Palm Pistol

[mako224]

  michaeljames92 said:

Ahh no...If guns weren't legalised in the first place then very few people would have guns.

Right just the criminals and the political elites.

Wow, now there is a bit of naiveté. Please tell me why I as a law abiding citizen in a free country should not be allowed to own the guns I have. I think drugs are illegal but it sure seems to me that an aweful lot of people have to problem getting or using them. Please explain how guns would be any different.

[michaeljames92]

  mako224 said:

Right just the criminals and the political elites.

Pictures tell 1000 words.

Seems to me there is a link between gun ownership and intentional homocides... I rest my case your honour.

[mako224]

I suggest you move to Poland.

[iacas]

  michaeljames92 said:

Seems to me there is a link between gun ownership and intentional homocides...

Seems to me you haven't done more than the slightest bit of research, either.

For example, did you know that suicides are often included in U.S. firearms statistics but not in the statistics of other countries? Did you know that if we remove black-on-black crime in the U.S., our gun violence statistics are actually lower than most other countries? No, probably not. And there's more beyond that, too, but you're young, you're gullible and idealistic, and you've not done your research. P.S. That chart doesn't mesh with the statistics I've heard which place Canada's gun ownership levels at or above those of the U.S.

[michaeljames92]

I'm not going to argue with you but I researched various countries and their deaths by MURDER and the US has a significantly higher amount of murders per 100,000 people compared to most other countries. Surely you can't say that being able to buy a gun from a store on the street does not influence the amount of murders and suicides in america.

[EquipmentJunkie]

  michaeljames92 said:

I'm not going to argue with you but I researched various countries and their deaths by MURDER and the US has a significantly higher amount of murders per 100,000 people compared to most other countries. Surely you can't say that being able to buy a gun from a store on the street does not influence the amount of murders and suicides in america.

That's not how gun purchases work first of all so your research is severely flawed. As someone who works in law enforcement I can say that most firearms crimes are not committed by the original owner (purchaser) of the firearm.

[iacas]

  EquipmentJunkie said:

That's not how gun purchases work first of all so your research is severely flawed. As someone who works in law enforcement I can say that most firearms crimes are not committed by the original owner (purchaser) of the firearm.

He seems to get too many things wrong to engage in serious debate.

The "beginner's book" to "gun control" I like to recommend is one called "Armed" by Kleck. I've read several, and it's no pamphlet, but it seems to be general enough and it's quite convincing. It also takes several popular "gun/death stats" to task and exposes their flaws.

[microcrayfish]

Michael, didn't you know it's against the rules of the internet to question Americans on their gun culture. They won't listen.

On another note. If you're going to question someone's argument based on their research then I'd suggest you provide some research that counters their argument. Blaming things on blacks or bringing up what you've "heard" doesn't hold any weight unless you can provide the statistics to back it up, especially since michaeljames92 did provide research to back up his argument. You've questioned the validity of the man's research now provide some of your own to prove your own point. Put up or shut up.

For the record, I couldn't care less about gun laws in America, it's not my problem and it's not my place to tell people in another country how to organise their society. If you can provide the statistics and research to prove your points then that's fine; but until you do, the one who can't engage in serious debate isn't Michael, it's you.

[EquipmentJunkie]

  microcrayfish said:

Michael, didn't you know it's against the rules of the internet to question Americans on their gun culture. They won't listen.

Michaels research was based on the ability to purchase a firearm but he does not seem to be familiar with the process? As far as research I would definitely think my vocation and degree make me more than qualified to talk about my countries gun laws than some foreigner.

[st0wgolf08]

  EquipmentJunkie said:

Michaels research was based on the ability to purchase a firearm but he does not seem to be familiar with the process? As far as research I would definitely think my vocation and degree make me more than qualified to talk about my countries gun laws than some foreigner.

seconded.

[iacas]

  microcrayfish said:

Michael, didn't you know it's against the rules of the internet to question Americans on their gun culture. They won't listen.

Yeah, cuz that's what's going on. Not.

  microcrayfish said:

If you're going to question someone's argument based on their research then I'd suggest you provide some research that counters their argument. Blaming things on blacks or bringing up what you've "heard" doesn't hold any weight unless you can provide the statistics to back it up, especially since michaeljames92 did provide research to back up his argument.

I didn't "blame" things on blacks, and when I said "what I'd heard" it was the lame Michael Moore gun "documentary." The majority of the information I provided WAS cited information - I referenced a book he should/could read to get more of the facts.

[EquipmentJunkie]

  iacas said:

Yeah, cuz that's what's going on. Not.

Yes and although I too found that documentary to be flawed (including the below cartoon that was in it) it still made me laugh.

'ehh link did not work never mind.

[nykfan4life]

  iacas said:

Yeah, cuz that's what's going on. Not.

I wouldn't trust anything coming from one of those movies. Even if he does have an arguable, grounded-in-fact point(not here, imho), he warps the facts, misrepresents the truth, and re-writes history to get his point across.

My own opinion is one that has been voiced many times in this thread - if you make guns illegal, then only criminals will have them. It might reduce the number of guns, but not make them any less dangerous. Look at the 'war on drugs' - you can be thrown in jail for even the smallest amount of illegal substance yet drugs are widely available pretty much everywhere. A federal ban on handguns would have the same effect.

[Ceej]

I agree w/ equipment junkie. A non-lethal taser or pepper spray will take care of business just as fast as a gun would.

[st0wgolf08]

  Ceej said:

I agree w/ equipment junkie. A non-lethal taser or pepper spray will take care of business just as fast as a gun would.

I dont know if I agree with that, I've seen and heard of people getting tasered, not even feeling it, and still moving on to do whatever he or she wanted to do. It's amazing what having a couple of drinks in ones system can do to their pain-taking ability or toughness.

[Big_M]

  microcrayfish said:

From the looks of it there's safety buttons so you'd have to be actually gripping it properly in your palm to actually fire it. Mind you, that won't necessarily stop little Timmy from rummaging around in grandma's handbag and finding an interesting looking toy and ****ing BANG! If it's designed for disabled and elderly people to be able to fire easily then a little kid's not going to have any trouble pulling uh pressing the trigger either.

but why would grandma's purse be left around carelessly if a gun was in it? Responsible gun ownership would counter this fear.

  Stacey_E said:

I think a single shot handgun is a terrible idea. Do you even realize what someone who is crazy acting enough to be "shootable" is going to do to you after you pop your one shot, if you are not spot on perfect with that one shot?

this is a good point, I'm not sure what caliber we're talking about, but either way, that one shot better be well placed. Maybe it is an OK option for some, but when I carry I want to have more shots at my disposal.

  michaeljames92 said:

My Opinion is no one should be allowed guns. Only farmers and such. Hence the number of deaths in Australia from guns.

You're right our second ammendment should be striken, and why should I be able to enjoy recreational activities like hunting. Even though hunters provide the vast majority of money that goes towards wetlands preservation and funding our agencies that care for the envirement here in the US.

  iacas said:

Seems to me you haven't done more than the slightest bit of research, either.

Thank you... and I think that about covers that... michaeljames clearly knows nothing of how US firearms are sold and has cited some of the most inaccurate research available.

[EquipmentJunkie]

  st0wgolf08 said:

I dont know if I agree with that, I've seen and heard of people getting tasered, not even feeling it, and still moving on to do whatever he or she wanted to do. It's amazing what having a couple of drinks in ones system can do to their pain-taking ability or toughness.

I agree but that a taser is not a replacement for a gun by any means, but having said that Tasers do not work on pain compliance.

[TommyD69]

  mako224 said:

driving is not a right but thank god we live in a country where it is a right for law abiding citizens to own a firearm.

amen!!!!!!!!!!!