Well, my tour ended 4 1/2 years ago, but I ain't givin' up my weapons! (I actually have an '03-A3 and a Model 1911A from Army surplus stock--my dad got 'em back in the 'fifties for about 25 bucks as part of the civilian marksmanship program).
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: gun control or justifiable? pineys at home [davejakes]
[ In reply to ]
Re: gun control or justifiable? pineys at home [cerveloguy]
[ In reply to ]
Release Date: November 27, 2003
Vancouver, BC - Restrictive firearm legislation has failed to reduce gun violence in Australia, Canada, or Great Britain. The policy of confiscating guns has been an expensive failure, according to a new paper The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, released today by The Fraser Institute.
What makes gun control so compelling for many is the belief that violent crime is driven by the availability of guns, and more importantly, that criminal violence in general may be reduced by limiting access to firearms, says Gary Mauser, author of the paper and professor of business at Simon Fraser University.
This new study examines crime trends in Commonwealth countries that have recently introduced firearm regulations. Mauser notes that the widely ignored key to evaluating firearm regulations is to examine trends in total violent crime, not just firearm crime.
The United States provides a valuable point of comparison for assessing crime rates as that country has witnessed a dramatic drop in criminal violence over the past decade for example, the homicide rate in the US has fallen 42 percent since 1991. This is particularly significant when compared with the rest of the world in 18 of the 25 countries surveyed by the British Home Office, violent crime increased during the 1990s.
The justice system in the U.S. differs in many ways from those in the Commonwealth but perhaps the most striking difference is that qualified citizens in the United States can carry concealed handguns for self-defence. During the past few decades, more than 25 states in the U.S. have passed laws allowing responsible citizens to carry concealed handguns. In 2003, there are 35 states where citizens can get such a permit.
Disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence in any country examined in this study. In all these cases, disarming the public has been ineffective, expensive, and often counter productive. In all cases, the effort meant setting up expensive bureaucracies that produce no noticeable improvement to public safety or have made the situation worse. Mauser points to these trends in the countries he examined:
England and Wales
Both Conservative and Labour governments have introduced restrictive firearms laws over the past 20 years; all handguns were banned in 1997.
Yet in the 1990s alone, the homicide rate jumped 50 percent, going from 10 per million in 1990 to 15 per million in 2000. While not yet as high as the US, in 2002 gun crime in England and Wales increased by 35 percent. This is the fourth consecutive year that gun crime has increased.
Police statistics show that violent crime in general has increased since the late 1980s and since 1996 has been more serious than in the United States.
Australia
The Australian government made sweeping changes to the firearms legislation in 1997. However, the total homicide rate, after having remained basically flat from 1995 to 2001, has now begun climbing again. While violent crime is decreasing in the United States, it is increasing in Australia. Over the past six years, the overall rate of violent crime in Australia has been on the rise for example, armed robberies have jumped 166 percent nationwide.
The confiscation and destruction of legally owned firearms has cost Australian taxpayers at least $500 million. The cost of the police services bureaucracy, including the costly infrastructure of the gun registration system, has increased by $200 million since 1997.
And for what? asks Mauser. There has been no visible impact on violent crime. It is impossible to justify such a massive amount of the taxpayers money for no decrease in crime. For that kind of tax money, the police could have had more patrol cars, shorter shifts, or better equipment.
Canada
The contrast between the criminal violence rates in the United States and in Canada is dramatic. Over the past decade, the rate of violent crime in Canada has increased while in the United States the violent crime rate has plummeted. The homicide rate is dropping faster in the US than in Canada.
The Canadian experiment with firearm registration is becoming a farce says Mauser. The effort to register all firearms, which was originally claimed to cost only $2 million, has now been estimated by the Auditor General to top $1 billion. The final costs are unknown but, if the costs of enforcement are included, the total could easily reach $3 billion.
It is an illusion that gun bans protect the public. No law, no matter how restrictive, can protect us from people who decide to commit violent crimes. Maybe we should crack down on criminals rather than hunters and target shooters? says Mauser.
Read the whole report here: http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin...dExperiment.pdf
Vancouver, BC - Restrictive firearm legislation has failed to reduce gun violence in Australia, Canada, or Great Britain. The policy of confiscating guns has been an expensive failure, according to a new paper The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, released today by The Fraser Institute.
What makes gun control so compelling for many is the belief that violent crime is driven by the availability of guns, and more importantly, that criminal violence in general may be reduced by limiting access to firearms, says Gary Mauser, author of the paper and professor of business at Simon Fraser University.
This new study examines crime trends in Commonwealth countries that have recently introduced firearm regulations. Mauser notes that the widely ignored key to evaluating firearm regulations is to examine trends in total violent crime, not just firearm crime.
The United States provides a valuable point of comparison for assessing crime rates as that country has witnessed a dramatic drop in criminal violence over the past decade for example, the homicide rate in the US has fallen 42 percent since 1991. This is particularly significant when compared with the rest of the world in 18 of the 25 countries surveyed by the British Home Office, violent crime increased during the 1990s.
The justice system in the U.S. differs in many ways from those in the Commonwealth but perhaps the most striking difference is that qualified citizens in the United States can carry concealed handguns for self-defence. During the past few decades, more than 25 states in the U.S. have passed laws allowing responsible citizens to carry concealed handguns. In 2003, there are 35 states where citizens can get such a permit.
Disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence in any country examined in this study. In all these cases, disarming the public has been ineffective, expensive, and often counter productive. In all cases, the effort meant setting up expensive bureaucracies that produce no noticeable improvement to public safety or have made the situation worse. Mauser points to these trends in the countries he examined:
England and Wales
Both Conservative and Labour governments have introduced restrictive firearms laws over the past 20 years; all handguns were banned in 1997.
Yet in the 1990s alone, the homicide rate jumped 50 percent, going from 10 per million in 1990 to 15 per million in 2000. While not yet as high as the US, in 2002 gun crime in England and Wales increased by 35 percent. This is the fourth consecutive year that gun crime has increased.
Police statistics show that violent crime in general has increased since the late 1980s and since 1996 has been more serious than in the United States.
Australia
The Australian government made sweeping changes to the firearms legislation in 1997. However, the total homicide rate, after having remained basically flat from 1995 to 2001, has now begun climbing again. While violent crime is decreasing in the United States, it is increasing in Australia. Over the past six years, the overall rate of violent crime in Australia has been on the rise for example, armed robberies have jumped 166 percent nationwide.
The confiscation and destruction of legally owned firearms has cost Australian taxpayers at least $500 million. The cost of the police services bureaucracy, including the costly infrastructure of the gun registration system, has increased by $200 million since 1997.
And for what? asks Mauser. There has been no visible impact on violent crime. It is impossible to justify such a massive amount of the taxpayers money for no decrease in crime. For that kind of tax money, the police could have had more patrol cars, shorter shifts, or better equipment.
Canada
The contrast between the criminal violence rates in the United States and in Canada is dramatic. Over the past decade, the rate of violent crime in Canada has increased while in the United States the violent crime rate has plummeted. The homicide rate is dropping faster in the US than in Canada.
The Canadian experiment with firearm registration is becoming a farce says Mauser. The effort to register all firearms, which was originally claimed to cost only $2 million, has now been estimated by the Auditor General to top $1 billion. The final costs are unknown but, if the costs of enforcement are included, the total could easily reach $3 billion.
It is an illusion that gun bans protect the public. No law, no matter how restrictive, can protect us from people who decide to commit violent crimes. Maybe we should crack down on criminals rather than hunters and target shooters? says Mauser.
Read the whole report here: http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin...dExperiment.pdf
Re: gun control or justifiable? pineys at home [tri_bri2]
[ In reply to ]
When read in conjunction, does this mean that if you're under the age of 17 or over the age of 45, you don't have a constitutional right to "keep and bear arms" ???
If so, there sure are a lot of felons out there.
-------------------------------------
Steve Perkins
If so, there sure are a lot of felons out there.
-------------------------------------
Steve Perkins
Re: gun control or justifiable? pineys at home [steveperx]
[ In reply to ]
No, last time I checked, "the people" means "the people" not "the militia". And how do you go from gun ownership outside the militia to felon? Because it's Friday?
Re: gun control or justifiable? pineys at home [steveperx]
[ In reply to ]
Nope-- Article [IX.]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
In other words, just because something is not enumerated in the Constitution, does not mean a right does not exist.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
In other words, just because something is not enumerated in the Constitution, does not mean a right does not exist.
Re: gun control or justifiable? pineys at home [tri_bri2]
[ In reply to ]
Should we have mandatory firearms training for all US male citizens starting at age 17? Should we require all men between the ages of 17 and 45 to keep a rifle and ammo at the ready?
Yep. It seems to work for the Swiss.
"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Yep. It seems to work for the Swiss.
"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Re: gun control or justifiable? pineys at home [vitus979]
[ In reply to ]
>Yep. It seems to work for the Swiss.
I though they just used those little knives...
_______________________________________________
I though they just used those little knives...
_______________________________________________
Re: gun control or justifiable? pineys at home [jhc]
[ In reply to ]
Yeah, those Swiss have some good ideas. I say we adopt their model, and give every member of the militia an assault rifle, a mountain bike, a trusty pocket knife, and the training to use all three.
Sounds sort of silly, but I think it would actually work.
"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Sounds sort of silly, but I think it would actually work.
"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
If those French Canadians ever try to invade and make all our women stop shaving their pits, I'll be there.