The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / Law  % width posts: 1,615

The right to own guns: would you support such legislation in Poland?


ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
31 Dec 2013 #871
Nor are crime rates in your country where guns are relatively easily available any lower than those in Poland where they are not.

Heh,heh,heh, you just refuted your case for gun control. Reread your comment and figure it out.
bluesfan - | 85
31 Dec 2013 #872
Do you have any links to those statistic?

Plenty of stats have been posted on the US gun-nut thread; try looking there.

Here's an article for you to look at:

U.S. Has More Guns - And Gun Deaths - Than Any Other Country, Study Finds

The United States has more guns and gun deaths than any other developed country in the world, researchers found.
A study by two New York City cardiologists found that the U.S. has 88 guns per 100 people and 10 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people - more than any of the other 27 developed countries they studied.

Japan, on the other hand, had only .6 guns per 100 people and .06 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people, making it the country with both the fewest guns per capita and the fewest gun-related deaths.

They concluded that more guns do not make people safer.

David Hemenway, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health who specializes in injury research and is considered one of the top gun violence researchers in the country, said the there's "no question" that the relationship between guns and gun deaths is real.

"It shouldn't be really a surprise to people," Hemenway said.


abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2013/09/19/u-s-has-more-guns- and-gun-deaths-than-any-other-country-study-finds
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
31 Dec 2013 #873
U.S. Has More Guns - And Gun Deaths - Than Any Other Country, Study Finds

This reminds me of " A Tale of Two Cities" in more ways than one. If you take away the murder rates of minority groups than the U.S. is very much like your supposed other developed countries. Sad to say but minority crime which includes Blacks, Hispanics and some Asians account for 80+ percent of murders particularly in urban settings. Guns are an instrument of that violence even though urban areas like Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Detroit, etc have the most strict gun control ordinances. Interesting that the highest gun deaths occur in areas that attempt to prohibit gun ownership yet "conceal and carry" states have the lowest. Take away guns from legal gun owners and you'll still have thugs who don't care about laws killing people.

Additionally, those without access to guns kill others or themselves through other means. Your study seems to ignore that. It's noticeable that the eggheads who did your study ignored suicide by guns "The New England Journal of Medicine" notes that "firearms were used to kill 30,143 people in the United States in 2005, the most recent year with complete data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.1 A total of 17,002 of these were suicides, 12,352 homicides, and 789 accidental firearm deaths." So suicides play a big role in gun use. You might want to read John Lott's interview:

press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html
Szczerbaty 4 | 49
1 Jan 2014 #874
An ex-hunter I am, but by no means a card-carrying NRA gun advocate. Actually I gave away my guns 20 years ago. However, one reason us Yanks want to have guns is to keep the government in check. Poles were governed/ruled/enslaved for around 50 years by powers that used the gun to do it. Ain't gonna happen here Bub.
Ironside 50 | 10,814
1 Jan 2014 #875
Plenty of stats have been posted on the US gun-nut thread; try looking there.

Hey I asked you about Swiss gun crimes statistic.

A study by two New York City cardiologists found

Shouldn't that be studying something related to their field?
jon357 66 | 16,187
1 Jan 2014 #876
Heh,heh,heh, you just refuted your case for gun control. Reread your comment and figure it out.

Hardly.

Despite all your homeowners being able to protect themselves, crime rates are higher where you are.

And gun crimes are very, very, common.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
1 Jan 2014 #877
Hardly.Despite all your homeowners being able to protect themselves, crime rates are higher where you are.

Ah, lefties, logic plays no role in their 'feelings' about things. I'll break it down for you. Since you pointed out - "nor are crime rates in your country where guns are relatively easily available any lower than those in Poland where they are not", then owning guns makes no difference, hence why try to outlaw them?

Evidently my link to John Lott was ignored by you because he bases his information on facts and empirical experience instead of rhetoric.

You also ignored gun crimes in urban areas which have the strictest gun control laws which I pointed out in my previous post. So it is ironic that states with 'conceal and carry' laws have the lowest crime rates while cities with the strictest gun laws have the highest gun crime rates. To liberals this is perplexing because they base their beliefs on emotion and feelings instead of concrete facts.

And gun crimes are very, very, common.

Not in 'conceal and carry' states but yes, much more common in minority populated urban areas. It isn't guns but culture that is the difference. Perhaps that sort of information doesn't penetrate the agenda-ridden leftist mindset.
jon357 66 | 16,187
1 Jan 2014 #878
then owning guns makes no difference

Ah, the tea party reactionaries love to avoid the truth. Fortunately we don't have so many in Europe.

Easy availability of guns does nothing at all to protect and does everything to increase the murder rate.
bluesfan - | 85
1 Jan 2014 #879
lefties

liberals

agenda-ridden leftist mindset

More right-wing drivel...

Poland doesn't want to experience all the Sandy Hook, Columbine and Virginia Tech massacres that are so prevalent in US.

Keep your guns and your brainwashed right-wing BS out of Poland.

Polish partisans would have loved to have more guns during the years 1939-1945.[/quote]
poland would have loved not to be invaded simutaneously by two superpowers. Fortunately, it's not the 1930's and times have changed.
Ironside 50 | 10,814
1 Jan 2014 #880
Almost always mental illness has been a contributing factor.

That issue should be addressed not guns. Failure if the system to keep dangers mentally ill people on the street on drugs that clearly do not work properly
Ranger 1 | 23
2 Jan 2014 #881
Guns are only for the "government". Peasants cannot have guns unless they are in fact employees of the state.
Its too dangerous to grant freedom to the masses. That's why the West is losing freedoms right and left.
gucio
2 Jan 2014 #882
Why single out peasants?
Ranger 1 | 23
3 Jan 2014 #883
Generally the elites hate the fact that firearms have destroyed their monopoly on arms. Simple folk with firearms could defeat trained warriors.
Of course many elites do enjoy hunting and sport shooting. However they do not wish for the peasants to be armed. It is a threat against their domination.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
10 Jan 2014 #884
A problem with 'do-gooders' is their emphasis on emotion when making decisions. It's a kind of 'feel goodness' instead of logical thinking. Poland would do well to take this and other studies in any evaluation concerning guns.

breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/01/06/Professor-To-Study-Naysayers-I-Am-A-Democrat-Gun-Control-Not-Good-Public-Policy
Lefties have difficulty dealing with their cognitive dissonance. So many things which seem correct to them are actually not.
jon357 66 | 16,187
10 Jan 2014 #885
If anything it's conservatives who are ruled by their emotions and the rest of us by what is sensible:
telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8228192/Political-views-hard-wired-into-your-brain.html

Interesting though that you use the phrase 'do gooders' disparagingly. One would hope you don't prefer 'do badders'.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
10 Jan 2014 #886
When liberals in knee-jerk fashion immediately call someone a "racist", "homophobe", "sexist", "gun nut", etc, they act emotionally not objectively. They don't address the issue at hand. Now you point out another pin-head professor with an agenda who has a selected small sample size (" scientists at University College London who scanned the brains of two members of parliament and a number of students.")

Since I'm a long-term recovering liberal and have seen and experienced the folly of the leftist agenda, do you really want to believe that there has been some physical brain change? (there's a joke in there somewhere lol)

Interesting though that you use the phrase 'do gooders' disparagingly.

As a recovering "do gooder", I've realized that wanting the world to be full of rainbows, flowers and everything nice leads to naivete and harm. My many discussions with assorted lefties (commies, socialists, anarchists, feminists, etc)

has shown them to respond emotionally instead of addressing the facts. I've previously and frequently pointed that out and have shown examples. Rarely have those been addressed properly and instead lefties have appealed to emotion to make their naive points.

Many people in Chicago have saved their belongings, perhaps even their lives by scaring off a home intruder with a gun. Most have not reported such incidences because they didn't want to be hassled by prohibitive anti-gun rules.

However, it's doubtful that the home invaders would be back to the same house. That's success.
legend 3 | 664
10 Jan 2014 #887
When liberals in knee-jerk fashion immediately call someone a "racist", "homophobe", "sexist", "gun nut", etc, they act emotionally not objectively. They don't address the issue at hand.

Right on.
jon357 66 | 16,187
10 Jan 2014 #888
Right on

Eloquent as ever.

do you really want to believe that there has been some physical brain change? (there's a joke in there somewhere lol)

Some scientists certainly suspect that

Many people in Chicago have saved their belongings

And how many innocent people in your country (or just Chicago) have been shot dead? No accident that the murder rate is so high.

Fortunately, in Poland we don't want easily available guns and there is no significant lobby for that.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
11 Jan 2014 #889
nd how many innocent people in your country (or just Chicago) have been shot dead?

Way too many. The emphasis should be on criminals who obtain guns illegally as well as on the mentally ill. Banning guns will only allow thugs who don't care about the law to possess them.

No accident that the murder rate is so high.

It is high in minority communities. 92% of all murders last year in Chicago were committed by Black or Hispanic gangs. Murder rates by non minorities rival those of European countries. That should give you pause for thought.

(It isn't the gun but the culture which determines behavior).

Fortunately, in Poland we don't want easily available guns and there is no significant lobby for that.

As was true in August 1939. The next (almost) 6 years brought about a big demand for guns. That's another reason why America's founders insisted that people have a right to be armed.
jon357 66 | 16,187
11 Jan 2014 #890
The emphasis should be on criminals who obtain guns illegally as well as on the mentally ill.

'The emphasis' obviously isn't working very well. You've had 200 years of governments, 200 years of easy availability of guns and still you have a high murder rate. Whatever your 'emphasis' is, you've clearly failed badly at it.

It is high in minority communities.

So what? Unless you propose different laws for 'minority communities' which as those 'minority communities' become the majority may very well rebound on you.

As was true in August 1939. The next (almost) 6 years brought about a big demand for guns

Don't make me laugh! That was a world war 70 years ago! And a time when a homeowner shooting at an intruder would have been a very, very bad idea.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
11 Jan 2014 #891
Zimmy:The emphasis should be on criminals who obtain guns illegally as well as on the mentally ill.
Jon: 'The emphasis' obviously isn't working very well

The government has exacerbated conditions within minority communities by offering programs that created dependency. BigGovernment aided in the deterioration of the black family (73% illegitimacy rate) which contributed strongly to the 'crime culture' of young black men and women who grew up in single parent families.

200 years of easy availability of guns and still you have a high murder rate.

You continue to ignore the fact that non minority communities do not contribute substantially to a "high murder rate". A reemphasize of priorities is needed within the high crime rate areas. The "Great Society" programs threw trillions of dollars at the problem of poverty and the end result begot a slave plantation mentality. Instead of being politely "politically correct" the emphasize should be on self responsibility instead of teething on government dependence.

Unless you propose different laws for 'minority communities' which as those 'minority communities' become the majority may very well rebound on you.

Laws should be the same for everyone! BigGovernment nonsense like 'affirmative action' allows for some to be more equal than others.

As was true in August 1939. The next (almost) 6 years brought about a big demand for guns
Don't make me laugh! That was a world war 70 years ago!

Time doesn't change a fundamental premise or truth. I doubt if Poles want to forget that 20% of their population was lost during the war. Of course with lefties, facts are not only stubborn things but also inconvenient.

And a time when a homeowner shooting at an intruder would have been a very, very bad idea.

Why?
jon357 66 | 16,187
11 Jan 2014 #892
The government has exacerbated conditions within minority communities
You continue to ignore the fact that non minority communities do not contribute substantially to a "high murder rate"

A total irrelevance. As you say the ław should be the same for all.

I doubt if Poles want to forget that 20% of their population was lost

Nobody forgets. Yet it's never led to a gun lobby. In Poland we just don't want them around.

Why?

If you need to ask why, then you are truly naive. That or disingenuous. I wonder what you think would have happened to someone between 1939 if they fired a gun when the knock on the door came.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
11 Jan 2014 #893
The government has exacerbated conditions within minority communities
You continue to ignore the fact that non minority communities do not contribute substantially to a "high murder rate"
A total irrelevance. As you say the ław should be the same for all.

It should be but it wasn't nor is it still. As is evidenced by the recent 50th anniversary of America's anti poverty programs. They've been a failure, one instituted by BigGovernment. As previously pointed out, such programs helped create dependency and single family households which contributed to a crime culture.

Why?
If you need to ask why, then you are truly naive. That or disingenuous. I wonder what you think would have happened to someone between 1939 if they fired a gun when the knock on the door came.

It depends. Perhaps shooting a Nazi officer would be one possibility. Perhaps allowing Nazis into the home hoping they wouldn't take your family away would be another.
jon357 66 | 16,187
12 Jan 2014 #894
America's anti poverty programs

Have nothing to do with guns in Poland...

Perhaps shooting a Nazi officer would be one possibility

A suicidal one.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
12 Jan 2014 #895
ZIMMY:America's anti poverty programs Have nothing to do with guns in Poland...

I corrected a false premise with the correct answer. Crime rates in certain communities are high because of government dependency programs. So the state helps create the problem and then uses 'gun crimes' as an excuse to take away guns from law abiding citizens. Poles, because of their history should be wary of BigGovernment. Nazism and Sovietism are the logical final steps of government growth.

ZIMMY: Perhaps shooting a Nazi officer would be one possibility
A suicidal one.

So you oppose resistance fighters who used guns to fight Nazis.
jon357 66 | 16,187
12 Jan 2014 #896
I corrected a false premise with the correct answer. Crime rates in certain communities are high because of government dependency programs.

No. You rather ineffectively tried to introduce a red herring. There are no significant crime issues with minority communities in Poland.

So you oppose resistance fighters who used guns to fight Nazis.

Perhaps you didn't notice that we aren't talking about the wartime Polish Army. Despite your suggestion that householders in occupied territory might have used guns to repel someone who came knocking - pure fantasy land. We are talking about whether or not the law should be changed. The thread title makes that clear.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
12 Jan 2014 #897
You rather ineffectively tried to introduce a red herring. There are no significant crime issues with minority communities in Poland.

Several time you brought up the gun crime rates in the U.S. Just to illustrate one example, you said, "If Poles want to live in a country with 10,000 gun-related homicides a year, they can just move to the States..".

I merely gave you fuller information which included high minority crime rates exacerbated by BigGovernment programs. If you continue to bring up U.S. gun crime rates then I will continue to give you the 'fuller truths'.

As it is there is no reason to punish law abiding gun owners who not coincidently have the lowest crime rates but that is typical of BigGovernment bureaucrat policies who do things backwards.
jon357 66 | 16,187
12 Jan 2014 #898
Your 'fuller information' unfortunately adds nothing to the discussion, not least because it's an irrelevance. There is only one issue here the fact that there is not political will in Poland to have easy access to guns.
peterweg 37 | 2,320
12 Jan 2014 #899
Despite your suggestion that householders in occupied territory might have used guns to repel someone who came knocking - pure fantasy land.

Yes, the idea that armed civilians can defend themselves against an army is pure ********. Its also illegal, you won't be protected under the Geneva convention - you would become a terrorist.

I read an account of a small town during the German invasion, one German soldier was shot as he entered the town. The Germans burnt down hundreds of houses and killed many.

Can ALL posters keep to the thread title which is about whether legislation In POLAND should be changed.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
15 Jan 2014 #900
Yes, the idea that armed civilians can defend themselves against an army is pure ********.

Isn't that how Americans won their independence? Check out Afghanistan's history as well (along with others).

Its also illegal, you won't be protected under the Geneva convention

This may be the most strikingly odd comment yet. People won't defend their country because of the Geneva convention? It's illegal to invade a country too. It's also technically illegal for a government to enslave it's own people. Perhaps the Geneva convention only applies to people defending themselves?

you would become a terrorist.

You don't seem to know the difference between a terrorist and someone who is defending their home. Evidently, Polish partisans during WW2 were "terrorists" by your definition. Gun ownership is good for Poland in case invasions happen again - as they have so many times.

I read an account of a small town during the German invasion, one German soldier was shot as he entered the town. The Germans burnt down hundreds of houses and killed many.

They destroyed towns that didn't resist as well. Your supine posture allows tyrants to take over countries without repercussions.


Home / Law / The right to own guns: would you support such legislation in Poland?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.