with various friends. I ran into one fellow musician at a concert of Irish traditional music, and he bragged that he was packing a firearm. What the hell? You need a gun to go hear jigs and reels?? Another guy at one get-together proudly showed me photos of his "new baby": an assault rifle. (BTW, when I told that guy about our bike tour this summer, he said he'd never be out on a bike without his biggest pistol and his combat knife in a hidden sheath. What the hell??)

Gun fans who were content with a shotgun and a pistol a generation ago now don't seem to feel "safe" unless they've got a 30 round capacity, and the ability to slam 30 more in at a moment's notice. What the hell??

My dislike of the "anti - gun" laws is firstly, that it is another
freedom that the government seem intent on denying the population and
secondly, historically gun laws haven't solved anything. Read up on
the New York "Sullivan Law" enacted a some years ago to deny hand guns
to New Yorkers in reaction to an assassination , or attempted
assassination. And we all know that New York is, as a result, gun free
and no more gun deaths. New Hampshire, on the other hand, has
practically no gun laws and gun deaths in that state are among the
lowest in the nation.

The gun murder rate is influenced by many variables in society, to be sure. It's not surprising to me that there would be fewer gun murders per gun owner in rural states with high popularity of hunting, few large cities, homogenous populations and less desperate poverty. And when a segment of society sinks so low that large numbers of its young guys think dealing drugs is the path to riches, it's not surprising that gun murders rise among competing gangs.

But I think it's wrong to pretend that gun laws don't work. My understanding is that after some mass killings, Australia clamped down on firepower, and - son of a gun! - pretty much stopped the mass killings. (James can confirm or deny, I guess. Or we could look it up...)

The obvious problem with New York, Chicago, DC or other cities enacting gun control laws is that they are islands in a "no control" sea. If the average gang-banger can ride a bike out of the city limits and legally buy a person-killer, it's hard to keep that thing out of the city. And with the NRA pulling in big bucks by convincing duck hunters that the black helicopter guys are after their shotguns, it's _really_ tough.

But it's not hard to see a strong correlation between guns-per-person and murders-per-person among the world's nations. I've got that data as an X-Y graph and the correlation is striking, but I can't seem to locate the site I got it from. But http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...hip-world-list has the same information in table form.

Apparently no one in the U.S. realizes that you can't legislate
safety. they Tried eradicating the Devil Rum - yup, no more alcohol in
the whole country, and as a result the Mafia went from a local
neighborhood activity to a major crime threat. They tried eradication
the Demon drugs and now have the largest prison population in the
world, I've read. On the way they have outlawed gambling,
prostitution, bigamy, and a whole host of bad things, which, of course
no longer exist in America.

... and when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs! (An English friend of mine used to use that to mock the NRA crazies.)

More seriously, the items you list above are practically impossible to outlaw, BUT that's because any hillbilly in a holler can brew his own white lightning. Any guy living in a trailer park can brew up some meth, or plant a patch of weed. Gambling requires only a pair of dice, and prostitution requires no equipment at all, if you keep it simple enough.

Guns are different. Sure, we may not be able to prevent a gang member from fabricating a zip gun that's lethal (with luck) at three feet. But we certainly _should_ be able to keep macho, para-military, rapid-fire guns in the military, and off the streets. Nobody needs 30 rounds to hunt anything.

- Frank Krygowski

No guns aren't really different. As you said, street kids can make a
zip gun out of a piece of brass tube and a nail, but nearly anyone can
have a machine gun. there is even a site on the web that has
instructions to make a number of different automatic guns without a
"proper machine shop" to use a description I read on this site :-)
A friend makes simple tubing shotguns - two tubes that slide together
and fire 12 gauge shotgun shell. My mate calls them a "flare gun" and
they will fire a 12 gauge flare, and shot shells too :-)

Thailand once had, and perhaps still do, a cottage industry making
guns. I had one years ago - a 12 gauge pistol. Kept it in a drawer
right beside the bed - in case someone broke in at night.
I lost it when we were robbed in broad daylight. When they busted in
the door I was sitting the front room and the gun was in the bedroom
:-(

Tell your gun buddies that one.
--
Cheers,

John B.

Op maandag 30 september 2013 12:56:45 UTC+2 schreef John B.:
On Sun, 29 Sep 2013 20:05:14 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski

wrote:



On Sunday, September 29, 2013 7:45:50 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:



Granted I've not been back to America for quite a while but when I was

there I can't remember ever hearing that tripe. We had target

shooters, trap and skeet shooters, hunters and some collectors. I

never heard anyone extol the M-16, for example.



I think it _is_ different now. Examples: I play traditional tunes with various friends. I ran into one fellow musician at a concert of Irish traditional music, and he bragged that he was packing a firearm. What the hell? You need a gun to go hear jigs and reels?? Another guy at one get-together proudly showed me photos of his "new baby": an assault rifle. (BTW, when I told that guy about our bike tour this summer, he said he'd never be out on a bike without his biggest pistol and his combat knife in a hidden sheath. What the hell??)



Gun fans who were content with a shotgun and a pistol a generation ago now don't seem to feel "safe" unless they've got a 30 round capacity, and the ability to slam 30 more in at a moment's notice. What the hell??



My dislike of the "anti - gun" laws is firstly, that it is another

freedom that the government seem intent on denying the population and

secondly, historically gun laws haven't solved anything. Read up on

the New York "Sullivan Law" enacted a some years ago to deny hand guns

to New Yorkers in reaction to an assassination , or attempted

assassination. And we all know that New York is, as a result, gun free

and no more gun deaths. New Hampshire, on the other hand, has

practically no gun laws and gun deaths in that state are among the

lowest in the nation.



The gun murder rate is influenced by many variables in society, to be sure. It's not surprising to me that there would be fewer gun murders per gun owner in rural states with high popularity of hunting, few large cities, homogenous populations and less desperate poverty. And when a segment of society sinks so low that large numbers of its young guys think dealing drugs is the path to riches, it's not surprising that gun murders rise among competing gangs.



But I think it's wrong to pretend that gun laws don't work. My understanding is that after some mass killings, Australia clamped down on firepower, and - son of a gun! - pretty much stopped the mass killings. (James can confirm or deny, I guess. Or we could look it up...)



The obvious problem with New York, Chicago, DC or other cities enacting gun control laws is that they are islands in a "no control" sea. If the average gang-banger can ride a bike out of the city limits and legally buy a person-killer, it's hard to keep that thing out of the city. And with the NRA pulling in big bucks by convincing duck hunters that the black helicopter guys are after their shotguns, it's _really_ tough.



But it's not hard to see a strong correlation between guns-per-person and murders-per-person among the world's nations. I've got that data as an X-Y graph and the correlation is striking, but I can't seem to locate the site I got it from. But http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...hip-world-list has the same information in table form.



Apparently no one in the U.S. realizes that you can't legislate

safety. they Tried eradicating the Devil Rum - yup, no more alcohol in

the whole country, and as a result the Mafia went from a local

neighborhood activity to a major crime threat. They tried eradication

the Demon drugs and now have the largest prison population in the

world, I've read. On the way they have outlawed gambling,

prostitution, bigamy, and a whole host of bad things, which, of course

no longer exist in America.



... and when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs! (An English friend of mine used to use that to mock the NRA crazies.)



More seriously, the items you list above are practically impossible to outlaw, BUT that's because any hillbilly in a holler can brew his own white lightning. Any guy living in a trailer park can brew up some meth, or plant a patch of weed. Gambling requires only a pair of dice, and prostitution requires no equipment at all, if you keep it simple enough.



Guns are different. Sure, we may not be able to prevent a gang member from fabricating a zip gun that's lethal (with luck) at three feet. But we certainly _should_ be able to keep macho, para-military, rapid-fire guns in the military, and off the streets. Nobody needs 30 rounds to hunt anything..



- Frank Krygowski



No guns aren't really different. As you said, street kids can make a

zip gun out of a piece of brass tube and a nail, but nearly anyone can

have a machine gun. there is even a site on the web that has

instructions to make a number of different automatic guns without a

"proper machine shop" to use a description I read on this site :-)

A friend makes simple tubing shotguns - two tubes that slide together

and fire 12 gauge shotgun shell. My mate calls them a "flare gun" and

they will fire a 12 gauge flare, and shot shells too :-)



Thailand once had, and perhaps still do, a cottage industry making

guns. I had one years ago - a 12 gauge pistol. Kept it in a drawer

right beside the bed - in case someone broke in at night.

I lost it when we were robbed in broad daylight. When they busted in

the door I was sitting the front room and the gun was in the bedroom

:-(



Tell your gun buddies that one.

--

Cheers,



John B.

What would you have done when the gun was within reach? Shot the guy?

Lou

On 9/30/2013 2:16 AM, James wrote:
On 30/09/13 13:05, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Sunday, September 29, 2013 7:45:50 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:

Granted I've not been back to America for quite a while but when I
was there I can't remember ever hearing that tripe. We had target
shooters, trap and skeet shooters, hunters and some collectors. I
never heard anyone extol the M-16, for example.

I think it _is_ different now. Examples: I play traditional tunes
with various friends. I ran into one fellow musician at a concert of
Irish traditional music, and he bragged that he was packing a
firearm. What the hell? You need a gun to go hear jigs and reels??
Another guy at one get-together proudly showed me photos of his "new
baby": an assault rifle. (BTW, when I told that guy about our bike
tour this summer, he said he'd never be out on a bike without his
biggest pistol and his combat knife in a hidden sheath. What the
hell??)

Gun fans who were content with a shotgun and a pistol a generation
ago now don't seem to feel "safe" unless they've got a 30 round
capacity, and the ability to slam 30 more in at a moment's notice.
What the hell??

My dislike of the "anti - gun" laws is firstly, that it is another
freedom that the government seem intent on denying the population
and secondly, historically gun laws haven't solved anything. Read
up on the New York "Sullivan Law" enacted a some years ago to deny
hand guns to New Yorkers in reaction to an assassination , or
attempted assassination. And we all know that New York is, as a
result, gun free and no more gun deaths. New Hampshire, on the
other hand, has practically no gun laws and gun deaths in that
state are among the lowest in the nation.

The gun murder rate is influenced by many variables in society, to be
sure. It's not surprising to me that there would be fewer gun
murders per gun owner in rural states with high popularity of
hunting, few large cities, homogenous populations and less desperate
poverty. And when a segment of society sinks so low that large
numbers of its young guys think dealing drugs is the path to riches,
it's not surprising that gun murders rise among competing gangs.

But I think it's wrong to pretend that gun laws don't work. My
understanding is that after some mass killings, Australia clamped
down on firepower, and - son of a gun! - pretty much stopped the mass
killings. (James can confirm or deny, I guess. Or we could look it
up...)

The obvious problem with New York, Chicago, DC or other cities
enacting gun control laws is that they are islands in a "no control"
sea. If the average gang-banger can ride a bike out of the city
limits and legally buy a person-killer, it's hard to keep that thing
out of the city. And with the NRA pulling in big bucks by convincing
duck hunters that the black helicopter guys are after their shotguns,
it's _really_ tough.

But it's not hard to see a strong correlation between guns-per-person
and murders-per-person among the world's nations. I've got that data
as an X-Y graph and the correlation is striking, but I can't seem to
locate the site I got it from. But
http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...hip-world-list
has the same information in table form.

Apparently no one in the U.S. realizes that you can't legislate
safety. they Tried eradicating the Devil Rum - yup, no more alcohol
in the whole country, and as a result the Mafia went from a local
neighborhood activity to a major crime threat. They tried
eradication the Demon drugs and now have the largest prison
population in the world, I've read. On the way they have outlawed
gambling, prostitution, bigamy, and a whole host of bad things,
which, of course no longer exist in America.

... and when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs! (An
English friend of mine used to use that to mock the NRA crazies.)

More seriously, the items you list above are practically impossible
to outlaw, BUT that's because any hillbilly in a holler can brew his
own white lightning. Any guy living in a trailer park can brew up
some meth, or plant a patch of weed. Gambling requires only a pair
of dice, and prostitution requires no equipment at all, if you keep
it simple enough.

Guns are different. Sure, we may not be able to prevent a gang
member from fabricating a zip gun that's lethal (with luck) at three
feet. But we certainly _should_ be able to keep macho,
para-military, rapid-fire guns in the military, and off the streets.
Nobody needs 30 rounds to hunt anything.


I agree but I think the Govt went a touch too far here when they banned
semi auto 5 shot shotguns - a favorite of small game shooters here.


Maybe but I seem to find myself in the very unusual position of agreeing
with Frank.

I see what you mean about the shotgun, had a small 4/10 bird shooter
when I was a kid and a semi auto 12 gauge. Don't hunt any more though.


They also banned a favorite firearm of mine. I had a Browning .22 semi
auto, that took about 10 rounds up a tube through the stock. It only
used .22 shorts, and was a lovely rabbit rifle for walking quietly
around blackberry bushes. Made in the early 1900s, I restored it and
had it working beautifully. Then some nutcase went and killed some poor
folks with people killing firearms [1], and little John Howard ordered
me to hand my little pea shooter in. I haven't forgotten nor forgiven him.

Christ, it barely had enough grunt to kill a rabbit at 25 yards!

What would have been better was a more strict control of who could
obtain a license, and the type of firearms they could own.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Ar...28Australia%29

Per John B.:
A friend makes simple tubing shotguns - two tubes that slide together
and fire 12 gauge shotgun shell. My mate calls them a "flare gun" and
they will fire a 12 gauge flare, and shot shells too :-)

My takeaway from watching the movie "Sin Nombre" was that those things
are staple items among Mexican and Central American gang members.
--
Pete Cresswell

On 9/30/2013 7:52 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op maandag 30 september 2013 12:56:45 UTC+2 schreef John B.:
On Sun, 29 Sep 2013 20:05:14 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski

wrote:



On Sunday, September 29, 2013 7:45:50 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:



Granted I've not been back to America for quite a while but when I was

there I can't remember ever hearing that tripe. We had target

shooters, trap and skeet shooters, hunters and some collectors. I

never heard anyone extol the M-16, for example.



I think it _is_ different now. Examples: I play traditional tunes with various friends. I ran into one fellow musician at a concert of Irish traditional music, and he bragged that he was packing a firearm. What the hell? You need a gun to go hear jigs and reels?? Another guy at one get-together proudly showed me photos of his "new baby": an assault rifle. (BTW, when I told that guy about our bike tour this summer, he said he'd never be out on a bike without his biggest pistol and his combat knife in a hidden sheath. What the hell??)



Gun fans who were content with a shotgun and a pistol a generation ago now don't seem to feel "safe" unless they've got a 30 round capacity, and the ability to slam 30 more in at a moment's notice. What the hell??



My dislike of the "anti - gun" laws is firstly, that it is another

freedom that the government seem intent on denying the population and

secondly, historically gun laws haven't solved anything. Read up on

the New York "Sullivan Law" enacted a some years ago to deny hand guns

to New Yorkers in reaction to an assassination , or attempted

assassination. And we all know that New York is, as a result, gun free

and no more gun deaths. New Hampshire, on the other hand, has

practically no gun laws and gun deaths in that state are among the

lowest in the nation.



The gun murder rate is influenced by many variables in society, to be sure. It's not surprising to me that there would be fewer gun murders per gun owner in rural states with high popularity of hunting, few large cities, homogenous populations and less desperate poverty. And when a segment of society sinks so low that large numbers of its young guys think dealing drugs is the path to riches, it's not surprising that gun murders rise among competing gangs.



But I think it's wrong to pretend that gun laws don't work. My understanding is that after some mass killings, Australia clamped down on firepower, and - son of a gun! - pretty much stopped the mass killings. (James can confirm or deny, I guess. Or we could look it up...)



The obvious problem with New York, Chicago, DC or other cities enacting gun control laws is that they are islands in a "no control" sea. If the average gang-banger can ride a bike out of the city limits and legally buy a person-killer, it's hard to keep that thing out of the city. And with the NRA pulling in big bucks by convincing duck hunters that the black helicopter guys are after their shotguns, it's _really_ tough.



But it's not hard to see a strong correlation between guns-per-person and murders-per-person among the world's nations. I've got that data as an X-Y graph and the correlation is striking, but I can't seem to locate the site I got it from. But http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...hip-world-list has the same information in table form.



Apparently no one in the U.S. realizes that you can't legislate

safety. they Tried eradicating the Devil Rum - yup, no more alcohol in

the whole country, and as a result the Mafia went from a local

neighborhood activity to a major crime threat. They tried eradication

the Demon drugs and now have the largest prison population in the

world, I've read. On the way they have outlawed gambling,

prostitution, bigamy, and a whole host of bad things, which, of course

no longer exist in America.



... and when bombs are outlawed, only outlaws will have bombs! (An English friend of mine used to use that to mock the NRA crazies.)



More seriously, the items you list above are practically impossible to outlaw, BUT that's because any hillbilly in a holler can brew his own white lightning. Any guy living in a trailer park can brew up some meth, or plant a patch of weed. Gambling requires only a pair of dice, and prostitution requires no equipment at all, if you keep it simple enough.



Guns are different. Sure, we may not be able to prevent a gang member from fabricating a zip gun that's lethal (with luck) at three feet. But we certainly _should_ be able to keep macho, para-military, rapid-fire guns in the military, and off the streets. Nobody needs 30 rounds to hunt anything.



- Frank Krygowski



No guns aren't really different. As you said, street kids can make a

zip gun out of a piece of brass tube and a nail, but nearly anyone can

have a machine gun. there is even a site on the web that has

instructions to make a number of different automatic guns without a

"proper machine shop" to use a description I read on this site :-)

A friend makes simple tubing shotguns - two tubes that slide together

and fire 12 gauge shotgun shell. My mate calls them a "flare gun" and

they will fire a 12 gauge flare, and shot shells too :-)



Thailand once had, and perhaps still do, a cottage industry making

guns. I had one years ago - a 12 gauge pistol. Kept it in a drawer

right beside the bed - in case someone broke in at night.

I lost it when we were robbed in broad daylight. When they busted in

the door I was sitting the front room and the gun was in the bedroom

:-(



Tell your gun buddies that one.

--

Cheers,



John B.

What would you have done when the gun was within reach? Shot the guy?

Lou


Either that or not, which endangers the neighbors next week.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

the Dutch get their ass kicked like Japan....no coal no oil great sailors. What would they say ? Lebensraumeniger ?

Could be your D man has a fear of open skies endless waves of gasohol for purple mtns of delusional 'Westerners.'

Next complaint will be abt French food.

Whiners and no nothings abt history and gov are always looking to Mommy/Big Bro/ and the queen for benevolent dictatorship from cheap insurance and real estate hacks.

Yawl doahn no ****.

On Monday, September 30, 2013 9:52:46 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/30/2013 7:52 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

What would you have done when the gun was within reach? Shot the guy?

Either that or not, which endangers the neighbors next week.

And there you have it. In the U.S., lots of gun owners think the vigilante death penalty is a perfectly fine punishment for petty theft. Or trying to take over one's drug customers. Or flirting with one's "significant other.." Or "dissing." Or even for trying to prevent any of the above.

When van Uhm (the speaker in the video linked by Andrew) talked about the huge reduction in murder rates since medieval times, he ascribed it to the fact that individuals are no longer permitted to be vigilantes - what he described as the democratic, constitutional state's monopoly on violence. IOW, you can't just kill anyone you want to kill.

I know some gun fans are horrified by that situation, and apparently think that it's terribly unsafe if every citizen can't shoot to kill. But examine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate again. The U.S. has well over 20 times the gun death rate of the Netherlands, and over 40 times the gun death rate of Great Britain. That's hardly testament to "protection" by guns.

- Frank Krygowski

On 9/30/2013 9:57 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Monday, September 30, 2013 9:52:46 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/30/2013 7:52 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:

What would you have done when the gun was within reach? Shot the guy?

Either that or not, which endangers the neighbors next week.

And there you have it. In the U.S., lots of gun owners think the vigilante death penalty is a perfectly fine punishment for petty theft. Or trying to take over one's drug customers. Or flirting with one's "significant other." Or "dissing." Or even for trying to prevent any of the above.

When van Uhm (the speaker in the video linked by Andrew) talked about the huge reduction in murder rates since medieval times, he ascribed it to the fact that individuals are no longer permitted to be vigilantes - what he described as the democratic, constitutional state's monopoly on violence. IOW, you can't just kill anyone you want to kill.

I know some gun fans are horrified by that situation, and apparently think that it's terribly unsafe if every citizen can't shoot to kill. But examine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate again. The U.S. has well over 20 times the gun death rate of the Netherlands, and over 40 times the gun death rate of Great Britain. That's hardly testament to "protection" by guns.

- Frank Krygowski


I agree that we don't seem to be slowing up armed robbery,
assault, rape, home invasion or carjacking so far. What do
you suggest?

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971