Father mistakes son for burglar and kills him with gun

[DGFone]

Well there just a trend. Over all developed countries (all of Europe, the US and Canada). Germany has the 2nd most deaths by guns, which is 347. The US is first with....9369 people...
I am not saying ban them, but this is the price you pay. It is after all way too late to ban them

cough *drgu war much?* couch. Let's just say that not all gun crime in the USA is simply just gun crime and not a side effect from something else.

[DGFone]

Can't take away the fact that a gun makes murder, for any reason, really easy. Why do you have drug wars and we don't? canada doesnt, however, guns are legal in Canada.

Canada doesn't share several thousand miles of border with Mexico. I think this should give you enough of a reason. (if you think gun deaths in the USA are bad, look at Mexico)

[DGFone]

Because we share a border with Mexico. It might not be a developed country, but it still doesn't stop the drug cartels from coming over here and messing things up.

[FlipMode]

If tomorrow, 1000 Americans die in some freak shooting spree... Guns will still not be banned in the country and frankly the laws will remain unchanged.
Its part of the culture, nuff said.

In this particular case, his ass is going to jail anyway so all is well in the "Land of the free". Of course we could debate that it its not, but we could debate in whether guerilla PMCs made out of slave children are allowed in third world countries... The fact it, the government (or lack of) allows for things like that in that country, and it is part of the natural order there. I mean, this whole thread seems to be a dig at the American gun laws... When one kid dies? Much worse has happened and the laws remained unscathed... I doubt any difference will come of this and if I was American I would see no reason either to be honest.

Guess I am just quite neutral on the matter
I will say this though...

Alright, but we can agree that guns are built to kill, right?

Yeah. But the gun itself was not the only part of the crime, the fool of a father was the one to pull the trigger. Even with a gun, you still only have half of the things needed to commit murder, you still need a criminal / stupid person to pull the trigger. So really I do not think guns can be blamed for this... Did the gun fire itself? No, the man decided someone life was apparently worth taking over his sisters house being broken into. Could have shot him somewhere it may not have killed him, foot or leg for example.
Guns don't kill people, murderers do.

EDIT - in another matter

An autopsy is being conducted to determine the manner and cause of death.

Well, he was shot... I think it is safe to assume he was killed by the bullet... CRAZY THEORY I KNOW!

[FlipMode]

Anyone who says guns are a good thing has obviously not seen what kind of damage they can do to innocent people.

I am definitely not saying they are a good thing, by any means. I am just saying that it takes two to tango - if one is shot, the gun did not fire itself at the person, someone aimed it, with intent to shoot another person. I mean guns do have their uses I.E military, hunting and such... If guns did not exist we would never have had the American Revolution, Bin Laden would still be alive and such.
I suppose though if guns were not legalised in the first place then people would not have that mentality, but even then you only mentioned gun crimes - we still have murders here via other weapons / actions to take into consideration.

Do I think guns should be banned there like they are in the EU? Absolutely. I just also see reasons why Americans would defend their right to own a gun.

[DGFone]

Anyone who says guns are a good thing has obviously not seen what kind of damage they can do to innocent people.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/kendra-st-clai ... ISWleClhxo

'nuff said.

[KentuckyWildcat]

Any notion that access to guns increases violence just isn't supported by any data. If anything, there is limited evidence that increased gun ownership among law-abiding citizens deters violent crime.

This interesting study published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy contains the statistics and analysis that I'm referring to. It's a bit lengthy, but worth reading.

[Azdgari]

^ First of all, while I love that you cited a source, nobody is going to read a fifty page Harvard dissertation. It might be in your best interests to use a more concise source. ;3

Secondly, have a look at the world. What do the UK, Switzerland, Singapore, Japan, New Zealand, and the UK all have in common? Strict regulation and control of firearms, and extremely low levels of gun violence. How's the US doing?

The United States has the highest rate of gun related injuries (not deaths per capita) among developed countries. ...they also have the highest rate of gun ownership and highest rate of officers.

Soooo.... yeaahhh....

[DGFone]

Not to mention that once again: you ban the guns, the criminals will still get the guns. Problem: If they have to resort to the black market, they are going to get the biggest bang for their buck (and I mean bang). Translation: The stricter the gun laws, the bigger the guns that are used in crime.

Dat logic.

http://www.examiner.com/article/those-p ... -you-think
http://www.tuccille.com/blog/2008/01/le ... reece.html

[KentuckyWildcat]

Again Woeler, your emotional and politically charged argument isn't supported by the statistics, and I really recommend you read this study

If it's too long, allow me to give some highlights.

1. Singling out the number of crimes involving guns is not an accurate measure of how violent a society is. In many cases, countries with tight gun laws or even outright bans have a higher rate of violent crime in general than neighboring countries that permit gun ownership. This suggests that cultural and socio-economic factors influence the rate of violent crime, not the availability of guns.

2. There is not a recorded instance in either the US or Europe in which passing gun control measures reduced the violent crime rate from the level it was at before such laws were passed. In several cases, violent crime subsequently increased.

3. Records show that murderers almost always have a prior criminal record, and are thus the kind of people far less likely to obey gun laws in the first place.

4. The areas of the United States that permit gun ownership have a significantly lower rate of violent crime than those that have enacted gun control laws.

5. Further, violence is not spread evenly in America. Certain sub-cultures have much higher rates of violence. For example, urban African-Americans have a much higher murder rate than whites and rural African-Americans despite being far less likely to own a gun. If guns are really the problem, rather than say, gang involvement, this trend would necessarily be the opposite.

In short, there is no evidence that restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens to own guns does anything to stop violent crime. In some cases, the opposite seems to be true.