Here is my reply to these gun-lovers, along with their e-mail:

As I did "negelect the relative statistics", here are some, with URLs for you!

A study conducted by the Heartland Institute called "Taking Aim at Gun Control" concluded recently that between 1973 and 1992 handgun ownership increased by 110 percent, from 37 million to 78 million. During that time the crime rate steadily rose also.

If we look to other parts of the globe, we will find much stricter gun control. Some countries do extensive background checks and psychological tests. Others have much stricter licensing requirements. Some prohibit gun ownership. But, not surprisingly, they all have one thing in common - a much smaller number of deaths due to handguns.

Just look at the facts from the Mennonite Central Committee news service: In 1992 handguns killed 13 persons in Australia, 33 in Britain, 36 in Sweden, 60 in Japan, 97 in Switzerland, 128 in Canada and 13,429 in the United States! (http://www.kcstar.com/democracy/stories/gnedit.htm)

In 1993 nearly 2 percent of the labour force was in prison (Freeman, 1995) and, yet even with such a high level of incarceration, the crime rate in the USA remains one of the highest in the world. (http://www.labor.net.au/evatt/washington.html)

Both Canada and Australia can lay claim to having stable, safe, clean and fun living environments and both are viewed by many international students as having much lower crime rates than the United States. (http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/culture/educationmarketing/AUSTRA-E.htm (Note: Is down at the moment))

"By keeping guns out of the hands of criminals... we have helped cut the crime rate to its lowest point in a generation." - President Clinton (about the Brady Law which "blocked some 69,000 handgun purchases in 1997 - more than half of them because the would-be gun owner was either a convicted or indicted felon.") (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/bradylaw980622.html)

> First, UK is NOT "safer" than the US. The US has a higher murder rate per
> population, but it is confined for the most part to a few of the worst
> areas. On an average piece of ground or residential street, you are safer
> in America. SECOND, the occupied dwelling burglary rate in England is TWICE
> that of the US. Would that make you feel safer in your home at night?
> The reason is they're taking away guns. The robbery rate there is also
> skyrocketing, and is now higher than in the US.

13,429 in the United States is one heck of a lot, compared to the 'unsafe' 33 in Britain.

> You also negelect to mention Switzerland, Israel, and Finland, which have
> much higher rates of gun ownership than the U.S., and also much lower
> crime than England, Canada, and Australia. note also that as the US has
> more concealed gun carriers legally licensed all the time, crime is
> dropping here. As Canada, Australia, and UK add more restrictions,
> crime is going UP there.

Switzerland places a far heavier reliance on decentralized government, and individual responsibility, which, when combined with a greater degree of social control than Americans would likely tolerate, helps keep the crime rate low .... Swiss citizens are generally very law abiding, and the Swiss have not seen the need for the sorts of harsh justice and broad police powers seen elsewhere .... Violent movies can be banned, and racist and anti-Semitic acts, speech or publications are strictly prohibited ...

Switzerland requires mandatory military service for its men, but there is only a small standing army. The Swiss rely upon a militia system for defense of the confederation, and because of this, ownership of all types of military weapons is more widespread even than in the United States ... Purchase of handguns is licensed on a "must issue" basis at the cantonal (state) level, with "firearms purchase certificates" issued to all adult residents without criminal records or history of mental illness. Handguns and semi-automatic rifles are registered using the same "triple-sheet" form in those cantons which have any registration, with one copy going to the police, one to the dealer, and one to the owner. (http://www.op-sec.com/myths/appendix3.html)

You can't compare Switzerland to the USA - they are totally different societies with totally different ways of doing things. Trying to compare Switzerland to the US is laughable.

And isn't Israel in the middle of fighting WITH GUNS with other countries, hence lots and lots and LOTS of people are dying due to these weapons? Or don't they count in the 'crime rate', hm?

> You also negelect the relative statistics in the U.S.

As have you, as I see NO statistics in this e-mail!

> Places with more legal concealed gun carrying in the U.S. have on avaerage
> seen greater reductions in crime after the institution of these laws than
> other places that do not. it is now quantifiable that gun carrying SAVES
> lives NET, while disallowing legal carry COSTS lives NET, here in the still
> fabulously free united States of America.

> Anybody who knows how laws work would not trade American legal rights for
> those of the Countries that still bow to monarchy. Even if the giving up
> of the rights would achieve more safety, which it wouldn't.

Ah, joy. American patriotism.

Such emotive writing, without a single fact or statistic to back any of it up!

"The other day in Indianapolis, where I live, a group of teenagers got one of their father's semi-automatic handguns and were playing with it. They had removed the clip, but they didn't know that this gun chambered a round and could be fired without the clip. One kid put the gun to his head and told another kid to pull the trigger. He did, the gun discharged and killed the first kid." says a friend living in the US.

I see how you completely ignored this aspect of owning guns - are your CHILDREN safer, when they die of using weapons that gun-lovers leave around the home?

> Look sometime at the murder rates in police-state paradises such as
> Jamaica, Mexico and South Africa. All MUCH higher than in the U.S.
> living in China. They have the death penalty for illegal gun possession.
> They also have a lot of crime they don't like to talk about.

And this has to do with the subject because...?

> My Chinese friends who live here now are amazed at the stupidity of
> anybody who would let the government have a monopoly on guns if they
> don't have to. it removes BOTH safety and civil rights.

Ah, more emotive writing without facts to back it up. And abusive, too!

*shakes her head*

It's a very, very sad state of affairs all this gun-loving. It really is.

Here is my reply to them again - their letter is yet more emotive stuff, not backed by a single fact. I don't know why they just don't come out and say 'We want guns because we are scared!'... anyway, here is the letter:

> "Switzerland places a far heavier reliance on decentralized government,
> and individual responsibility, which, when combined with a greater degree
> of social control than Americans would likely tolerate, helps keep the
> crime rate low .... Swiss citizens are generally very law abiding, and
> the Swiss have not seen the need for the sorts of harsh justice and broad
> police powers seen elsewhere .... Violent movies can be banned, and > racist and anti-Semitic acts, speech or publications are strictly prohibited
> This defeats your own argument. If guns were the cause, Switzerland would
> have a lot more crime and gun trouble than the U.S.

> By noting all the other factors that are different between the countries as
> your rationale for why the crime levels are different, you make the point that
> guns are not the cause -- other things are. Notably, you do not differentiate
> all these kinds of factors for australia and england and so on. presuming
> them to be identical to the US for all other factors but switzerland not to be
> is totally fallacious.

The case is society, how it is set up, and the total lack of training and background checking for the US. Any idiot can get a gun, even if he's a psycophathic murderer. Hence, more guns = more murders, more accidents, etc.

> This reminds one of the argument that the gun laws in Virginia cause the
> murder rate in D.C. Why then does the neighboring Fairfax County Virginia
> have double the population and 1/30 to 1/60 of the homicides each year?
> wouldn't the gun laws have the most effect right where they are situtated?

> Of course not. It's all those "other" factors. This makes the case that the
> guns are not the cause.

> I think you would not get the full effect of the kind of gun control you would
> like in Canada or Australia. they still have guns.

> You should definitely try China. You would feel at home with their level of
> free choice.

[ Not in my reply, but does everyone note how they've stooped to childish replies, because they can bring up no facts or figures, yet again? I never insulted them once in my letters to them, yet they don't have the civility to reply without attempting insults, or being childish. So I can be petty on this web page. Nyer! I never said that I wasn't hypocritical... ]

You still seem to ignore all the accidents that are caused by guns. I've brought that up three times, (not), but the last two e-mails you have refused to reply to that.

Does that mean that you believe that guns do NOT cause accients? From my first e-mail, you will notice THAT was my main point - guns cause accients, killing children, because of irresponsible parents. The type of people who should NOT get guns.

Yes, I feel it is better that the population doesn't get guns. Guns belong in the hands on law enforcement people, only. While they are on duty, only.

Look at Indonesia right now! Things like that CAN'T happen in a society that doesn't let everyone have a gun.

[ Yes, it's the Indonesians running riot in East Timor right now - they, selfishly, want to keep control of the place! ]

Potentially, that could happen in the US.

Freedom is all well and good, but there HAS to be laws, otherwise you'd have anarchy. I feel that guns in the hands on every man and his dog brings a society a little closer to anarchy, without correct training (such ats the police and army get) for EVERYONE who owns a gun. Without strict background checks, without safety checks for children who might be in the house, without a heck of a lot of laws to help protect people and teach people, guns do more harm than good.

What's wrong with trying to legalise weapons that you can't kill someone by accident? What's wrong with learning a martial art to protect yourself? If a criminal has a gun, and is in your house, it's very likely that you could shoot each other, maybe both be killed. Maybe the untrained person will miss the criminal, and get shot anyway. Maybe the untrained person will shoot someone - a family memeber- who they THOUGHT was a criminal breaking in! There are a HECK of a lot of accidents with guns, accidents that would never have happened without these weapons in the hands of people who don't know how to use them.

PS - try living in a country where you don't need a gun to feel safe for a while.

I can only assume that your need for guns comes from fear... and that fear is there because all criminals can get their hands on the guns.

Here, at least, gun restrictions means less likelyhood for criminals to get guns - hence less fear of people with guns shooting you/breaking in/ etc - hence less NEED for people here to have/want guns.

I don't know a sungle person over here who WANTS a gun. I don't live in the country, or in a town. I live in the city.

That's the big difference between the US and Australia - less criminals have guns here. So less need for guns. More feelings of safety without the need for a gun.

And this (should) be my final reply to them. Unless, of course, they childishly try to get the 'last word' after I said that I wouldn't reply. They have absolutely zero credibility, now, don't they:

> By bringing up accidents, you make even a weaker case. accidental deaths
> from firearms in the US shrink all the time. the absolute number is
> drastically less than 90 years ago and 10 years ago. VASTLY more children
> are killed as a result of interaction with swimming pools, although there
> are far fewer swimming pools. more children are killed in cars, on
> bicycles, and as a result of cleaning prproduct storage than by guns.

> dedicated safety instructors such as myself work very hard to lessen gun
> accidents.

> many of the cases listed as accidents are homicoides and suicides in
> reality - willful acts. gun accidents are statistical aberrations.

> The weather in Beijing is hot at this time of year. bring ashorts when you
> emigrate.

You don't seem to let facts get in the way of a good argument, do you? Oh, well. Enjoy your gun, and hope it doesn't blow up in your face one day.

> There is crime in every country. there are criminals everywhere. even in
> your fantasy paradise, those with murderous intent can find something to
> use to kill you. since cain slew abel, we have had murder. there is a
> high likelihood it will continue in every country. those who prepare to
> defend themselves might not have to.

> answer the main question:

> would you use a gun to defend your child or mother from a large, strong,
> determined ax murderer? if the answer is "no,' then you are irrational or
> heartless. If the answer is yes, then you are a hypocrite for wanting to
> deny others the capability to defend their families.

> Rain predicted for Beijing tomorrow. take an umbrella.

Ah, there we go, childish, petty insults! A "hypocrite", huh? "Heartless", huh? *shakes her head*

How old are you? You sound about 15 years old or something...

a) No facts
b) Repetitive China stuff
c) Insults

You've never won at debating, have you?

You just keep making your side weaker and weaker by your lack of a decent argument.

For an adult discussion on any topic, you need:

a) Facts, backed up by evidence
b) To be able to go along with the flow of the discussion
c) Not get worked up enough to insult people

Consider that for your next e-mail to someone who writes against you.

I've had en enjoyable discussion, but petty insults are the end of it.

Goodbye, enjoy your gun.

And contemplate the words to Weird Al's Trigger Happy song.

This has been added since the sudden influx of people replying to me about a page that I'd completely forgotten about - this page was written some time during either 1999 or 2000 - but, anyway, this is what I currently think:

My main problem with guns isn't just the fact that criminals use them, but this:

Gunpowder (in it's original form) was originally a thing to make fireworks, to make something beautiful. That was then mangled into making something that was designed to do nothing but kill. It was only later that people made a sport out of it.

It's the killing people thing. But, then, I don't really like any weapon. I did win a sword, but it's in a box, somewhere in the bottom of my wardrobe in my room!

Well, my current opinion is that EVERYONE in a society should be _taught about_ guns and _taught how to handle_ guns, especially safety, before guns should be allowed to be freely used in that society. Without education, all the horrible things done with guns today will still continue to be done... Having a healthy fear and respect for guns is a good thing. I think that this is a good quote of how an 'ideal' gun owner should feel, where 'hate' is a term of fearful respect: "If ever you don't hate it any longer, then will be the time to throw it as far as you can and run the other way."

Anyway, thank you to the civil people who have replied to me... you are the only ones who have a hope of changing my mind. The nastiness that I get from the bad apples will only keep me firmly set in my path. But a big thanks to the kind and civil gun owners out there for talking to me. ^_^

Back to my main page, noframes navigation, or go here if you're missing the left-hand navigation frame!

--
If you enjoyed this page, please contact me at kunoichi@thekeep.org