Just In
for Guns in America: The Real Story

10/7/2013 c1 4Dakota Derkwood
*claps hands

Very well said sir very well said.

-Dakota Derkwood
8/22/2005 c1 chitoryu12
That's what I said. Of course, people like Clinton don't really enjoy facts much, do they?
9/2/2004 c1 10BasketweaverJesser
I'd have to agree that guns don't kill people. Stnad-up comedian Bill Cosby once said that it's not the gun, knife, or can-opener that should be held responsible for murder. It's rather more the person behind the weapon and the lack of respect he has for the other person.
Your essay is well-researched by-the-by. It's even worthy of Bill O'Reilly's high esteem. I'm adding it to my favorites list.
9/2/2004 c1 BasketweaverJesser
I'd have to agree that guns don't kill people. Stnad-up comedian Bill Cosby once said that it's not the gun, knife, or can-opener that should be held responsible for murder. It's rather more the person behind the weapon and the lack of respect he has for the other person.
Your essay is well-researched by-the-by. It's even worthy of Bill O'Reilly's high esteem. I'm adding it to my favorites list.
8/16/2004 c1 theworldisround
Yes. It seemed like a reasonable thing before. If you ban guns, then guns won't be around to be used, but only criminals don't follow the law, and we've seen that now. Bans on guns don't work.
7/12/2004 c1 21Phoenix-Pen
Ok, you make some strong points. But surely some level of conrol is needed? (ie. to keep firearms out of the hands of kids/lunatics etc.-I didn't mean to make that seem synonomous . . . oh dear). Having been quite impressed by Bowling for Columbine it's interestong to get the other point of view. Thanks!
3/17/2004 c1 2ESC's escapes
GUNS DO NOT KILL PEOPLE! People kill people, so why do they want to deny law abiding citzens their self defense? The constitution also states that no law shall deprive a US citizen of 'life, liberty, or property' without due compensation. They cannot duly compensate us for taking our weapons.
Long live America's first right!
10/3/2003 c1 150SpawnMeister666
I felt it only fair to read, as you put it, the true facts regarding guns and gun crime.

I also feel it only fair to offer my own criticism of the said true facts.

First off, you claim Great Britain is a country with a long and valued gun heritage. This is patently false. Being from England, which of course is part of Great Britain, and being from one of the biggest cities in England, I can state categorically that there has never been any long or valued gun heritage.

Or were you talking about the British Farmers, many of whom carry shotguns around with them as part of their routine?

You know what, the gun control laws introduced in the 90's, they were regarding HANDGUNS. So your average farmer could still go and shoot a fox having a go at his chickens with his shotgun if he so desired.

Thats if there were any foxes left after the farmer, his friends, and a pack of wild dogs had chased all over the countryside, for the 'sport' of seeing a fox ripped apart.

Actually, thats another argument altogether.

As for the increase in crime in Great Britain, that has a lot more to do with drugs than it does with gun control laws. I live here, I'd know about these things.

You state that a place like Texas has less crime statistically than Great Britain, but dont say where these statistics come from. You also state that if it wasn't for gun control laws, 4,177 rapes wouldn't have happened, and 6.124 billion dollars of losses would have been saved.

I'd be interested to know where these figures come from, as I dont see how banning guns leads to increased rapes.

Statistics are wonderful tools, but difficult to believe. Statistically, for example, a recent survey showed that 94% of all Manchester United Football Club supporters live within half a mile of the clubs stadium.

Which is impressive. Especially when you consider there are 68,0 supporters in the stadium for each fixture, and that extra trains are laid on from places like London for each fixture because of increased demand, and the traffic problems getting to and from the stadium every time they play.

I mean, they all live within half a mile, why do they need to bring the car?

Then you look at the figures of the survey. Which involved a total of 1,0 people being asked the same set of questions, at every stadium where a game was being played, on one weekend.

The English Football League has 96 clubs, all were in action that weekend, which means there were 48 football games being played. Which means that the survey actually asked 21 people at each game the same set of questions.

Which means 94% of 21 people asked a set of question outside a football stadium lived within half a mile. Which, according to the survey, means 94% of the 68,0 people that were actually at that football match live within half a mile.

How can you make an assumption like that based on a survey involving 21 people?

My point, basically, is statistics say whatever the person whose ordered the survey wants them to say.

If the NRA wants a survey to say gun control leads to more crime, thats what the survey will say.

If the Government want a survey to say gun control saves lives...guess what the surveys going to say?

So you know what, whilst admittedly well written, and certainly an entertaining read, I'll take what you say in this essay with the proverbial pinch of salt!

9/22/2003 c1 12Carmen Noriko
This is one issue I am very undecided on. I shoot when I have time, and have a FOID card, so it's obvious I'm not completely against firearms. However, I find I can't make an exact political stand because there is so much propaganda coming from each side that I can't keep it straight. Your essay was very good, and very informing. You've made a lot of good points, and I commend you for that.

- hasapi

P.S. Good thought, not accepting anonymous reviews, especially with the controversial nature of your essays.
8/22/2003 c1 1serasivad
Very balanced and factual. I liked the quotes. Although, as a woman, seeing as how a woman who tries to defend herself from rape with a gun is more likely to have the gun used on her, I prefer rape to death.
8/11/2003 c1 Mbwun
Well done. Guns are not evil or good; they are mechanical objects of metal and (in some cases) plastic, and last time I checked, metal and plastic don't think. A gun all by its lonesome cannot kill-it requires a human to use it.

~He Who Walks On All Fours
8/9/2003 c1 8HNMN Commander for the Right
This was a great essay. You made your point really well. It's going on my Favorite's list (something that I don't do very often.)
7/7/2003 c1 10James Jago
All very well, but the main reason we don't have a dozen gun-murders a day in every county over here is that guns are harder to get hold of: a background check makes sure that the few people who own guns for hunting or recreational shooting aren't criminal madmen. Obtaining firearms ilegally isn't impossible, but a lot harder than simply walking into a shop and buying a submachine gun. If it weren't I'd own one!
7/6/2003 c1 1David Osborn
Yes, guns are tools, but as you've said, bare hands, knives, and blunt objects make up 22% of all homicides. If the other 3% is rifles, that leaves 75% to guns. If guns were much harder to get, people would need other weapons. Having to use weapons which don't kill as easily as guns would cause many people to not try, and other's to fail.

The reason you have guns is to protect your rights. In the 1700's, those rights were revolutionary, and the empires of europe would have loved to crush them. Today, they don't need protecting. At least not by force.
7/5/2003 c1 27Loganberry
It's nice to see someone writing this point of view coherently and in good English, even if I disagree entirely with it, so well done for that.

But in all honesty the points about Britain are a bit of a red herring, in that saying we're "a country with a long and valued gun heritage" implies that before the handgun ban it was unexceptional for private citizens to own handguns, which isn't the case. Even before the ban, it was extremely unusual for an ordinary private individual to own one - I've *never* known anyone who did. (Farmers with shotguns, of course, are another matter, but they haven't been banned in any case.)

It's certainly true that outlawing guns is hardly going to stop criminals getting them, seeing as they don't obey laws in the first place. And it's unfortunately true that some violent crimes (though not murder) are more prevalent in the UK than the US. But public opinion is still strongly in favour of the ban, despite the general (though incorrect) feeling that crime is rising, and even police officers consistently vote against being routinely armed.

Finally, I think we might have moved on a bit since 1764.
18 Page 1 2 Next »

Twitter . Help . Sign Up . Cookies . Privacy . Terms of Service