Ban every gun

[Bubble181]

If I remember my Call of Duty 2 properly, they also didn't have enough guns to go around(!).

Near the end of the Stalingrad campaign, it was fairly common to distribute bullets over a whole group of soldiers, and give them one gun. You were supposed to take it from your fallen omrade and be able to press on. No "this is my rifle, there are many like it but this one is mine" crap for the Russians

 

[Ravenpoe]

Near the end of the Stalingrad campaign, it was fairly common to distribute bullets over a whole group of soldiers, and give them one gun. You were supposed to take it from your fallen omrade and be able to press on. No "this is my rifle, there are many like it but this one is mine" crap for the Russians

Commies!

 

[Bubble181]

Commies!

In Communist Russia, there are many soldiers like you, but you're the gun's.

 

[Ravenpoe]

In Communist Russia, there are many soldiers like you, but you're the gun's.

Yakov fail.

It's like this:

In Soviet Russia, guns wield you!

 

[Bubble181]

Yakov fail.

It's like this:

In Soviet Russia, guns wield you!

In Socialist Belgium, jokes make you!

 

[TommiR]

Near the end of the Stalingrad campaign, it was fairly common to distribute bullets over a whole group of soldiers, and give them one gun. You were supposed to take it from your fallen omrade and be able to press on. No "this is my rifle, there are many like it but this one is mine" crap for the Russians

That is the myth, and given the massive losses the Red Army suffered particularly in '41, there might well have been some local shortages of weapons. But can you cite a source that suggests the lack of weapons was a widespread problem for the soviets by the end of 1942?

 

[Necronic]

Near the end of the Stalingrad campaign, it was fairly common to distribute bullets over a whole group of soldiers, and give them one gun. You were supposed to take it from your fallen omrade and be able to press on. No "this is my rifle, there are many like it but this one is mine" crap for the Russians

Getting our history from Call of Duty are we?

(Honestly I thought this was true was well)

 

[Bubble181]

That is the myth, and given the massive losses the Red Army suffered particularly in '41, there might well have been some local shortages of weapons. But can you cite a source that suggests the lack of weapons was a widespread problem for the soviets by the end of 1942?

Yes. I wrote my master's paper on the ethics surrounding weapons of mass destruction; if you don't mind sources given in Dutch, Though it's not technically a scholarly source, I can suggest Anthony Beevor's "Stalingrad". For the type of publication it is, it's very on the money about a lot of things and relatively well-researched.[DOUBLEPOST=1343322626][/DOUBLEPOST]For clarity's sake: I'm not saying the Russians really only supplied platoons with one gun per 10 soldiers. They did try to outfit their troops decently (and often they were better-equipped than their German counterparts). I'm only saying that this happened, because of supply issues and all that jazz. "Fairly common" may have been an exageration.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

"Guns are bad"

*8 pages later*

*Military jerkoff/hero worship*

lol

 

[Necronic]

*Charlie feels superior to other posters*

8 pages later

*Charlier feels superior to other posters*

10 years later

*Charlier feels superior to other posters*

 

[TommiR]

Yes. I wrote my master's paper on the ethics surrounding weapons of mass destruction; if you don't mind sources given in Dutch, Though it's not technically a scholarly source, I can suggest Anthony Beevor's "Stalingrad". For the type of publication it is, it's very on the money about a lot of things and relatively well-researched.[DOUBLEPOST=1343322626][/DOUBLEPOST]For clarity's sake: I'm not saying the Russians really only supplied platoons with one gun per 10 soldiers. They did try to outfit their troops decently (and often they were better-equipped than their German counterparts). I'm only saying that this happened, because of supply issues and all that jazz. "Fairly common" may have been an exageration.

Alright, thanks for the clarification. Sources in dutch could as well be written in swahili as far as I'm concerned I haven't read Beevor's book on Stalingrad, though I did enjoy his work on the Spanish civil war. However, I have read John Erickson's book 'The Road to Stalingrad', and it lists figures that seem to indicate that, overall, the soviets did have sufficient amounts of weapons for their personnel.

 

[PatrThom]

*Charlie feels superior to other posters*

8 pages later

*Charlier feels superior to other posters*

10 years later

*Charlier feels superior to other posters*

I like how Charlie gets Charlier as time goes on.

--Patrick

 

[Covar]

Someone should post some babes with guns pictures on here. You know for research.

 

[Necronic]

I like how Charlie gets Charlier as time goes on.

--Patrick

Well, seeing as Charlie exists in his own universe, and the universe is constantly expanding, it makes sense.

 

[GasBandit]

Oh no, can't let this thread die yet. Here's some fun gun control links.

Research done for the Clinton administration didn’t find that the federal assault-weapons ban reduced crime.

Since the federal ban expired in September 2004, murder and overall violent-crime rates have actually fallen.

With a single exception, every multiple-victim public shooting in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed since at least 1950 has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry their own firearms.

 

[Ravenpoe]

Oh no, can't let this thread die yet. Here's some fun gun control links.

Research done for the Clinton administration didn’t find that the federal assault-weapons ban reduced crime.

Since the federal ban expired in September 2004, murder and overall violent-crime rates have actually fallen.

With a single exception, every multiple-victim public shooting in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed since at least 1950 has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry their own firearms.

Correlation, causation, blah blah blah. You already know this rebuttal, I'll let you fill it in.

 

[Necronic]

Oh no, can't let this thread die yet. Here's some fun gun control links.

Research done for the Clinton administration didn’t find that the federal assault-weapons ban reduced crime.

That's not true. Basically their conclusion was that it was hard to tell for sure. There's a big difference. They put the upper bound of reduction at 5%, (which comes out to like 500 deaths a year) and also argued that it's impossible to know the full affects of such a sweeping change in such a small amount of time, and that a longer time frame is necessary to understand the full impact of the change.

I mean, you took a 100 page report and ignored the first sentence of the conclusion:

Although the ban has been successful in reducing crimes with AWs, any benefits from this reduction are likely to have been outweighed by steady or rising use of non-banned semiautomatics with LCMs,
.....
However, the grandfathering provision of the AW-LCM ban guaranteed that the effects of this law would occur only gradually over time. Those effects are still unfolding and may not be fully felt for several years into the future, particularly if foreign, pre-ban LCMs continue to be imported into the U.S. in large numbers. It is thus premature to make definitive assessments of the ban’s impact on gun violence

It definitely had an effect, but there were other actors at play. Same thing with any complex system.

 

[PatrThom]

Come on now. When Charlie says, "I will never own a gun ever I think they're evil and wouldn't be caught dead with one," he is really saying, "Everything Charlie owns is up for grabs, just come on by with a bunch of your friends and take whatever you want."

EDIT: I wish I were being facetious, here. I'm sure It would be relatively easy for a group of six average people to take over just about any undefended suburban household before the authorities could arrive to prevent it.

--Patrick

 

[Necronic]

I like to give my brother a hard time about not being prepared for hurricanes and whatnot (having canned food/bottled water etc.) He likes to remind me that he has a ton of guns and lives right above me.

 

[strawman]

I like to give my brother a hard time about not being prepared for hurricanes and whatnot (having canned food/bottled water etc.) He likes to remind me that he has a ton of guns and lives right above me.

Better stock for him as well then, he brings the armory, you bring the food.

 

[blotsfan]

Come on now. When Charlie says, "I will never own a gun ever I think they're evil and wouldn't be caught dead with one," he is really saying, "Everything Charlie owns is up for grabs, just come on by with a bunch of your friends and take whatever you want."

EDIT: I wish I were being facetious, here. I'm sure It would be relatively easy for a group of six average people to take over just about any undefended suburban household before the authorities could arrive to prevent it.

--Patrick

Considering you aren't being sarcastic, my philosophy towards this is that its better to be robbed than to get yourself hurt or killed, which I think is more probable for people trying to defend themselves with a gun.

 

[strawman]

its better to be robbed than to get yourself hurt or killed, which I think is more probable for people trying to defend themselves with a gun.

Now if only there were studies or statistics that showed whether robberies of people with guns resulted in greater bodily harm than robberies of people without guns...

 

[Jay]

Why so much gun crime?

 

[strawman]

Because we have guns available as tools for killing. In countries where guns are banned the tools are necessarily different, but the murders still happen. The image suggests the fallacy that if handguns were not available, then the deaths would not have occurred.

Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate for a list of countries by murder rate per capita for a better picture. While our per capita murder rate may be 2-3 times higher than many countries, depending on how the data was gathered, it's not hundreds or thousands of times higher than other countries as your image suggests it might be.

 

[AshburnerX]

I'd also ask if those are simply gun DEATHS or MURDERS with guns involved. We have a lot more accidental gun deaths just because guns are more available, not to mention because there are a lot of idiots who treat them as toys or don't do enough to keep them out of the hands of their kids.

 

[strawman]

I'd also ask if those are simply gun DEATHS or MURDERS with guns involved. We have a lot more accidental gun deaths just because guns are more available, not to mention because there are a lot of idiots who treat them as toys or don't do enough to keep them out of the hands of their kids.

Over half the suicides in the US are committed using a gun, and the suicide rate in the US is large enough that I suspect that a significant number of those deaths are the result of self inflicted gunshot wounds. http://www.suicide.org/suicide-statistics.html

But, you know, it is a pretty compelling piece of propaganda.

 

[Espy]

Oh Adam. Why you gotta bring facts in and make everyone feel bad?

 

[sixpackshaker]

Not to mention most gun deaths are suicides.

Also the USA has nearly halved their gun deaths per year since that poster came out over 20 years ago. And those European countries gun deaths have nearly doubled since then. See that makes it sound dangerous.

 

[Necronic]

All that aside the US still has a higher murder rate than any of those countries

 

[sixpackshaker]

How many of those nations had police states, higher standard of living, monoculture, fraction of our population, and low drug use...

but the only difference is guns.

 

[strawman]

How many of those other countries hold life more sacred than the US?

I'm sure that the murder/death rate would drop if the government destroyed all our guns, and jailed or killed those that refused to give them up.

But the murder/death rate would still be abnormally high compared to other similar nations, and it's due to our culture more than anything.

We hold the value of things very high, and the value of life very low. People will kill for the contents of a wallet.

Getting rid of guns won't change that fundamental difference in US culture.

 

[Necronic]

Police States? = 1, Israel

Higher Standard of Living? = I dunno, really depends on how you define it

Monoculture? = 3, Sweeden Switzerland and Japan

Fraction of our Population? = All of them, although China and India (not on the list I know) both have lower murder rates on paper iirc. I say on paper because they may fudge the numbers)

Low Drug Use? = Dunno, Japan and Israel definitely, the rest are probably similar to here.

 

[sixpackshaker]

Pot does not equal crack when it comes to risky behaviors.

 

[GasBandit]

Interestingly enough, the Israeli government provides uzis to its populace. If the sole impetus of violent crime is guns, shouldn't they have something approaching our level of shootings?

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

I've said this before, but lol if you think the USA isn't a police state