Recommended Posts
***
...She doesn't recognize - ..
"She" does, perhaps as "she" dares to have a look over the edge?
Lay down your arms, PJ. I am not attacking you. I do not even defend me. I just stated something. If you need to tell me something, do it. Or do you need JohnRich's OK on that?
Or vice-versa?
dudeist skydiver # 3105
...She doesn't recognize - ..
"She" does, perhaps as "she" dares to have a look over the edge?
Lay down your arms, PJ. I am not attacking you. I do not even defend me. I just stated something. If you need to tell me something, do it. Or do you need JohnRich's OK on that?
Or vice-versa?
dudeist skydiver # 3105
QuoteJohnRich, you are not talking about my country.
You talk about yours.
Are you even on the same PLANET as the rest of us??! Why can't you follow this discussion??! WE [I]ARE[/I] TALKING ABOUT [I]YOUR[/I] COUNTRY.
I linked to a story about a MASSACRE BY A GUNMAN in YOUR COUNTRY. It was just a few short years ago. He killed himself when the police closed in on him ready to do violence to end his rampage.
Then you come along with yet another utterly incomprehensible post about how johnrich is not talking about your country...
WTF?!?! We could talk all day long and into the night about how gun control's history in your country is rich with atrocity, and adverse effects.
Would you like us to?
-Jeffrey
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
Jimbo 0
QuoteDear JohnRich, I do not need to avoid a thing.
As long as you're not avoiding things do you think that you could take a few minutes and answer the question I posed here, and again here? Both questions are in response to the following exchange:
QuoteQuote
PhillyKev said:
Yes, much better to be killed by the first guy
And then you replied:
No. Much better to have strict gun control.
-
Jim
"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.
Quote***
...She doesn't recognize - ..
"She" does, perhaps as "she" dares to have a look over the edge?
Lay down your arms, PJ. I am not attacking you. I do not even defend me. I just stated something. If you need to tell me something, do it. Or do you need JohnRich's OK on that?
Or vice-versa?
Again, what the hell are you talking about??
I was talking, in public view, to johnrich about his expectation about your response to his queries. Where do you see a desire for johnrich's approval for something?
-Jeffrey
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
billvon 2,466
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Are you even on the same PLANET as the rest of us??!
Looks like you could use a little time to cool off.
Looks like you could use a little time to cool off.
Quote
Are you even on the same PLANET as the rest of us??! Why can't you follow this discussion??! WE [I]ARE[/I] TALKING ABOUT [I]YOUR[/I] COUNTRY.
PJ, you are angry. Should control that! Slow down, like me.
DO YOU REALLY THINK I HAVE TO REPLY ON EVERY S*** I READ ?? IS THAT A MUST ??
***** cooling down ********
If you need (bad) examples, go and check you own files. You will find enough.
If you need to show a link to a massacre in my country, do it! What does that mean to me in that moment ? I have to change my mind on gun control, gun laws? That needs more.
Go and stir you own s***, not the one of the others. Bad habit.
The more people have access to weapons, the more will be killed! If legal access or not, what does that count finally?
Night folks.
dudeist skydiver # 3105
JohnRich 4
QuoteJohnRich, you are not talking about my country. You talk about yours. No need to talk about me in 3rd person, I am still alive
Yes, I *am* talking about your country. You're talking about mine, so it should be fair game for me to talk about yours. Don't you like it when the shoe is on the other foot? Can you answer the points which Jeffery and I raised?
I mentioned you by name three times, to draw you into the response, knowing you would see it. That can hardly be construed as talking about you behind your back, i.e. "third person".
You've got all weekend to respond, without me being here for rebuttal. Take advantage of it. Try to clear up all those outstanding questions which you've been avoiding.
QuoteThe more people have access to weapons, the more will be killed!
That's demonstrably false. Any examination of the facts will bear that out. It's a nice, kneejerk "logical" way to think, but it just isn't true. But we've done that argument before - it's all in the forum here if you care to look it up. Don't worry, I won't hold my breath waiting for you to do so.
I'm off to the Aggies Over Texas boogie.
JohnRich 4
QuoteLay down your arms, PJ. I am not attacking you.
What right do you have to tell others to "lay down their arms", when you admit that you own firearms yourself, and haven't laid down your own? If you want to take the high moral ground on this issue, and demonstrate the depth of your belief in disarmament, then you should set an example by laying down your own arms first.
Will you?
Otherwise, your position could be seen as hypocritical; telling others to do something, which you are unwilling to do yourself. And that would devastate the credibility of your arguments.
QuoteWhy does England currently have a gun problem?
I'm genuinely interested in why you think england has a gun problem?
If you even mouth the word gun in england, you'd have police marksman at your doorstep.
Please explain.
Kennedy 0
QuoteI'm genuinely interested in why you think england has a gun problem?
If you even mouth the word gun in england, you'd have police marksman at your doorstep.
Please explain.
Well, there's this thing called crime. That's when bad people do bad things. It happens despite our best efforts.
And there're these things called statistics. That's the recording and measuring of things. So we study things and come up with crime statistics.
Well, England has VERY big problems with crime, violent crime, home invasions, and gun violence.
People who inform themselves through sources more reliable than the evening tabliod know about this.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*
QuoteLay down your arms, PJ. I am not attacking you.
What right do you have to tell others to "lay down their arms", when you admit that you own firearms yourself, and haven't laid down your own? If you want to take the high moral ground on this issue, and demonstrate the depth of your belief in disarmament, then you should set an example by laying down your own arms first.
Do you recognize a joke if you hit one?
dudeist skydiver # 3105
Quote
Yes, I *am* talking about your country. You're talking about mine, so it should be fair game for me to talk about yours. Don't you like it when the shoe is on the other foot? Can you answer the points which Jeffery and I raised?
I mentioned you by name three times, to draw you into the response, knowing you would see it. That can hardly be construed as talking about you behind your back, i.e. "third person".
You've got all weekend to respond, without me being here for rebuttal. Take advantage of it. Try to clear up all those outstanding questions which you've been avoiding.QuoteThe more people have access to weapons, the more will be killed!
That's demonstrably false. Any examination of the facts will bear that out. It's a nice, kneejerk "logical" way to think, but it just isn't true. But we've done that argument before - it's all in the forum here if you care to look it up. Don't worry, I won't hold my breath waiting for you to do so.
JohnRich, I truely dislike the tone you "talk" to me.
You might remember, there already were so many threads (were'nt you the author
mainly?) regarding gun owning matters. You know my point of view. You will not change it. So, I still decide by myself whom to answer or not. Leave it to me. Too many words do not automatically mean a smart speaker.
dudeist skydiver # 3105
JohnRich 4
QuoteI still decide by myself whom to answer or not. Leave it to me. Too many words do not automatically mean a smart speaker.
Nor too few.
If you choose not to respond to the contradictions and misstatements of facts in your positions, that is your free choice to make. However, the readers here may conclude from that lack of response, that you really haven't thought out and researched your position thorougly.
Suffer the consequences to the credibility of your arguments accordingly.
Ripple 0
QuoteAnd there're these things called statistics. That's the recording and measuring of things. So we study things and come up with crime statistics.
Well, England has VERY big problems with crime, violent crime, home invasions, and gun violence.
Total crime: Down 1.8% to 1,060,930 offences
Burglary: Down 7.1% to 105,361 offences
Car crime: Down 7.1% to 225,610
Drugs offences: Down 3% to 32,332
GBH: Down 0.5% to 4,908
Gun crime: Down 7.4% to 3,576
Picking pockets: Down 14.6% to 27,238
Rape: Down 5.9% to 2,571
Robbery: Down 4.4% to 40,640
Sexual offences: Down 2.2% to 10,200
Street crime: Down 4.2% to 56,455
Source: BBC News 28th April 2004
Shootings
Significant reductions were achieved in Camden, where gun crime fell by 40 per cent Haringey (27 per cent) and Lambeth (21 per cent). Cuts of 17 and 10 per cent respectively were also recorded in Hackney and Brent.
And a new unit, Trafalgar, set up in January to tackle non-fatal shootings, has achieved a 35 per cent reduction in incidents in six months.
Trident has continued to have a clear impact within the black community, with a 45 per cent cut in gun-related murders over the last six months – from 11 between January and June 2003 to six murders this year.
Detective Chief Superintendent John Coles said: “The combination of the Trident and Trafalgar teams working together in one command has led to an improved focus on intelligence and proactive opportunities to drive down shootings in London that benefits all the communities we serve.”
Source: The Job 24 July 2004
The Job is the MPS newspaper, btw.
People mistakenly believe that gun crime has risen, when infact, all that has changed are the recording procedures.
Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes
Quote
Suffer the consequences to the credibility of your arguments accordingly
I am suffering still some pain in my broken leg.
That's all.
dudeist skydiver # 3105
Kennedy 0
So, according to you, since England (I said England, not GB, UK, etc) banned handguns to its subjects, your position is that gun crime didn't go up, only the recording methods changed?
Sure, whatever helps you sleep at night. By the way, the numbers you posted constitute a large problem.
Also, when posting statistics, it helps to tell everyone what they mean.
e.g.: reduction over what period of time, from when to when, covering what area, etc.
ps - what I saw in your post is that you don't think you're crime problem has gotten any bigger, you were just underreporting it before. Not an improvement.
Sure, whatever helps you sleep at night. By the way, the numbers you posted constitute a large problem.
Also, when posting statistics, it helps to tell everyone what they mean.
e.g.: reduction over what period of time, from when to when, covering what area, etc.
ps - what I saw in your post is that you don't think you're crime problem has gotten any bigger, you were just underreporting it before. Not an improvement.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*
JohnRich 4
QuoteGun crime: Down 7.4% to 3,576...
People mistakenly believe that gun crime has risen, when infact, all that has changed are the recording procedures.
I'm doing your work for you here. When you post something from a newspaper, you should provide the link so that others can peruse the same story, and verify what you're saying.
Here is the story from which you posted your info: BBC News
There are a few problems with your presentation. First of all, those numbers are for the London Metro area only, not for all of England as you tried to imply, since that was the subject of the discussion. You tried to pull a switcharoo there.
Furthermore, you omitted a few things which didn't support your story:
" murder (7.9%), and violent crime against the person (4.1%), showed a rise..."
"The number of violent crimes in London rose by 7,400 over the last year to 186,188 offences. The number of murders rose from 189 to 204."
"Sir Ian said the murder level was the highest in London in recent years and, although firearms offences were falling, there was an increase in knife-related crimes."
Any police chief who calls an 8% increase in murder in one year a crime-fighting "success", should be fired immediately.
Just because gun crime is down for the last year in one place, does not mean that gun crime is not up, and dramatically so, for England overall, since handguns and semi-auto long guns were banned. It is.
And note that substitution is occuring from guns to knives, and the murder rate is still climbing. Is it an improvement to have more people murdered with knives, than fewer people with guns?
Check out the attached chart showing rising gun crime in England, as reported by the Home Office, which is the statistical collection office for crime, similar to America's FBI. The chart shows that I was correct when I said that gun crime is up in England.
The source for that chart is here: BBC News
In summary, you were wrong that gun crime is down in England. The gun ban did nothing to stop gun crime, nor to reduce the number of murders. It is a failure, which deprived law-abiding people of their property and their sport, for nothing.
"The gun ban did nothing to stop gun crime, nor to reduce the number of murders. It is a failure, which deprived law-abiding people of their property and their sport, for nothing."
I strongly (and respectfully) doubt that this tragic situation could have been avoided by relaxing our current gun laws to the previous arrangements. Especially if the homeowners were adhering to the (previous UK) law and responsible gun onwership guidance.
We would have required some sort of further relaxation of our previous laws to enable the homeowners to react within a reasonable time frame.
Prior to the present gun control laws, we had to keep guns locked, and stored separately from ammo. Not very practical for personal security purposes, but perfectly adequate for sporting, and 'special interest' (such as maintaining antique firearms) applications.
I strongly (and respectfully) doubt that this tragic situation could have been avoided by relaxing our current gun laws to the previous arrangements. Especially if the homeowners were adhering to the (previous UK) law and responsible gun onwership guidance.
We would have required some sort of further relaxation of our previous laws to enable the homeowners to react within a reasonable time frame.
Prior to the present gun control laws, we had to keep guns locked, and stored separately from ammo. Not very practical for personal security purposes, but perfectly adequate for sporting, and 'special interest' (such as maintaining antique firearms) applications.
--------------------
He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson
He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson
MBOF 0
In the UK violent crime is broken down into various categories including domestic violence, robbery, gun related crime and alcohol related crime. The statistics (at the home office website http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime/violentcrime/index.html) show that all except alcohol related violent crimes are down by at least 14 percent (compared to the previous report 2001-2002). I think the perception that is being perpetuated here, that the UK has an exceptionally high crime rate is false. It is also false to generalise about crime figures (for which the BBC is definitely guilty). If we are talking about all crime then it is clear that in the UK all crime is falling. Violent crime is on the increase but this is largely due to alcohol related crime. In the UK we need to tackle the real issue which has nothing to do with gun legislation, it is that we have to solve the rapidly growing problem associated with binge drinking.
Ripple 0
That's correct.QuoteSo, according to you, since England (I said England, not GB, UK, etc) banned handguns to its subjects, your position is that gun crime didn't go up, only the recording methods changed?
Thank you. However, if gun crime goes up, goes down, stays the same, I'll sleep easy at nightQuoteSure, whatever helps you sleep at night. By the way, the numbers you posted constitute a large problem.
I'm unable to see why they cause a large problem. Sorry, quite right.QuoteAlso, when posting statistics, it helps to tell everyone what they mean.
e.g.: reduction over what period of time, from when to when, covering what area, etc.
No, not underreporting, recording differently.Quoteps - what I saw in your post is that you don't think you're crime problem has gotten any bigger, you were just underreporting it before. Not an improvement.
I'll try and find the article I read the other day...
Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes
Ripple 0
Please don't feel that its 'work'. This is only a forum, after all. I don't actually care if people believe the statistics or not. If they want to they will, whether I post a link or not and the obverse is true, also. Besides, posting of links to verify info is lampooned by some, and for your information, I didn't get it from a website, and therefore didn't have a link, I got it from a newspaper.Quote
I'm doing your work for you here. When you post something from a newspaper, you should provide the link so that others can peruse the same story, and verify what you're saying.
Firstly, all I was demonstrating was that gun crime in London is down. I did not at any time mean to imply that I was talking about the entire country. Secondly, I was refering to gun crime only, as that appeared to be the topic under discussion. This, as proven has improved dramatically in London, principally, it would seem, due to different policing techniques along with the gun control laws.QuoteThere are a few problems with your presentation. First of all, those numbers are for the London Metro area only, not for all of England as you tried to imply, since that was the subject of the discussion. You tried to pull a switcharoo there Furthermore, you omitted a few things which didn't support your story:
" murder (7.9%), and violent crime against the person (4.1%), showed a rise..."
"The number of violent crimes in London rose by 7,400 over the last year to 186,188 offences. The number of murders rose from 189 to 204."
"Sir Ian said the murder level was the highest in London in recent years and, although firearms offences were falling, there was an increase in knife-related crimes."
Any police chief who calls an 8% increase in murder in one year a crime-fighting "success", should be fired immediately.
Just because gun crime is down for the last year in one place, does not mean that gun crime is not up, and dramatically so, for England overall, since handguns and semi-auto long guns were banned. It is.
And note that substitution is occuring from guns to knives, and the murder rate is still climbing. Is it an improvement to have more people murdered with knives, than fewer people with guns?
Check out the attached chart showing rising gun crime in England, as reported by the Home Office, which is the statistical collection office for crime, similar to America's FBI. The chart shows that I was correct when I said that gun crime is up in England.
The source for that chart is here: BBC News
I didn't say it was. Only London. If you remember I pointed out that the Job is the MPS newspaperQuoteIn summary, you were wrong that gun crime is down in England.
Actually, that's over dramatising the situation. Gun crime has never been as bad over here as it is in America, secondly without the gun control we now have, there would be far more criminals touting guns than there are currently. The gun laws have helped prevent a situation, not cure it.QuoteThe gun ban did nothing to stop gun crime, nor to reduce the number of murders. It is a failure, which deprived law-abiding people of their property and their sport, for nothing.
Next Mood Swing: 6 minutes
She doesn't recognize that as the end of the violence, because if the killer's brother starts killing the cops who brought about his death, that's a perpetuation of violence caused by the cops' legal and righteous use of it. Yes, it's crazy, I know.
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites