Gun Ownership

[lynx]

@j2k4 - Are you trying to make an issue of something to avoid the true topic ? Well I'm not going to let you drag me down that sidestreet.

@myfiles3000 - maybe you should learn English properly.

Hmm... it would seem so but hey read this:

http://www.wfsa.net/adobe_documents/Cross_...ional_Study.PDF

Why is it that those who find no correlation between gun ownership and gun deaths always want to include ALL weapons rather than just handguns. Most of the countries included in the high and very high ownership groups have firearms for pest control in rural areas or have a long tradition of hunting. Few of the firearms in these cases would be handguns.

and then this:

http://www.ippnw.org/HelsinkiCukier.pdf

I agree that there are some interesting points, but without some correlating figures it is hard to see how this sort of paper can avoid being brushed aside.

Gun death - there was a gun, it was discharged, someone died.
No gun death - there was no gun.

[ilw]

I've been thinking about the switzerland thing and talking to some people and i think the fundamental difference between swiss gun ownership and american is not only the type of gun (as it seems quite a few swiss people here have handguns), but also the purpose of having the gun. Here as j2k4 pointed out its a legal requirement and I haven't met any swiss people who would even consider having a gun for home defence. All the swiss guns are carefully locked away making them unsuitable to protect anyone from an intruder, but this makes the gun very hard for children to get at and the incidence of 'gun death' is much lower. I personally reckon there probably wasn't really a need for having a gun to protect your home until people did start protecting their homes with guns and now its a vicious circle. More people with guns to protect themselves leads to more people getting killed by guns (as shown by stats) as well as leading to more guns on the street (higher availability of guns) and this all leads to more people wanting a gun to protect themselves

[myfiles3000]

Originally posted by lynx@15 July 2003 - 11:16
@myfiles3000 - maybe you should learn English properly.

thank you lynx, i don't ever want to live in a world without irony

[j2k4]

Originally posted by lynx@15 July 2003 - 05:16
@j2k4 - Are you trying to make an issue of something to avoid the true topic ? Well I'm not going to let you drag me down that sidestreet.

Lynx-

It seems to me (and I'm sure it would seem so to anybody who reads the thread) you were the one planning the sidetrip.

Have you been placed in exclusive custody of "true topics?"

I've been accused of using big words and arcane reasoning in my posts, but I don't resort to the type of smug, intellectual snobbery you practice.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by ilw@15 July 2003 - 05:51
I've been thinking about the switzerland thing and talking to some people and i think the fundamental difference between swiss gun ownership and american is not only the type of gun (as it seems quite a few swiss people here have handguns), but also the purpose of having the gun. Here as j2k4 pointed out its a legal requirement and I haven't met any swiss people who would even consider having a gun for home defence. All the swiss guns are carefully locked away making them unsuitable to protect anyone from an intruder, but this makes the gun very hard for children to get at and the incidence of 'gun death' is much lower. I personally reckon there probably wasn't really a need for having a gun to protect your home until people did start protecting their homes with guns and now its a vicious circle. More people with guns to protect themselves leads to more people getting killed by guns (as shown by stats) as well as leading to more guns on the street (higher availability of guns) and this all leads to more people wanting a gun to protect themselves

Okay-

If you reject the example of Switzerland, please attempt a similar disection of the Israeli situation.

In Israel, the variety of weaponry is certainly greater, and they are likely to be kept situated in a much more convenient fashion. I'm also sure adequate training in the use of guns in Israel is not a strict requirement.

What say you?

[ilw]

attempt a similar disection of the Israeli situation

U got me there, i don't have a scooby about Israel

[j2k4]

Originally posted by ilw@15 July 2003 - 07:38

attempt a similar disection of the Israeli situation

U got me there, i don't have a scooby about Israel

If we trip over Tralalala, I bet he would know; if I remember correctly, he's from Haifa.

[Infested Cats]

Israel, with a higher gun ownership rate than the U.S., has a murder rate 40% below Canada's.

[lynx]

Originally posted by j2k4+15 July 2003 - 13:26--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 15 July 2003 - 13:26)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-lynx@15 July 2003 - 05:16
@j2k4 - Are you trying to make an issue of something to avoid the true topic ? Well I&#39;m not going to let you drag me down that sidestreet.

Lynx-

It seems to me (and I&#39;m sure it would seem so to anybody who reads the thread) you were the one planning the sidetrip.

Have you been placed in exclusive custody of "true topics?"

I&#39;ve been accused of using big words and arcane reasoning in my posts, but I don&#39;t resort to the type of smug, intellectual snobbery you practice. [/b][/quote]
No, you seem to lower yourself to the level of personal insults and jibes.

[lynx]

If I remember correctly, tralalala wanted to get rid of all the guns.
But I&#39;ll let him comment further himself, if he&#39;s around.