Jump to content

Check us out:

Photo
- - - - -

The Second Amendment for Dummies


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#21
Houwitzer

Houwitzer

    On The Road To Success

  • Bunker Members
  • 186 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rotterdam, NL
  • Server:Bunker #4
Click to view battle stats
@ EZ; whats a "state-ist"?
Im just a guy from the Netherlands, a country that has had 1 shooting-massacre in its exsistance.
Oh, and guns in our country are forbidden.

<3 Houwi.

@the Noob; calling peeps who dont agree liberal idiots, only stresses this only is getting insulting, and better should be locked- in the name of respect and -gaming- love.

btw im not a liberal in american consensus.

Edited by Houwitzer, 23 July 2012 - 01:08 AM.


#22
neurosis

neurosis

    Will Become Famous Soon Enough

  • Bunker Members
  • 1,776 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, wa
  • Server:Bunker #1
Click to view battle stats

@ EZ; whats a "state-ist"?
Im just a guy from the Netherlands, a country that has had 1 shooting-massacre in its exsistance.
Oh, and guns in our country are forbidden.

<3 Houwi.

@the Noob; calling peeps who dont agree liberal idiots, only stresses this only is getting insulting, and better should be locked- in the name of respect and -gaming- love.

btw im not a liberal in american consensus.

Guns and crime in the Netherlands

Yesterday saw the publication of a report (PDF) by the Dutch Justice Department on guns and gun crime. (There's an English summary on page 173). It has been summarized in the newsmedia, with the key headlines being that it's easy for criminals to buy guns. For 250 euros you can get a basic gun. The most popular is the Browning Highpower while Glocks and Berettas are popular too. The more refined criminals pay 1500 euros for an honest-to-goodness Smith and Wesson. Machine guns start at 1900 euros, and hand grenades can be had for 7 euros a piece.

The total number of illegal firearms is estimated to be between 85,000 and 120,000 depending on various assumptions on circulation speed and extrapolations from the numbers of confiscated arms. It's also estimated that up to 20,000 firearms trade hands each year. Most weapons are single-use. The criminals get rid of the weapon once's it been fired. In some cases, they sell it on to clueless newbie criminals.

By European standards, it's easy to get a gun legally in the Netherlands. The requirements are that you have to have been a member of a shooting club for a year, be 18 years or older, prove that you can handle firearms safely, have enough shots to your name and you obviously can't have a criminal record. The actual procedure for buying a gun is arcane and requires approval from the shooting club and the police. You must keep the gun in a safe in your home (so it's no use for self-defense), you're only allowed to transport it to and from the shooting club, and the police will come inspect your home at least once a year to check on how you're storing the gun. There are about 80,000 people with a gun license in the Netherlands.

This report focuses almost exclusively on illegal gun ownership. It makes no mention of how many legal guns were used in committing crimes. The report does point out that going the legal route of obtaining a gun makes little sense for criminals, since it's long and cumbersome while they can get guns easily anyway in the illegal circuit. If there had been many legal guns used, I suspect it would have been mentioned.

The number of gun crimes has been relatively constant in the three years that the report covers (1998-2000). There have been 30 crimes with firearms committed per 100,000 inhabitants. There are huge regional variations. In Amsterdam the rate was 72 per 100,000 people, while in the rural provinces of Drenthe and Zeeland the rates were 14 and 13 respectively. The big cities have much higher crime rates than rural areas, so the higher incidence of gun crimes is no surprise.

How does this compare to America? The FBI's Uniform Crime Reports provide the answer. The UCR keeps track of gun use in three kinds of crime: murder, robbery and aggravated assault. There are 5.6 murders per 100,000 people in the US (page 19 of the linked PDF) with 63.4% involving firearms (table 2.9, page 23). Robberies run at 148.5 per 100,000 (p.32) with 42.0% involving guns (table 2.22, p.35). Aggravated assault occurs at a rate of 318.5 (p.36) with 18.3% gun use (table 2.24, p.38). This means that gun-related crime in the US runs at 124 per 100,000 people.

This is substantially higher than the 30 reported for the Netherlands, although the 72 rate in Amsterdam comes rather closer. But this is not the whole story. Does lower criminal gun ownership translate to lower crime rates overall? Looking at the FBI data in table 1 on page 64, the violent crime rate in the US was 504.4 per 100,000 inhabitants, while property crime ran at 3656.1 per 100,000 inhabitants. The Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics has crime numbers online, but not the crime rate. The table shows 101,143 violent crimes and 919,262 property crimes in 2001. With a population of 16,171,520 (September 2002), this works out as 625.4 violent crimes per 100,000 people and 5684.4 proprety crimes. Or, to put it differently, the violent crime rate in the Netherlands in 24% higher than in the US, and the property crime rate is 55% higher.

More guns, less crime. What a surprise.

#23
Houwitzer

Houwitzer

    On The Road To Success

  • Bunker Members
  • 186 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rotterdam, NL
  • Server:Bunker #4
Click to view battle stats
crimerate isnt the same as gun related deaths...statistics are fun to use but not to the point in this discussion.
Using statistics is one thing but defining violent crimes is another story.
in the end percentage of peeps killed by guns in the us is much much higher then in any west european capital.

if u like to use statistics; some mayor us cities have a killed by gun-rate comparable to cities like kabul...


statistics are prone to falsification and have no meaning without a context or broader story, Neurosis you should mention your source if you want to give some weight to it. Add a link, for example.

anyways, i respect your views, i simply dont agree.

love, houwi.

p.s. still dont know what a "state-ist" is.

Edited by Houwitzer, 23 July 2012 - 03:11 AM.


#24
neurosis

neurosis

    Will Become Famous Soon Enough

  • Bunker Members
  • 1,776 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, wa
  • Server:Bunker #1
Click to view battle stats

crimerate isnt the same as gun related deaths...statistics are fun to use but not to the point in this discussion.
Using statistics is one thing but defining violent crimes is another story.
in the end percentage of peeps killed by guns in the us is much much higher then in any west european capital.

if u like to use statistics; some mayor us cities have a killed by gun-rate comparable to cities like kabul...


statistics are prone to falsification and have no meaning without a context or broader story, Neurosis you should mention your source if you want to give some weight to it. Add a link, for example.

anyways, i respect your views, i simply dont agree.

love, houwi.

p.s. still dont know what a "state-ist" is.



I only posted that because you said that guns in your country are forbidden. Apparently they are not.

Also to make a point. Even if they were forbidden, seems that criminals do not have a problem getting them.

I havent given my views on gun control and dont plan on it. I was just confused by your statement when I found several links that gave information to the contrary.

Anyway, I respect your opinion as well. Everyone has them and they are not always popular.

#25
JeyAem

JeyAem

    Postin Ain't Easy

  • Members
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Syke NIE/GER
  • Server:Bunker #2
Click to view battle stats
oh yes ..the american dream.. start as dishwasher > become rich enough to buy a gun > shoot everyone you dont like > profit ^^

#26
THEN00B

THEN00B

    Exploring the area

  • Founders
  • 1,280 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Server:Unselected
Click to view battle stats
Houwitzer, never did I say you were a liberal idiot. I stated I would steal food from the liberal idiots that don't like guns.

If the world goes completely to shit, at least I will be able to defend my family and steal food from the liberal idiots that think guns are bad


The only statement that was semi-directed towards you was...

If you don't like the topic you don't have to read it or post. I'm not locking this simply because it's actually a good topic and there has been good discussion so far.


I'm not attacking anyone specific, nor am I one to attack people for their opinions I'm mostly ranting about my opinions. I haven't seen anyone making personal attacks in this topic.

#27
neurosis

neurosis

    Will Become Famous Soon Enough

  • Bunker Members
  • 1,776 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, wa
  • Server:Bunker #1
Click to view battle stats

oh yes ..the american dream.. start as dishwasher > become rich enough to buy a gun > shoot everyone you dont like > profit ^^



Haha.. Thats ridiculous. Funny though.

#28
Snoid

Snoid
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beloit, Wisconsin
  • Server:Bunker #1
Click to view battle stats
Politicians and the like try to put us all in categories so they have some way to define us. Truth is... we are all so different you really can't define us. From what has been said in this thread... Europeans have some interesting ideas about what kind of people Americans are. If you talked to a large cross section of the country you would find a lot of diversity. I know people who consider themselves liberals, but on many issues, including gun control, they take a more conservative stand. I'm included in that group. I believe it's better to have the option of owning a weapon than not. If you ban guns, that option goes away. I've also talked with people who consider themselves conservatives who still want their social security checks, Medicare and Medicaid, etc. For those who fear socialism... that's what that is.

In reflecting on the theater disaster, if there had been one person legally carrying a hand gun in the theater, I think there would have been far fewer deaths, and we wouldn't have to spend millions on a prime time TV murder trial because we would have one less brain damaged, delusional, psychopath to deal with.

#29
JeyAem

JeyAem

    Postin Ain't Easy

  • Members
  • 521 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Syke NIE/GER
  • Server:Bunker #2
Click to view battle stats

In reflecting on the theater disaster, if there had been one person legally carrying a hand gun in the theater, I think there would have been far fewer deaths, and we wouldn't have to spend millions on a prime time TV murder trial because we would have one less brain damaged, delusional, psychopath to deal with.


dont know if one person with a gun would have helped all that much. at least in german news they state he had bulletproof equipe and even the police had problems to shut him down

#30
killjoy

killjoy

    Sticking Around

  • Bunker Members
  • 783 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Chiltern Hills
  • Server:Bunker #2
Click to view battle stats
What should be banned in any country - should we all have the right to own anything and do anything -
What are the limits ? Why do we elect a Government - If not to make these decisions for us -
To illustrate the point, by taking it to an absurd extreme -
If we say guns are Ok and neccessary - Is that Any gun ? - what weapons should we have the right to own - assault weapons - bazooka's - tanks - nuclear bombs :-)
What else should be a legal activity for a consenting adult - anything ?
Are drugs Ok ? - Do I have the right to inbibe anything I have a fancy for -
I would conclude the biggest threat to any society is not the Weapons, Drugs etc etc - but the fear of those things in themselves -
We all have very litlle to fear as individuals - but our perception of any threat to our own liberty, far outways the reality -

In the "UK" we have a well known phrase called "Arguing the Toss" which describes someone who enjoys the argument for its own sake -
I fear I may be a little guilty of this at the moment :-)

#31
Houwitzer

Houwitzer

    On The Road To Success

  • Bunker Members
  • 186 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rotterdam, NL
  • Server:Bunker #4
Click to view battle stats
@ neurosis:

Under strict conditions one can own a gun for sport or hunting in the netherlands.
However, it is forbidden to carry one in public.

#32
Nevermore

Nevermore

    Will Become Famous Soon Enough

  • Old retired farts
  • 2,543 posts
  • Steam:NevermoreRC
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denver, CO, USA
  • Server:Bunker #1
Click to view battle stats
So... I live in Aurora, Colorado. This massacre happened at a theater about a mile (1.6 km) from where I work and about five miles (8 km) from where I live. I've driven by it on many occasions and been to it once in the past. This shit doesn't really hit you until you're either a part of it or it comes this close to home.

I really do think it would be better if nobody had a gun, but that's not the case. There are already a ton of guns in America. WAY too many to just pass a law one day that says "ban all the guns!" It's not going to happen. And part of that is because guns are already everywhere. Not only do a lot of the bad people have them, but a lot of people already have this mentality that they're not safe without one. That's fine. With how this country is, I'm not against concealed carry or for owning guns for leisure use (hunting, clay shooting, etc). There are a number of people who are very responsible with guns (like a lot of people on this forum I'm sure).

I just... can't find one reason whatsoever that someone needs to own an AR-15 assault rifle with thousands of rounds of ammunition (which is what this person legally obtained). You don't need this to defend your home and it will get into the wrong hands. If you think your household is so threatened that you need an assault rifle which the sole purpose is to kill large amounts of people, either you're going to run out of ammo sooner or later or the world you'll find outside your home is not one worth living in anyways.

My main weapon for defending myself is a gigantic wrench I bought at Harbor Freight in a 17-wrench pack. I'll never use on an actual bolt and I don't feel any less safe than those with guns.

Gun laws do work in a society that has never been as free reign as the USA, but they're not foolproof (see Norway from a year or two ago).

Ban assault rifles. It's not a stop-all but a step in the right direction. And yes they will still be around but after a couple generations, they will be gone.

And to think I was done being controversial on these forums...

#33
EZFrag

EZFrag

    Will Become Famous Soon Enough

  • Bunker Admins
  • 1,753 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisiana
  • Server:Unselected
Click to view battle stats

And to think I was done being controversial on these forums..


I thought about you and Mrs Nevy when this went down. Glad you guys are ok.

#34
JaimeReTypo

JaimeReTypo

    On The Road To Success

  • Bunker Members
  • 208 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Kalispell Montana
  • Server:Bunker #1
Click to view battle stats
I found this article on worldwide gun ownership that might be of interest. Lots of facts and figures. One thing that caught my eye is that Latin America has a massive homicide by firearm rate, with some of the lowest rates of gun ownership in the world and the highest homicides by firearm count.

FWLIW, 6000 rounds of ammunition would last one afternoon of plinking with a group of my friends . . . :D

#35
Viking

Viking

    Becoming a Part of the Forum

  • Old retired farts
  • 445 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway, Telemark
  • Server:Bunker #2
Click to view battle stats

So... I live in Aurora, Colorado. This massacre happened at a theater about a mile (1.6 km) from where I work and about five miles (8 km) from where I live. I've driven by it on many occasions and been to it once in the past. This shit doesn't really hit you until you're either a part of it or it comes this close to home.

I really do think it would be better if nobody had a gun, but that's not the case. There are already a ton of guns in America. WAY too many to just pass a law one day that says "ban all the guns!" It's not going to happen. And part of that is because guns are already everywhere. Not only do a lot of the bad people have them, but a lot of people already have this mentality that they're not safe without one. That's fine. With how this country is, I'm not against concealed carry or for owning guns for leisure use (hunting, clay shooting, etc). There are a number of people who are very responsible with guns (like a lot of people on this forum I'm sure).

I just... can't find one reason whatsoever that someone needs to own an AR-15 assault rifle with thousands of rounds of ammunition (which is what this person legally obtained). You don't need this to defend your home and it will get into the wrong hands. If you think your household is so threatened that you need an assault rifle which the sole purpose is to kill large amounts of people, either you're going to run out of ammo sooner or later or the world you'll find outside your home is not one worth living in anyways.

My main weapon for defending myself is a gigantic wrench I bought at Harbor Freight in a 17-wrench pack. I'll never use on an actual bolt and I don't feel any less safe than those with guns.

Gun laws do work in a society that has never been as free reign as the USA, but they're not foolproof (see Norway from a year or two ago).

Ban assault rifles. It's not a stop-all but a step in the right direction. And yes they will still be around but after a couple generations, they will be gone.

And to think I was done being controversial on these forums...


+1

For me, it would be a sad day to see Norwegian police carrying weapons on daily duty...

#36
*CapTn*

*CapTn*

    Will Become Famous Soon Enough

  • Members
  • 1,929 posts
  • Steam:captn3
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wheres your mom?
  • Server:Bunker #1
Click to view battle stats
not one person any where in the world should be banned the right to defend himself..

anyone who trust a goverment to protect them is a fool.....

trying to justify no guns is almost borderline retarded..

i have one last comment to any europian who thinks there country is great ..if it was so why then do we need to trade and protect ur country to ase if it was are own.i dont see europe jumping up to defend usa..lolwhy becuz we have the right to bare arms..and if u attack are country we have mallitias with there own guns bombs and tanks..

just remember europe when u try to reason with a american.. we left ur country for a reason already.and i dont see anyone running to europe to live ..lolololol.

and last thought here on this subject .its a deep one .

if it wasnt for us bad usa people over here shooting each other with are freedom,u euros would all be germany ..lolnot once but twice.

now i dont belive like u and i dam sure amnot gonna agree with u..thats why i am here and u are there.hahaha oh and dont forget theres over 400 million of us dumbasses with rights to own aand carry guns..and for me it would be a sad day when my local police didnt carry guns.


and for gun facts heres one should be at top of list not once in any history have i heard of a gun jumping up all on its own and just start shooting people..some one has to pull that trigger.

Edited by *CapTn*, 26 July 2012 - 10:48 PM.


#37
solewu

solewu

    Sticking Around

  • Old retired farts
  • 1,034 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:belgium
  • Server:Bunker #4
Click to view battle stats
lol captn :P

personally i don't think that invading lots of countries is working as planned :P doesn't seem the proper way.

Btw i think saddam hussein was brought to power by the usa aswell?



+ about us all being germans without u guys help, that's true. But I don't think germany would've stopped after europe ;)

#38
Hey Motion

Hey Motion

    Making Friends

  • Members
  • 82 posts
  • Server:Bunker #1
Click to view battle stats
@Viking - Are you saying that you don't want your police carrying guns? If so, how come? When a maniac decides to go on a killing spree, you don't want anyone to stop him? Doesn't make sense to me.

#39
*CapTn*

*CapTn*

    Will Become Famous Soon Enough

  • Members
  • 1,929 posts
  • Steam:captn3
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:wheres your mom?
  • Server:Bunker #1
Click to view battle stats
hey solwu nobody is perfect.

and no actually i dont remember voting on suddam hussins office so are u correct or are u one who thinks that are goverment is are spokes person..lolso wrong.and i remember usa taking care of that fool.

now i dont disagree that usa goverment is corupt .i think this is about the right t o defend ur self in which europe fails many times...and us so called dubass moronic fools who left ur country..lol have been defending ur country many times and guess what we will be there again when u need us ..now arent u glade ur ancesters chased us off.. i know i am..lol i love u sol i hope u love me too.


and too add some humor i am a german..oh and also irish and dutch..

Edited by *CapTn*, 29 July 2012 - 08:59 PM.


#40
Viking

Viking

    Becoming a Part of the Forum

  • Old retired farts
  • 445 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Norway, Telemark
  • Server:Bunker #2
Click to view battle stats

@Viking - Are you saying that you don't want your police carrying guns? If so, how come? When a maniac decides to go on a killing spree, you don't want anyone to stop him? Doesn't make sense to me.


Yes, I'm saying exactly that. In fact, that's how it is here in Norway today - the police doesn't carry any weapons on daily duties here, and I'd like to keep it like that.
The police have the ability to call out teams that have weapons when needed, and that's more than enough here. Most weapons related crime here happens out of the public space where police isn't at (like homes).

What happens when we arm the police is that the criminals will need to "out-gun" the police with more firepower, which then the police need to increase their firepower, and then the criminals....

I'm not blind for the history of the US when it comes to guns, and it wouldn't help to ban them today (too much guns out in the public already), but it wouldn't hurt to start a process to restrict (as in reduce) firearms in my view which hopefully would end up with less weapons out in the public.

I don't know what you (and others) know about life (in this context) in other countries (e.g. those in Scandinavia) so I'll try to explain; I personally would never ever think about owning a gun, much less carrying one in public. Why would I? There is no need for a gun here. I would really feel nervous walking out in the city knowing that some, or even worse; many, people I meet in the streets could be carrying weapons.

I see arguments here that weapons doesn't fire on their own, people do that, and I agree. But the fact that people carry weapons means that their accessible. If people don't carry weapons they won't be used either because they are *not accessible*.

example: one rather drunk person insults another person at a bar one weekend which causes the other guy to retaliate. I see two scenarios based on this discussion here:

a) the person carries a gun and in the heat of the moment (since it's *accessible*) draws and fires
b) the person doesn't carry a gun and therefore needs to use his bare hands if he wants to retaliate
(of course the person in b) can carry another form for weapon like a knife, but still; it's possible to run away from a knife, but rather hard to run away from a bullet)

You must try to understand that my point of view are based on how life is where I've been brought up and how this society works here.

What I find sad is that if some (!) of you would travel over to e.g. Scandinavia for a vacation you might be feeling insecure because you don't (as in can't) carry a gun here. That's for me sad and really makes you *not* free (in the sense of personal freedom). Again, try to see my arguments from my point of view and upbringing.

@Captn: you didn't leave Europe, your ancestors did. And your remarks (in my view) shows lacks of oversight and might be taken as an insult (which I don't think is needed, neither in this thread or others). Here's a question for you; when US enters foreign countries with military force - are they doing that alone, or are there other countries with them (to help and defend them)?

Based on your previous reply here, I'm retarded for arguing for no guns - well, I beg to differ!