Summations Only

Is it completely impossible for you to comprehend the not-so-subtle differences in gun-related killings between the UK and the US?
The latter has a bit over 4 times the population but 600 times the gun-related deaths.No matter how you try to insult your way around those numbers you are not successful.

Yeah - we should be trying to free a man who is not in prison.
I think you USA rightists should try to get at least one thing right.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

Faith, it's been pointed out to you twice now that the statistics in question include the crime of illegal possession of a firearm. If a ban on firearm ownership is introduced, then any statistics which include the new crime of illegally possessing a firearm will peak for a while after the new laws are introduced and enforced by the police. Surely you can see that ?

Chuckle.Crash, if you knew more than me than you would have simply showed me evidence that NORWAY has a HIGHER VIOLENT CRIME RATE than the USA.Do you wanna show your sheer ignorance a second time? Norwegian evidence please.

That's fine. I don't mind your confusion. If you would like I'd be happy to try to explain sometime although it will be a rather boring discussion I fear.

why would you change the habit of a lifetime?

You act like that makes it ok. You can hardly make something legal a crime and then just wave it away when that increases the crime rate. You have to eat your vegetables on this; you can't just say "well, that kind of crime doesn't count."

Hi Faith,The important point is that if no one had guns, no one's life would have been at risk.--Percy

I can't tell if this is your usual sarcasm or not, but you need to understand that saying things like this is why you get accused of holding viewpoints you find ridiculous - the viewpoints you say you hold are often ridiculous.

Really? Or do you mean "no one's life would have been at risk from guns?"

removedEdited by NoNukes, : No need to dogpile.

Crash, the recent debate with Faith has been about whether the firearm ban in the UK was followed by an increase or decrease in violent crimes/murders using guns. Faith was claiming an increase, by pointing at data which include non-violent crimes. The data have to be relevant - they cannot include irrelevant elements.

It does.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

Look, Panda, I get it; you're as proud of your country as I am of mine.But you need to stop and consider. Maybe your conviction that I'm irrationally ignoring evidence out of nationalistic fervor - and let's be honest, that's what you believe - is actually your excuse for you to irrationally ignore evidence out of nationalistic fervor.Suppose it were really the case that, in the UK, you're more likely to suffer violence at the hands of a home invader than in the US. (It actually is, but I know you don't yet believe that, so just suppose for a moment that it is.) Is that something you'd be prepared to believe, or would national pride force you conclude that something was wrong with the stats?

When I had an FFL(Federal Firearms License) my biggest competition was not other gun stores it was the guys selling stuff out of their houses and cars. Some of these guys were unlicensed but most had FFL's. There is no requirement that a FFL holder have a storefront. Basically these guys are unregulated.The only basic requirement for selling a gun is to have a form filled out and to keep that record. Nothing ever is done with it unless there is a gun trace.
Here is the pertinent line from the ATF themselves.

quote:

---

These requirements enable ATF to carry out one of the principal purposes of the GCAto assist State, local, and foreign law enforcement officials in tracing firearms used in crime.

​

The United States government does not maintain records of licensees’ firearms transactions, other than the previously mentioned out-of-business records, reports of multiple handgun sales, and records of firearms traces. The assimilation of the information from these records provides valuable leads in the identification of illegal gun traffickers and their sources of firearms in the United States.

---

The records for purchase stay with the license holder. There is no requirement for a backup copy anywhere. If the copies are destroyed there is no other record. I have seen purchasers taking possession of 20 assault type weapons and basically there is no oversight. I have reason to believe that they were purchased to be resold to inner city gangs. This was in 1989 or so. I was not the seller. They were sold out of the trunk of a car at a bar and the seller was an FFL license holder. There were multiple names and addresses used by the person taking possession. When a trace is done on any of these the FFL holder will affirm he saw an ID for each purchase.This was one of the things that made me rethink selling guns.We do not even have basic controls on these things.