Gun Paper

Discussion in 'General Rifle Discussion' started by Meatypaws67, Apr 26, 2010.

  1. Meatypaws67

    Meatypaws67 New Member

    1
    0
    0
    I wrote a paper for a class and once we were done we had to post some of our work into the community. Here are a couple paragraphs from my Draft.

    One of the main arguments for a gun ban is “We have police, we do not need guns.” However after looking through “Gun Facts Version 5.1” I came across disturbing information. According to the U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Justice Department in 1999 there was only one on-duty cop for every 1,813 citizens. To say that the police can protect us 100% of the time is just absurd and plain ignorant. This fact is further substantiated by this sad but true statement “Former Florida Attorney General Jim Smith told Florida legislators that police responded to only 200,000 of 700,000 calls for help to Dade County authorities.” (Gun Facts Version 5.1. Page 44.) I do not think I can say it better myself. The premise of police being able to protect all the citizens is flawed. Citizens need to have the ability to protect themselves when the police are too busy to answer our cries for help. Placing a ban on guns will limit our chances of getting a gun and it will place citizens in vulnerable situations; it will not only have zero affect on crime rates, but it will also put citizens in danger.

    There is no quick fix that will solve our gun related problems. Placing bans/restrictions will not work, because criminals will still find ways to get guns. I think the only way to reduce gun related violence is to make sure criminals are thoroughly punished for their crimes. I stated before that the majority of people who commit crimes with guns are already criminals with extensive arrest records and over 90% of gun homicides are gang related. These people cannot legally purchase guns but they have them and they get them illegal means. Placing bans on weapons will not hinder criminals it will only hinder law abiding citizens. Programs directed at preventing youth gun violence has had success, and I think that increasing the success of these programs can reduce accidental firearm deaths as well as youth gun violence. There is no one single answer to significantly reduce our gun related crime rate, however we can reduce it over time; not by placing restrictions on guns, but by increasing the punishment for criminals who commit violent acts and by informing our youth about the dangers of firearms.
     
  2. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    2
    0
    First, Welcome to the FTF Community. Some of the guys & gals here might suggest you swing by the Introduction Section and tell us all a little about yourself. That is your choice, but it helps the folks here get to know you and warm up to you a little easier.

    As for your work, it is well thought out and you make some valid points. If you have to support your work, I would suggest a book called More Guns / Less Crime by John Lott Jr.

    This work is highly statistical, with a ton of references, and it takes into account Right to Carry and CCW States, along with the economic trends where the studies come from.

    I think you have some good work that you have put forth. There are two points that I find are very instrumental when talking to Anti-Gun folks.

    The first is a two part question:

    Say you have someone who is hell bent on creating a scene, making a name for themselves, creating a suicide by cop scenario, whatever. This person is going to commit violence. This person has weapons s/he has obtained, whether they be guns, pipe bombs, large knives and swords, or whatever his/her choice.

    Take that person and release him/her in a target rich environment where weapons are prohibited, like a local mall, a school or other such place.

    What will the outcome be?

    take this same individual with the same motive, same weapons and same desire. Let this person loose in a police station.

    What will the outcome be?

    What is the major difference?? :cool:

    Obviously if there is armed resistance, there will not be as any victims.

    Case in point: Seven Dead in Rampage in Tokyo Video Game District - News - Kotaku

    A Japanese man rents a truck, drives it into a crowd of people and starts to hack and slash people with a couple of knives. He is stopped when a police officer makes his way to the scene and shoves a gun in his face. The suspect complied with commands to get on the ground and stopped stabbing people.

    Now, the second point I like to make, is this:

    When SECONDS count, the police will always be MINUTES away.

    JD
     

  3. DrumJunkie

    DrumJunkie New Member

    4,823
    0
    0
    There are dozens of examples one could use in a paper like this. You have made some good points. Constitutional aspects might be valuable as well. I am very interested in just how your paper is retrieved by the one(s) grading it. I hope you post the grade as well as any comments you receive.

    And welcome to the forum.
     
  4. skullcrusher

    skullcrusher New Member

    10,888
    1
    0
    You have some well thought out points there. Dillinger is correct about "gun free" zones as they are just an advertisement telling bad person(s) that they will meet no resistance. How many lives could have been saved in any of the mass shootings had there been trained people in the area carrying firearms? Keep in mind that concealed carry permits require training prior to issue. Had any of the teachers or administration at Columbine HS been carrying concealed, I imagine those two asshats would not have been able to terrorize the scholl for as long as they did.

    There is a city in Georgia where the residents are required to have a firearm in the house. The crime rate dropped immediately and has stayed down for a prolonged period of time. (I can't remember the town)

    I hope your paper was well received. Keep up the good work.
     
  5. Car54

    Car54 New Member

    2,103
    0
    0
    Welcome to the FTF. Glad ro have you here. Good work on the paper.
     
  6. Ruzai

    Ruzai New Member

    546
    1
    0
    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]

    Both of these pictures express my agreeing with your paper. I'm an advocate for CCW on college campuses, because after all a sign wont stop a criminal.
    Unfortunately, the people on the base at Fort Hood couldnt have CCW if I'm not mistaken, but dont take my word for it, its merely what I've heard.
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2010
  7. canebrake

    canebrake New Member

    21,833
    3
    0
    Gun control is like trying to stop drunk driving by making it hard for sober people to buy a car.

    An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity.





    The wisdom of Lieutenant Colonel Jeff Cooper (1920-2006)


    [​IMG]

    “The police cannot protect the citizen at this stage of our development, and they cannot even protect themselves in many cases. It is up to the private citizen to protect himself and his family, and this is not only acceptable, but mandatory.”

    “One cannot legislate the maniacs off the street, these maniacs can only be shut down by an armed citizenry. Indeed bad things can happen in nations where the citizenry is armed, but not as bad as those which seem to be threatening our disarmed citizenry in this country at this time.”

    “The media insist that crime is the major concern of the American public today. In this connection they generally push the point that a disarmed society would be a crime-free society. They will not accept the truth that if you take all the guns off the street you still will have a crime problem, whereas if you take the criminals off the street you cannot have a gun problem.”
     
  8. buckhuntr

    buckhuntr Well-Known Member Lifetime Supporter

    3,860
    180
    63
    Skullcrusher, that would be Kennesaw, GA, about an hour's drive from my hometown.