Gun debate

[Tex]

Very good point Andy. :yes:

Agreed, thread straying off-topic. Let's get back on-topic with future posts.

 

[Eagle]

Very good point Andy. :yes:

Agreed, thread straying off-topic. Let's get back on-topic with future posts.

:threadjacked:
Maybe this emoticon may be extra appropriate? I say this depicts vigilantes correcting injustice of the thread-jacking that the hippie is perpetrating with his sign. More proof that everyone should have a gun!

 

[simonpro]

Nah, it's just Simponpro's sense of humor. But I think he's serious about hating landmines. It's understandable, given that they are often left behind after the war is over and go on to mame and kill people for years.

I would gladly do what I said to anyone who even contemplates using a landmine. I'd go so far as to class them alongside weapons of mass destruction, and anyone caught using them should be tried for war crimes.

(edit) And as we're now off topic I won't mention it again. I've seen what landmines do, and it makes me very angry.

 

[Urwumpe]

I think land mines are overestimated, as they are a part of destructive warfare - you don't force your strategy on the enemy, but instead, hinder him from using his. Even worse, you deny both sides territory..

But I don't count command triggered explosives as land mines. Tripwire stuff is clearly a land mine. But not far from useless - boobytrapping a forest is a great way to make sure nobody sneaks into your back.

 

[James.Denholm]

I've seen what landmines do, and it makes me very angry.

I thank god I have never had the experience. I hope I never do.

 

[jedidia]

boobytrapping a forest is a great way to make sure nobody sneaks into your back.

Yeah, and it kills forest workers 12 years after the war is over (had exactly this in Bosnia las year). It's effectivly impossible to demine a forest...

 

[Urwumpe]

Yeah, and it kills forest workers 12 years after the war is over (had exactly this in Bosnia las year). It's effectivly impossible to demine a forest...

Except knowing where you placed the hand grenades...

 

[Eagle]

Yeah, and it kills forest workers 12 years after the war is over (had exactly this in Bosnia las year). It's effectivly impossible to demine a forest...

I'm not sure if the technology is used, but long-duration fuses can be added to mines and cluster bombs to disable themselves after a certain number of years. Of course you still have deactivated mines everywhere, which isn't great.

The only landmines I think should be used are the ones put on flat earth between two fences and maybe self-deactivating cluster mines (with only a few days of potency), oh and naval mines are OK in my book too. I don't expect anyone to agree, but these are areas I feel mines still have some utility.

 

[GregBurch]

OK, just to make sure that folks here don't think I'm a complete and total nut-case, I don't really have claymore mines embedded in the walls of my house. That was a joke.

Anyway, I think the criticisms of landmines as they have been employed over the last 100 years or so are very valid. On the other hand, I think that there can and should be some technological solutions to many of those criticisms.

The general issue is what the proper moral and legal framework should be for autonomous or semi-autonomous weapons. That's going to be a very relevant subject in the discussion of military ethics and law over the next few decades.

 

[ar81]

Amen on the shotgun as the best home defense weapon. There's just nothing like the sound of jacking a 12 gauge for its deterrent effect.

I find that as I get older, shotguns are the only kind of weapon that keeps increasing in my collection. In the last few years, I probably fire 500 rounds of shotgun ammunition for every round of pistol or rifle ammo.

But personally, for home defense, I rely more on the claymores we embedded in the walls when we remodeled the house.

The province with higher crime rates in this country is the one where hand arms are more abundant. Weapons are not a deterrence, if you buy a knife, criminals will buy a gun. If you buy a gun, they will buy a machine gun.

 

[Urwumpe]

The province with higher crime rates in this country is the one where hand arms are more abundant. Weapons are not a deterrence, if you buy a knife, criminals will buy a gun. If you buy a gun, they will buy a machine gun.

If they have machine guns, get handgrenades or a field artillery. Is that sooo hard to understand?

 

[GregBurch]

The province with higher crime rates in this country is the one where hand arms are more abundant. Weapons are not a deterrence, if you buy a knife, criminals will buy a gun. If you buy a gun, they will buy a machine gun.

And culture doesn't have anything to do with this?

 

[Urwumpe]

And culture doesn't have anything to do with this?

Then, the question that has to be asked is: Can there be a right culture for having minimal fire arm related crime?

 

[GregBurch]

Then, the question that has to be asked is: Can there be a right culture for having minimal fire arm related crime?

Obviously, yes. As I've pointed out above, there are examples of heavily-armed societies that have very low rates of gun violence. What do those societies have in common with each other, and that is different from the societies that have high rates of gun violence -- that is the question. That is the crucial question.

Restrictions on gun ownership are, at best, treating symptoms, not causes.

 

[ar81]

And culture doesn't have anything to do with this?

Exactly.

I do have a hypothesis. Security is more a matter of culture than a matter of weapons. A Costa Rican friend who lives in USA told me that americans have an industry of fear, and that industry sells weapons.

If Americans want to feel fear, there must be people trying to exploit that commercially. Is love for weapons a cultural reflection of a culture of fear?

 

[GregBurch]

Exactly.

I do have a hypothesis. Security is more a matter of culture than a matter of weapons. A Costa Rican friend who lives in USA told me that americans have an industry of fear, and that industry sells weapons.

If Americans want to feel fear, there must be people trying to exploit that commercially. Is love for weapons a cultural reflection of a culture of fear?

Maybe you could respond to my point: What about the societies that have high levels of private gun ownership, and also low levels of gun violence?

 

[simonpro]

As far as I can tell the main difference is that a higher percentage of people in conutries with high rates of gun crime tend to have the guns as either a status symbol or as something fun to use. Conversely, people in countries with lower gun crime tend to view guns merely as a tool for getting a job done (such as protecting one's home or shooting deer).

 

[Urwumpe]

Restrictions on gun ownership are, at best, treating symptoms, not causes.

If the symptom is, that insane and criminals can easily get weapons, I think it is already a good improvement, if these people have it harder to get armed.