Friday, June 12, 2009

How to Get Shot in America

Actually, I doubt very much that there needs to be any sort of guide on how to get shot in America, you can probably get it done fairly quickly without much trying. I think this may speed up the process, though, if you're feeling particularly lazy.

In Japan, guns are rare. The cops have them, but never use them. Homicides in Japan are pretty rare (well, compared to suicides, anyway), and they usually involve knives or blunt objects. The nightly news shows someone robbing the local 7-11 with a steak knife. I think in America you might get laughed at for trying to rob a joint with a pointy object.

The homicides over here tend to be pretty weird, too. Just locally, here in Okayama, we had an incident a decade or so back (before I got here), where a kid was getting bullied at school. This is a typical practice, but the Japanese school kids take it to psychological extremes (rather than physical). Also, while anywhere kids just want to 'fit in', it's especially pronounced here, and when Ijime rears its head, it's usually pretty harsh. One kid finally flipped the fuck out, killed the kid that was bullying him, cut off his fucking head, and stuck it on a post on the school gate, so everyone could see it as they filed into school the next day. Another child recently murdered his mom, cut her body up, spray painted each piece white (???), and buried them in a tub on the family balcony that had been made into a planter box.

wtf...

ANYWAY!

This isn't some analysis of Japans homicides, it's a guide on how to get shot! It's pretty simple, actually:

Step one: Buy a toy gun in Japan.
Step two: Go wave it around in America.
Step three: Dial 911, because you just got shot.

See, over here, nobody has guns, so the 'toy gun' industry is pretty realistic. You can buy anything from a Tec-9 to an MP5 to a Desert Eagle or Glock at the local hobby shop, and hot damn if they don't look like the real thing. For 20 bucks you get one that, while real-looking from a distance, it obviously plactic and feels pretty cheap in your hand. But for 100 you get a full metal version with removable clip, cocking action and the ability to honestly pistol whip someone upside the head and leave a gash. In America, toy guns need to be bright orange or somehow indicate that they aren't real from a distance so police don't shoot you dead on accident.






I'm tempted to buy one, just because I can. I bought a stilleto when I went to Italy, but that was a long time ago. The sad fact is that I could probably buy a real gun in America for even less. Then again, I'm not exactly Clark Kent, mild mannered reporter, and I imagine if anyone pissed me off, I'd just go home and get my gun and shoot them before I could talk myself out of it. I imagine a lot of people are in the same boat, emotionally, and that's kind of a reason why we have so many shootings in the states. Better to not even have the avenue available in the first place. This can turn into some big discussion on gun control, but it's my blog, and I think the amount of guns in the hands of stupid people in America is ridiculous. There's a reason having a pipe bomb is illegal, but for some reason having a Glock with a 20 round clip is A-OK, because in 1492, Christopher Columbus signed the Declaration of Independence with Abraham Lincoln, and The Right To Bear Arms was included as a side note. Or whatever. It's all very silly.

People don't like being told what they can and can't do/have, and if they want to dual wield Big Macs with a bandoleer full of claymores strapped to their chest, it's their Rite as an Amaricun (goddammit!) to do so. Cold dead hands, etc etc etc...

/sigh

A toy gun, on the other hand, can't kill anyone, but could still be used to effectively rob the neighborhood 7-11 if desired, and who doesn't want THAT option available to them at a moment's notice?

: /

33 comments:

Klepsacovic said...

Why we need guns: Because we have guns.

No really. You see, when you live in a nation with lots of poverty, concentrated poverty, and more than enough racism to fill the glass (it's half overflowing), and guns are easily obtained, you get scared as fuck. Then you buy a gun. It then gets stolen and sold to one of the poor people. He then tries to use it to rob you. The only defense is to have your own gun.

Think arms race, with all that attached stupidity.

To be fair, America has had a long time when people were mostly alone except for surrounding enemies. Guns were really fucking important. Then there was the whole thing of originally the Founding Fathers wanted to avoid tyranny, so they made a fairly weak central government with the idea that much of the defense would be from local militias (anyone remember the bit about "as part of a regulated militia?"). We needed guns for defense against the government: "A government afraid of its citizens is a Democracy. Citizens afraid of government is tyranny!" - Jefferson

They're part of culture. People don't easily give up their culture, especially not when they think it's the only thing keeping them alive.

Khatib said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Khatib said...

^^^^

Because if we ban guns, then criminals will turn all their guns in too, along with the law abiding citizens, right? If you were going to rob someone and you were 99% sure they didn't have a gun, and you had one, would you be more likely to rob them than if you thought it was a total toss-up if they had a gun or not?

You can ban guns all you want in the US. That won't stop them from streaming across the border to the south, along with drugs and illegal immigrants. If criminals want a gun, they - will - get - a - gun.

And by the way, I own guns. No handguns, and they aren't for self defense. There's a little national pastime we have in America, known as hunting. Do me a favor, and hit a deer with your car, and then pay for the repairs, not to mention possible injury to yourself. Now imagine that animals population was completely unchecked by hunting. God knows the wolf population that used to exist throughout the ENTIRE landmass of the lower 48 is gone and can't control it anymore. Without hunting, not only would you have a shit ton more incidents with wildlife vs suburbanites and urbanites, but you'd have several species dying slow and painful deaths from disease and starvation caused by overpopulation.

America is not Europe. America is not Japan. America is a huge, sprawling nation, with huge sprawling borders, and huge non-populated tracts of land, and we need guns.

In the most colloquial of terms, fuck off, hippy.

Klepsacovic said...

@Khatib: Being rude is definitely the best way to communicate a point.

Why does Japan have so little gun violence? I'm sure they can get guns. Or hell, it's Japan, they could have fucking laser guns that we won't see for ten years. When people don't have guns, they don't need guns.

Hunting is a good past time. It's a source of food and fun and all that good stuff. You're stretching it if you think it's going to save us from the scourge of deer-on-car violence. Wolves used to control the population, but then people shot and poisoned most of them.

Kyir said...

Because people here aren't badass enough to carry sword canes.

That's right, I just said what we all were thinking.

Larísa said...

Sweden has a long tradition of hunting as well. Every autum the woods are filled with hunters going out to shoot some moose, elks, whatever you call it, I never remember. Huge anmials that wreck cars.

But.

Those weapons are only allowed to have if you have a license for it and the control is heavey. You definitely can't go and buy weapons everywhere. And I'm so grateful about that. I don't say that Sweden is an ideal country in every way, it certainly isn't. But the lack of weapons is really a good thing.

I think that the presense of weapons leads to an evil circle. People want weapons just because other people have weapons... it never ends and there's always the risk for a mistake or kill in a temporary rush

And no, I'm not a hippy.

:)

Leah said...

I have to say - I'm pretty torn on the issue, for several reasons.

Basically - it all comes down to personal maturity and self control. If you cannot control your impulses - then that is the problem and if the only solution you can see is in eliminating the access to the object that will make it easy to act on your impulses? by all means - eliminate that possibility. Even though I find is sad - dealing with the symptom rather then a problem.

I like guns. I'm a pretty good shot, and those target games at the summer carnivals are some of my favorites. I have a menagerie of stuffed animals I won over the years, playing those games.

at the same time - I ended up with a badly bruised face and years worth of depression, because I couldn't hurt another human being even though said human being did their best to try and hurt me. I don't own guns, because when push comes to shove - I wouldn't be able to use them to defend myself anyways, but I might give a person attacking me a more efficient way of making me dead.

if its in your nature to be violent - removing the access to a tool will not make you any less violent. you can always grab a kitchen knife and kill a person with that, instead of a gun.

Japan might not have gun violence, but it still has violence. some of it a lot more terrifying and cruel then shooting death. removal of guns will not fix the problem, but rather like most medicines today - it will take care of the symptoms, usually with side effects that will make you sick in other ways.

As far as seconds amendment and all that, well. It is a known historical fact that whenever a tyrant comes to power, the very first thing they do is disarm the population, because they don't want said population to overturn their rule. Of course populations have also been known to overturn tyrants with pitchforks and torches, but I'm afraid that in our day and age of technological advancement - pitchforks simply will not work against very efficient weaponry of the official army.

and I hope to god that what I'm seeing happening in our world is just my paranoia of someone who reads too much.

Ixobelle said...

this is a post about toy guns, you noobs.

stay focused.

Tatterdemalion said...

Meh, Ixo! I wanted to rant about how violence in america is directly tied to the availability of guns and other weaponry! Dammit. But here we go, stay to the subject: Toy guns are really cool. What kid hasn't been amazed by the feeling of holding something that can rob a human of life, well, at least, something that looks like something that can rob a human of her life. Basically I think that it's that fascination which causes people to buy toy guns OR real guns. If I am totally mad at my neighbor for keeping Barry Manilow at 300 decibel for 48 hours, I could just as well go for a kitchen knife. But, people are fascinated with guns because they're weapons DESIGNED to kill, to murder. Knives were first used by Troglodyte Og for cutting the flesh or skin of an already dead prey, back in the days when we couldn't hunt.
Toy guns really amount to the same thing: if I bought a kid a fake knife, with, say, a blunted edge, it'd be a weird metal thing without any use whatsoever. A baseball bat for example is the same: he might smash some of my ancient vases with it, but that's about it. A toy gun, though, is a close imitation of something that kills, instead of a piece of wood used for sport or a piece of metal. That's how people think of guns, and that's why toy guns are made so very realistic, for the feeling of holding something that kills. It lends a feeling of might and power. The reason for orange rings on the barrels of the fake guns of many countries such as USA; Germany or my own country Sweden is understandable, because it doesn't threaten people. But it's only in America where it is really needed, because that's the only country where a raving lunatic running around on the street with a realistic-looking gun would be shot, had he even not fired a single bullet. In another country, the police would be surrounding him, trying to speak with him or an alternative. So I think that essentially the markings on fake guns protects the american people using them, not the policy or the community.

Also, I have to comment on the discussions others started: Americans do not need guns. Why would the average american need a firearm in his house more than another? Common arguments are "Ability to protect yourself" That's what the POLICE is for, idiots! "What if I want to go hunting?" That's OK but if you really love hunting you can go through a one week process of actually making sure you're not the kind of person who'd shoot the neighbor so that you can get a license.


Also, Kyir wins.

whatsmymain said...

Actually. A lot of those same type of toy guns can be bought in America albiet mainly at gunshows. Realistically though these aren't guns you buy for your kids. Which begs the question why there is such a big market for adults to buy them? If you have the self control you may as well have a real gun for all the difference it will make.

Removing guns from the American population at this point is impossible. The only thing you will do is remove them from the law abiding citizens. America is a huge country with relatively open boreders on either end that would make it impossible to regulate guns.

Japan is an island. Regulating trade is a tad bit easier though I'm sure the criminal underworld is still largely armed.

Again toy guns or real guns they won't solve crimes of pashion. People can still get upset enough to murder another human. This has been happening long before guns and will happen long after.

oshin said...

It may be your blog, but its my comment, and I choose to talk about guns !

My belief is that the only guns people should be allowed to own are hunting rifles, as they have a purpose for hunting / sport etc. You could argue handguns can be used for sport, which ill accept, but I doubt the millions of americans who own them today are trying for the 2012 olympic handgun competition.

The average joe doesnt need a handgun any more than he needs a stealth bomber or an A-Bomb. The reason in America for him needing one is the fact they are so common anybody can get them, so even the most petty thief is likely to pull one on you.

If they were banned the problem would be that ordinary people wouldn't have any defence from the criminals who have them. After a generation or two however I bet the amounts of guns in the population would drop quite sharply.Not like it would ever happen however.


Katib, do you go hunting with a pistol ? I cant imagine its much use compared to a rifle. Gun control isnt about stopping hunting, its about removing pistols in hoodies and gloveboxs and drawers and stopping random stupid deaths from guns.

Border control makes me laugh, dont you have one of the best funded army's in the world to look after your border ?

Making the government fear the population ? At the end of the day I can only imagine a determined tyrant would just butcher any resistance with a well equipped army, a bunch of mom and dads with pistols isnt going to stop tanks.

Leah said...

Toy guns aside (and yes, you can buy very realistic guns in United states easily enough and its not even necessary to go to gun shows to do so)

to those of you who claim that police is here to protect you? I've learned otherwise. First they need to get there. then when/if they do manage to get there in time to make any difference, god forbid you express any distress at the situation (and that includes raised voice or trying to speak more then they wish for you to speak, even crying).

they are here to maintain order. whatever the cost. they don't care if you are a victim or an abuser. the policy of the American police is - shoot first and let courts/hospitals/funeral homes sort them out.

and if you read the story of that boy who got shot while playing with a toy rifle and many stories just like it - you will see it.

We might not need guns to protect us (and the jury is out on that one), but we cannot rely on the government either. protecting individual citizens is not government's purpose.

oshin said...

Leah, how did the police end up like that though ? One could argue because of high crime rates and violent criminals, but the gun factor comes in here too.

If your a cop in the US, theres a higher possibility of a person having a gun than someplace like Japan. All that cop is going to think of when he meets anybody who isnt perfectly calm or normal is "This guy could be a nutjob with a gun" Its obvious when somebody pulls a gun on you you have a few seconds to react or your dead, so of course your going to wanna handcuff anybody who could even be the remotest threat to you. I imagine plenty of cops have been killed not suspecting some guy was going to pull a gun on him and blast him.

Kid with a toy guy ? I just read a story where a 12 year old shot a 9 year old dead at home, with story's like its hard not to think twice about a kid with a toy gun.

Leah said...

Oshin, you are blaming the symptom not the problem. its so very easy to say that police are the way they are because of those evil guns. the very tools they use to "serve" and the reason they have such a twitchy fingers are not merely self preservation. for god's sakes - they are issued bullet proof jackets - and it is their damn job to be in the line of fire in a first place.

you are also completely missing out on the fact that police was always there to keep order. it was never there for protection of the individual. only the state. have you noticed how all the criminal cases are stated as individual vs state? that's because they are. they are not victim against the attacker, because victims only matter as witnesses for prosecution. when you commit a crime - you commit it against the state/federal law, you are disturbing the order and that's what police is here to deal with.

and as for personal protection, even if police DID have a purpose to protect us, do you really believe that they could be everywhere at once, just as you need someone to save you?

you read a story about a 12 year old shooting a 9 year old. how about stories of kids beating other kids up to death, stabbing them, drowning them in bathtubs, electrocuting themselves and others, starting fires and I can go on. More people die in car accidents (and sometimes not accidents) then any other unnatural cause combined.

guns are tools and you are fixating on a tool, a symptom rather then true cause.

Ixobelle said...

Okay, so here's my honest to god two cents:

The whole 'I need a gun for self defense' argument falls apart the instant you put it in a drawer.

AT ANY MOMENT A NUT JOB COULD PULL A GUN OUT!

...and at any minute you're going to tell him 'time out, I gotta run to the gun shed in my garage and select an appropriate caliber assault rifle to meet your threat, brb'? If you're licensed to carry a firearm, and *do* 24/7 then your argument holds merit. A karate champ doesn't need to run to a drawer to pull out his hands, he has them attached to his body, and he can use them in self defense.

OMG BUT WHAT IF A NUTJOB BREAKS INTO MY HOME WHILE I SLEEP?

While home invasion *does* happen, it's so ridiculously rare for an armed individual to enter someone's home to 'burgle' their goods etc these days. If someone is going to kick down your front door with the intent to shoot you --- again --- you better have your gun in a hoster while you're slicing the veggies for tonight's salad or the argument falls apart completely. No one running thru the foyer with an uzi is going to wait patiently while you go to the nightstand and unlock the trigger of your 357.



I'm sure there ARE people just like I've mentioned, though... licensed to carry firearms, and they take them with them to the toilet to take a shit. That doesn't strike me as healthy, well adjusted behavior, but at least they 'qualify' for the self defense argument. Anyone who needs to 'go get their gun' will find it's too late, unless you can outrun bullets.


I know my friend Tragedy will eventually chime in here, and I know his stance. I feel like I know him well enough from listening to his stories in vent that he could make a rational decision on when to shoot or not shoot someone if that person was a threat. But paperwork and beuracracy doesn't KNOW each person, they issue licenses based on a few criteria that could easily let some nutjob through. People's argument that 'well that nutjob has one, so I NEED ONE TOO' falls apart when that nutjob isn't issued a gun in the first place.

Putting more guns in the hands of more people isn't making anyone more secure, it's having the opposite effect. You just can't argue that point.

Leah said...

Ixo - disarming people is not making anyone more secure either. Unless you can insure it on a absolute scale, the way they did it in Japan (and Japan has its own share of crime, its just not gun violence) - making guns less accessible to law abiding citizens is just as bad of a solution as arming everyone and their dog.

incidentally - something my husband brought to my attention just now. The itchy trigger fingers that police have are reeeal itchy and THAT is part of the problem. We have nutjobs with guns who are not only allowed to carry them and encouraged to use them - they are not even going to be prosecuted for it, because its in their job description.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/nyregion/29cop.html

P.S. you don't even have to carry a gun in America to get shot - a silver wrapped candy bar will suffice

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/08/nyregion/agent-mistakes-candy-bar-for-gun-and-shoots-youth.html

http://cornellsun.com/node/26276

Ixobelle said...

making guns less accessible to law abiding citizens is just as bad of a solution as arming everyone and their dog.

that's where you lose me. law abiding citizens shouldn't need guns in the first place.

OH BUT WHAT IF WE NEED TO OVERTHROW OUR GOVERNMENT?

yeah. um. hm.

a gun isn't going to help in that situation. They have airplanes and tanks. let's not be silly. even if this did apply, why is it illegal, then, to own a rocket launcher or nuke? shouldn't that fit under the 'save ourselves from the government' clause?

being realistic, instead of dreaming up fantasy scenarios where a pistol will take down a tyrannical government, the simple truth is that if there were LESS guns, there would be less dipshits with guns. When EVERYONE is issued a gun at birth, is that the ideal we're striving for?

it's a stupid argument, and neither side is going to suddenly change their views. You either love guns or hate them, and I don't imagine I'll sway you one way or the other. I think they're stupid, and people clinging to things like the second amendment are doing just that... clinging. it's an outdated policy, like slavery, but for some reason still exists. yes, there are plenty of people that would bring back slavery if they could, but that doesn't make it a 'valid' choice.

Khatib said...

I knew I should have added a smiley after my fuck off hippy line. That was half joking, really.

Oh, and I did mention in the first post, I own no handguns. You said you'd never use those for hunting, but I have in the past, for small game type things. Same stuff you'd shoot with a .22 rifle you can shoot with a .22 pistol. And my dad has a good friend with a back problem. Guy is confined to a wheelchair. Has a special permit to be allowed to shoot out of his car off the highway. Takes his deer every year with a pistol that way. Sure, special circumstance, but still.

Anyways -- back to the debate that will never get anywhere on the internet -- The only people made considerably less secure by arming the law abiding populace of a nation are it's criminals. Granted, this assumes those armed law abiding citizens will be at least moderately well versed in gun safety. I really wish gun safety was taught in high schools right along with CPR and all the other half-ways pointless stuff you learn in health class. At least just the very basics. This is a safety, this is a trigger, never ever point a gun at something you don't intend to shoot, treat every gun as if it's loaded, etc, etc.

We have nothing to fear from good people owning guns. Bad people owning guns is the scary thing. But when good people have guns, bad people are much more hesitant to be bad. It's pretty simple logic really.

Leah said...

Ixo - you've missed my point. its my own failing, I don't always manage to get my thoughts across.

to return to your original post on toy guns - step 3 (and possibly even step 1) is superfluous as the only one who will shoot you if you wave anything even remotely resembling a gun in USA would be the police itself. if you are lucky - you will live to go to court and see the cop who shot you get acquitted.

and will disarming the population solve the itchy triggers of the police? only when they are no longer trained to shoot first, ask questions later. only when they are not so short on people that they let nutjobs slip through the cracks and be allowed to carry guns and badges, use them and then be excused on the grounds that their life MIGHT have been threatened.

As far as accessibility of guns as well as their usefulness in self defense for your average law abiding citizen, I started and erased many a paragraph, but you are right - its a stupid argument and we're both far too old and too established in our opinions to be swayed by a few words on the internet.

Klepsacovic said...

@Khatib:
Good people are not perfect. They make mistakes. They get angry or drunk or forget that they had the gun loaded before playing a prank.

While more guns would discourage crime, they would also encourage more violent crime. If you're breaking into a house and the owner probably doesn't have a gun, you're going to react differently than if you're pretty sure he's armed. There's little to be gained by shooting an unarmed person, except a far worse sentence if you get caught. But if you think that person has a gun, you're going to shoot first because now your life is on the line. Sure, the gun will make the robbery less likely, but if it does happen, it's going to be more violent. I'd gladly trade a murder for a dozen robberies.

Like I said at the start: it's an arms race.

bang bang said...

Guns are ugly. The reason they are so liked by the Americans is because they fit their culture so nicely. Easy to use, easy to maintain, loud bang, perfect for your average fat-ass American that yells "i know my rights" and believes some guy in a cave hates him for his freedom.

I don't want to offend anyone, it's true that you can't trust your gov't, after all, they want you paranoid with fear and dumbed down enough to make you believe everything you see on TV. The problem here is much deeper. It's beyond racism or religion or social upcoming or whatever. It's because of some twisted form of mentality that makes one think "why ? because i can.. and if i can, i should !"

But a device that can kill in seconds without any training beforehand whatsoever shouldn't be handed out like candy. A long time ago, it would take one years of practice to master the sword or the bow, and a lifetime to perfect. All those years bring something to the table: discipline. Something a gun owner severely lacks. Yes, just about any gun owner. The feudal Japan fell because of firearms and religion.. masters that trained their whole life in the way of the horse and the bow were gunned down by peasants with rifles, and religion told them, hey, it's ok, everyone is equal ! You have the same rights as that dude that spend half of his lifetime to train with the yari or the katana or whatever !

And therein lies the problem, this lack of discipline, of mastery. To truly master a weapon, any weapon, you first and foremost need a clear, still mind, not clouded by fear, paranoia or ego. I really really doubt that a robbery or hold up was thwarted because a bunch of guys returned fire.

Firearms are ugly because of this.. because they're too easy to use. You wanna protect yourself, fuck it, train to use a sword or an x-bow or something, it makes you more disciplined, more ethically balanced and more badass.

@Khatib, if you think hunting is some kind of hero job, you obviously didn't read that nakedmaninthetree blog that iso linked some time ago. You're fucking the earthmother and you're proud of it ? Jeez man, i spray ants too when they trespass, but i'm not deluding myself in thinking i did the right thing. Nature doesn't owe you shit, actually you owe nature. so really man, buy a toy gun or shoot some soda cans and leave the ecosystem alone.

Ixobelle said...

We have nothing to fear from good people owning guns. Bad people owning guns is the scary thing. But when good people have guns, bad people are much more hesitant to be bad. It's pretty simple logic really.


but as I mentioned... I think i'm a 'good person', but if I had a gun readily available to me, I'd probably end up shooting someone in a fit of anger. You guys read my blog. You know I rant, but (I hope) you know I'm not some angry guy that stares at candles cursing people all day long.

But if someone ran over my cat and then tried to laugh in my face about it, yeah, they'd get shot in the knees, then backed over a few times in my car. I'm not a small guy, but I never really got into fist fights much. If I could just pop open a glovebox and instantly have someone on the ground incapacitated, it might be too easy to not let something slide.

Not being cut off in traffic, but something PERSONAL. Having a gun just would make it too easy to do something I'd regret later, after it was too late.

So what happens when a good person becomes bad for a fraction of a second, and in that fraction a gun is an arm's reach away?

Bad things happen.

oshin said...

Leah,

Your point of view is going to be different to mine, as I live in a small country with a relatively low crime rate.

At the end of the day though, Your view on the police is still wrong, keeping the peace includes stopping beatings and robberys. I dont see how having your own gun and blasting any threats is a valid form of protection.

"and it is their damn job to be in the line of fire in a first place."

This made me laugh, police join the police for a lot of reasons, but I have to imagine nobody joins to get killed. There humans just like you and me, and if being an asshole saves your life, your going to do it.

I hate the whole argument made by both sides of gun control that guns are the root of all crime, of course there not, and I was very careful to not to state that. The fact is though, they make crimes much worse, its plainly obvious.

The only valid reason in my mind is because they are so common you need them for protection. The argument about crooks not giving them up is fair, but its not hard to see that crooks can just get these guns by breaking into a store or hunting around in gloveboxes/drawers until they have one.

Ixos dead on, I beat theres plenty of dumb crimes that could have been prevented if people didnt run back to there house for a gun to shoot somebody who`d simply pissed them off.

highlatencylife said...

Wow, how a post about toy guns devolves into a gun control issue.

I for one wish Toy guns looked real in the US. I'm all for anything that gets rid of stupid people faster.

Pierre said...

If you think that racism is bad in the US, you probably haven't lived in Europe much.

Pierre said...

also, here's a handy chart.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_murder_rate

Leah said...

@ Oshin

my view of police happens to be based on personal experiences and various conversations with actual cops. As well as research made into judicial system of USA, prompted by that personal experience.

people join the police for the variety of reasons. But when you join the police, regardless of your reasons - if you don't realize that you will be putting yourself in a line of danger - you shoudlnt' be joining in a first place. Sadly, I've noticed that a lot of those that join to actually help other people burn out in a few years and leave the force, sometimes for private security, sometimes for the jobs that are complete opposite.

Do you have a workable plan that will ensure that criminals of United states no longer have guns? DO you have a workable plan that will ensure the police getting to the scene of the grime in time to make a difference AT ALL times? DO you realize that police, even if they wanted to - cannot do anything about a threat - they can only do something when crime is either obviously already in in progress (like a robbery or where the punches were already thrown and some damage done) or more often then not - has already happened (except when it comes to potential shooting of the policemen themselves - they are like James Bond with a license to kill nowadays)

And why is it that police is allowed to be assholes to save their lives - these regular human beings just like you and me, and I cannot? DO you realize that I can and will be arrested if someone picks a fight with me on the street and I fight back instead of passively taking a beating? (heck, I got in trouble by passively taking a beating, just because I called the police and my assailant accused me right back. sure in the long run - I was cleared, but I still spent a few hours first cuffed, then locked up in a police precinct, with a bruised face and all the joys that being processed brings)

Do you really think that this sort of thing is fine and dandy? DO you really think its ok for police to have fingers so itchy - they will shoot you for a candy bar? DO you think that the above is ONLY because there are handguns around? really?

and as far as dumb crimes being prevented because there are no convenient tools to commit them with, you are so naive. there would be other crimes to replace them.

Have you read of the prohibition? (I'm not going to assumed that you actually lived during that time)

Did alcohol being illegal and not readily available stop people from drinking? not in a slightest. and yes, people still drank and drove, and killed other people.

When abortions were completely illegal - do you honestly think that people didn't have them done? they just died more often from them, because they had to go to some hack instead of a clean office with experienced medical professional.

cars. if you have so little self control as to not think before you shoot - you shouldn't be able to drive either. because what exactly will stop you from ramming someone with your car? and/or running them over? you shouldn't own knives either - because its not exactly difficult to run into the house, grab a kitchen cleaver and knife someone to death. or hit someone in a back of the head with a lamp or something.

you are fixating on the symptom, not the cause. It just happens to be the more visible symptom - like coughing when you have a flu (even though there's a multitude of other symptoms that you are experiencing)

and the cause is lack of personal accountability, responsibility, self control. Unfortunately - I don't know how to fix that beyond personal level.

P.S. I have this Lara Croft Halloween costume that I've never worn to street celebrations. the guns for that costume are the cheapy 99c each, bright lavender and acid green water pistols. The reason why I've never worn it outside? because at night - the shape alone is enough to put my life in danger. from the police, that is "watching" over the celebration.

oshin said...

And I think your deluded if you think any violent/dangerous situation can be helped by somebody untrained random person who picked up a gun at there local walmart.

More to the point, your getting worked up over something im not saying, I never said guns were the root of all evil like your implying, just that its fuckin stupid that they are so easy to access, and it doesn't help in any way. I accept that if they were banned in the morning chaos would insue, but ultimately, the more guns are in circulation the easier they are to get, in most eu countries its almost impossible to get a handgun without hardcore criminal links. I bet that reduces the severity of alot of crime that would otherwise involve guns and people dieing.

Leah said...

Oshin - at least in USA in a majority or states, it takes some serious jumping through bureaucratic hoops and a waiting period to get a handgun the legal way. conceal carry license btw - is separate from general gun license. automatic weapons are already banned, have been banned for years. its relatively easier to get a hunting rifle...in areas where you actually can hunt and you cannot exactly move said rifle out of the general area you are allowed to use it in.

lack of training is a personal responsibility issue and personally - I think that even driving tests all over the place should be of the same difficulty they are in New York City or harder (in other words - you can and will fail the test if you are not following the driving rules)

I never said that guns should be easily available or accessible, you seem to assume that this is what I'm saying. I think that training course should be a requirement before getting a hunting rifle, let alone something that can carry more then one bullet at a time.

you are again ignoring the issue though. violent gun crimes are NOT committed by law abiding citizens. they are committed by criminals with those hardcore criminal connections. And as for stupid crimes? like I've been trying to say over and over - you don't need a gun to commit a stupid crime. Most people manage just fine without.

however - for a criminal to be aware that the person they might be attacking can actually hurt them right back is a very good deterrent from attacking them in a first place.

Charles said...

Likely a comment on a post that comes too late but here it is anyway.

Taking firearms away from the popluation is not the answer. Look at the violent crime rates of major US cities and you will see that the cities with the most gun control laws have the highest rates. Washington DC, Chicago, New York, Los Angles are much higher than cities where people own firearms for self protection. Also look at the crime rates of countries like England where (in the last 5-10 years) firearms have been taken away from the population and you see a spike in violent crime. There have been a few other western nations that have tried to do what England did with the same results.

The police are not responsiable for your saftey (this is an accepted legal norm, and has been upheld in courts across the country) ultimatly you are responsiable for your saftey. It is up to you to choose how you protect yourself. Some people buy home security systems, some people train in various personal defense or martial arts, some people cary firearms, and some people don't do anything and just hope for the best. "When seconds count the police are only minutes away" isn't just a slogan used by people who choose to protect themselves it's a truth. What kind of harm could be done to your family while you wait on the police to arrive after you call 911? Would you rather spent those minutes hiding in a closet hoping that no one was hurt, or would you try to protect your family with enough force to see the job done?

Firearms are, at the end of the day, the great equilizer. What chance does a 80 year old man have to defend himself against a 25 year old that has decided to break into her home and rob him? How would a 19 year old girl stop a man (or group of men) who have decided to rape her? How did a black man defend his family from the Klan in the 50's and 60's? How does a young gay man defend himself from being a victim of a gay bashing? Having access to firearms, and having the will to protect yourself with them enable these things to happen (there is actualy a group called the pink pistols who's mission is to help gays protect themselves - look it up, and most gun control laws were actualy written to limit rights and protections of blacks and other minorities when they were first written)

For the record I am licensed to cary a firearm, and I do so. I have the means, the training, and the will to protect myself and my family if the need arise. My wife is capable of defending herself and my children if I am not home to protect them. And I pray that neither I or my wife ever have to protect our family with those firearms.

Stabs said...

"Also look at the crime rates of countries like England where (in the last 5-10 years) firearms have been taken away from the population and you see a spike in violent crime"

Err what? In England people haven't carried weapons since longbow training was compulsory in the Middle Ages.

In the final analysis this issue is subject to Darwinian principles. People who think everyone should have a firearm will live to produce less babies (and of those fewer will survive). Armed civilians are not an evolutionary advantage.

Tragedyx said...

3 things:

1: Damn I missed this blog.
2: Khatib, well said. Alot of people don't understand why we have a dependency of such things.
3: Our society is entirely different from every other nation on earth in almost every way. On the surface it's all the same, but when it comes down to such details, we are a very different group altogether.

When the law abiding citizens lays down his arms because it becomes illegal, do you think those who are committing crimes will do the same? When you are in trouble you can call the police, but who will protect you from the police? Anyone not willing to defend their own life is not fit to live.

dan said...

"In Japan, guns are rare."

In Japan? Try in the rest of the western world, period. I would guess that Canada would be next on the list with whoever was in third being way further down in the numbers game (are there even any other western nations where it is legal for any tom, bob, fred, or cleatus to head out and apply for a permit to carry a handgun?).

@Leah:
"removal of guns will not fix the problem"

But it will mean that Joe Nutjob who decides he's going to go on a killing spree would be able to walk into his place of work/school classroom/wherever, walk up to one person, pull out his knife and shank them, then...what? A knife would be a much worse tool for the task of cutting down the other ten, twenty, or however many people he's decided he want to kill as they run away/pick up something heavy and throw it at him than a gun. Bad shit happens, especially when there are nuts people around, but if they can only kill one or two people before stopped rather than as many as they have bullets that to me is a good, or rather less shitty, thing.