3D-Printed Gun Earns Man Two Years In Japanese Prison 331
jfruh writes: Japan has some of the strictest anti-gun laws in the world, and the authorities there aim to make sure new technologies don't open any loopholes. 28-year-old engineer Yoshitomo Imura has been sentenced to two years in jail after making guns with a 3D printer in his home in Kawasaki.
You can Detect 3D Printed Gun (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
an answer to the growing threat posed by plastic firearms
It stops people being hysterical and stupid about non-issues?
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to know about the plastic barrels, chambers, firing pins and other sundry parts designed to handle existing ammunition. Is there a printable plastic that is strong and light enough to print a firearm that can be fired more than once without using ANY metal?
I can see some kind of plastic blunderbuss made heavy enough to handle a low-power shotgun shell a handful of times before melting or cracking but I'm not sure you could make a plastic firing pin that would trigger the primer. But now you're ba
You mean... (Score:2)
Bruce Willis lied to us?!
Good, it should be that way! (Score:2, Interesting)
After all, we need a government-mandated monopoly on violence.
How else could the Yakuza do their business? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y... [wikipedia.org] I mean, they're considered a semi-legitimate business in Japan, and are armed to the teeth. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/ne... [japantimes.co.jp]
Of course, they also lie about their crime rates to hide corruption to bolster promotions within their police force (source: Freakonomics, the movie).
Gun control works people! You have a whole country who is paralyzed with fear of the organiz
Re: (Score:2)
After all, we need a government-mandated monopoly on violence.
Some people draw the line at guns, where do you draw it? Automatic guns, rocket launchers, tanks, atomic weapons? Or should the government not have a monopoly on any of those either?
Re: (Score:3)
Here in the US, we have democratized violence. Anyone, no matter their station in society, has the God-given right to be violent.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone, no matter their station in society, has the God-given right to be violent.
Wouldn't that eventually make everyone less violet and more black and blue?
Re: (Score:2)
are you saying that Japan does not pad it's crime rates? Or are you criticizing the source in the particular movie, or using movies as sources no matter what, or...?
just criticizing a source with no context is trolling...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In Japan (Score:4, Interesting)
In addition to very strict gun laws (pretty much the only guys with hunting licenses got them > 50 years ago), there are other laws which are a lot more strict compared to other countries.
For example, if a gaijin resident is caught with light marijuana -> Jail time or deportation. Drinking and driving, even one beer, will cause one to lose his job in a country that prides itself of life long employment.
Re:In Japan (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually depending on the area you can still get hunting licenses - the thing is there is a limit and family and friends of existing hunters usually get preference. One of my employees happens to be the son of a hunter in Nagano and he's got a license. When he goes home during winter holiday he'll often bring us back some boar or deer meat. Having grown up for part of my life in Colorado the deer meat is especially appreciated, and boar meat goes great in a winter nabe.
That said, even with a license they have extreme limits on what kinds of guns and how much ammo they can have. Ammo needs to have serial numbers and can only be purchased at very specfic places - and the prices are outrageous. The yearly license fees on the guns are apprently pretty expensive too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What makes you think that hunting licences can only acquired by "the rich or well connected"?
Re: (Score:3)
The connected people are more likely to have experience and be more used to being around guns. They also have known hunting partners/mentors.
The prices are about 4x or so what they are in the US. This is mainly due to registrations / tagging / adding serial numbers etc. The thing is the animals they take they also get very very good prices on - so active hunters who are even moderately good will tend to retire from their day jobs (which is a dream of many hunters in the US).
Re: (Score:2)
No. The people getting these licenses are certainly not rich. The licenses are granted to indviduals who will actually use them when needed. Certain animals such as boars need to have populations controlled etc. The only reason family members and friends of existing license holders get preference is because they've been around and understand how the guns work AND will have an accessable mentor and hunting partner from the get-go.
Re: (Score:2)
FYI: nabe = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N... [wikipedia.org] = "...Most nabemono are stews and soups served during the colder seasons..."
Re:In Japan (Score:5, Interesting)
Drinking and driving, even one beer, will cause one to lose his job in a country that prides itself of life long employment.
Uh, no. I lived there from 97-99 and I promise you that is not true at all. In fact, a manager at the english school/business that I worked for got a DWI and was embarrassed, had "points" put on her license.... and NOTHING ELSE. She kept working. Please don't make up stories about "one beer fired for life!" YES they have roadblocks and check for DWI but the limits aren't as strict as you make them out to be. My wife was driving once after a few drinks when we went through a roadblock (turned the corner, there it was, no way around it). Blew into this baton thingy..... "thanks, you folks have a nice night".... (She wasn't fired)
To the case in point; gun laws have helped keep gun deaths to a minimum but that may also be part of an unspoken agreement between government and Yakuza. As long as street crime is taken care of blind eyes will be turned to gambling and prostitution rings. The only gun deaths are Yakuza shooting Yakuza. While this is a bit of a generalization, it's not much of one.
HOWEVER, it is the Japanese ideal of society that makes their country so safe in terms of physical crime. They are raised with such strong views of courtesy and manners that it is hard to overstate. The idea that you would cause trouble for those around you is horrifying for many (not all) Japanese. And yes... round eyes have much stricter penalties, that is very, very true. If you are trying to become a citizen you can't have so much as one parking ticket in 10 years of residency if you wish to even think about applying for citizenship... or you have to be an athlete, entertainment star, or sumo champ....
Re: (Score:2)
That's relatively minor compared to other countries in Asia, where importation of drugs is smuggling, and smugglers get the death penalty. No if, ands or buts. They find drugs on you, you're dead within the week. If you're lucky, the newspaper articles will read "Drug smuggler arrested and sentenced to death".
Oh yeah, and some of those countries neighbour unofficial drug producing countries as well.
Others are we
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
One beer? You're an idiot. Who'd want to live in a society where job loss and de facto permanent unemployment occurs at the slightest infraction?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If anyone thinks that it is a small number of people that drink and drive, take a look at most any parking lot outside any bar in the US>
Do you actually think all those cars are driven by the designated driver? That all those people have only 1 or less drinks?
Those empty lots mean most everyone is driving at some level of impairment. It happens and most people don't get in trouble for it, nor are they serious danger to anyone else on the road.
People natur
Re: (Score:2)
You already live in a world that's far worse;
One beer, a large strong one, the "slightest infraction", and you kill someone on the road because you weren't so sharp.
Life's tough sometimes, and you have to live with the consequences of your "slightest infractions".
Re: (Score:2)
Driving drunk is not a slight infraction, and many (most?) companies screen their employees for off-hour drug use nowadays - heck, I've heard that having Facebook pics of yourself drinking beer can get you disqualified from a job. We already have all the worst sides of authoritarianism, so why not get what few good things there are, too?
you deserve neither (Score:2)
We already have all the worst sides of authoritarianism, so why not get what few good things there are, too?
you're an idiot
just because some asshats are screening new hire's facebook page doesn't mean we should surrender all privacy rights
really, everything about your post is upside-down...
Re: (Score:2)
I acknowledge your feelings of inadequacy. But it would be more effective to improve yourself than attack random strangers online, especially since your ad hominems are less than impressive, too. Might I suggest learning basic reading comprehension as a start?
I didn't propose we do.
Try adjusting your system configuration.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't know extraterrestials are posting on Slashdot. Where is this free world you're talking about?
Re: (Score:2)
Drunk drivers already are positioning themselves outside of the society. I'd personally prefer to have automatic prison time for that offence.
Re: (Score:3)
If drunk driving is punished by job loss, it's de facto not a minor infraction. Perhaps they just disagree with you about priorities, and take deaths from car accidents more seriously than you do? That doesn't make things they care about, that you don't, "slight".
Re: (Score:2)
Since Japan is one of the most public transit connected / bike friendly countries in the world, the number of people who would need to use a personal motorized vehicle to get home from a bar is rather low.
Re:In Japan (Score:4, Interesting)
Oddly, Magic Mushrooms are legal in Japan...but for "appreciation purposes" only. So you can buy them but you're only supposed to look at them, I suppose.
Kawasaki engineering (Score:5, Funny)
Oh well, if his guns work as well as my Kawasaki it'll all end in broken parts, thrown rods and tears anyway :p
Not in the slightest bit surprised (Score:5, Insightful)
John Lott (Score:2)
This is why violent crime is so out of control in Japan.
Yeahhhhh (Score:3)
His mistake was posting he had made them... (Score:2)
... on the internet.
Imagine if he hadn't... you'd never know. The police didn't catch him or do some investigation. He said he had them on the internet. Did he even have bullets? In any case, what this makes clear is that if you print a gun... don't post that you've done it on the internet. They're watching.
And all of you that think you can control this thing... you can't. Your entire legal enforcement concept is obsolete. The most you'll be able to do is bust morons. Anyone with any sense won't broadcast t
Japan isn't the United States (Score:2)
I wouldn't be surprised to see the exact same thing happen in Canada or France.
proof banning guns doesn't harm criminals (Score:3)
Every member of the yakuza have pistols, and the various gangs. But banning guns keeps civilians from defending themselves.
When you ban guns it never stops criminals from getting them. It makes it easier for criminals to get and easier for them to use to take whatever. Its also why the yakuza are more powerful than their own government
Re:proof banning guns doesn't harm criminals (Score:4, Informative)
In reality, in nations like New Zealand (and Japan, I believe) criminals rarely use guns. A well-connected crook can get a gun if he wants one, but the risks generally outweigh the benefits. (For a start, using a gun to commit a crime guarantees much more police attention than you would otherwise get. And if you do get caught, you can expect a much harsher sentence.)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
absolutely .... there should be a strict law about this 3D printed guns .... man imagine if ISIS gets this technology ... it can do more disasters than now ...
You're being daft here. The man wasn't jailed for having a 3D printed gun, he was jailed for having a gun.
Re: (Score:3)
Disaster? With a single shot plastic toy that is liable to blow up on you when you pull the trigger? Do you watch the news? Have you seen the ridiculous measures being taken at crazy expense to ineffectively deal with a few cases of ebola in the US? If ISIS or Al Queda or any other nutty group wants to do damage, printing poorly functioning plastic guns is not the way to do it. The way to do it is to send a bunch of suicidal jihaddists to west Africa to get exposed to ebola. They will have about 2-3 we
Re: (Score:2)
The way to do it is to send a bunch of suicidal jihaddists to west Africa to get exposed to ebola. They will have about 2-3 weeks to travel to other places, such as airports, sports events, etc., where large crowds of people gather. Can you imagine the financial impact? No 3D printers, no bullets needed. Just a few airline tickets and maybe some phony passports.
hope they are not reading your comment ... otherwise a new idea for them ... :-(
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just a casual observer of the news. The leaders of those groups are working 24/7 to come up with ideas to create fear, trouble, and expense. Do you believe they didn't think of this before I did?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Until you start wondering if someone on a plane you're sitting in might have ebola. The disease isn't the problem, the fear is the problem. Fear spreads faster than the flu.
Re: (Score:2)
TSA security checkpoints have only made it easier for terrorists to kill air travelers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, you're aware that suicidal jihaddists regularly blow themselves up, right? They spray themselves on everyone around them.
Fear of ebola is nearly as expensive as fighting actual ebola. Look what happened to airline stocks when it was announced that one of the nurses with ebola flew with a fever.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are apparently not familiar with 3D printing. The effort required to get a good print for most of these machines is far greater than the effort to make a gun by other means.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't understand. While ebola might be a poor weapon compared to something like smallpox in terms of its ability to kill large numbers of people, it is readily available (just a plane ride or two away) and produces HUGE amounts of fear. Fear is the goal of terrorism, and fear is what is expensive. All those people blowing themselves up don't usually manage to kill more than a few others in their immediate vicinity but that's OK because killing a lot of people isn't necessary to instill fear. People n
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes absolutely, in a country where you can own a battle ready katana, because tradition.
Then again, any place you lean traditional Japanese martial arts will concentrate on the mind and the body. You can not win an unarmed fight in blind rage...
Re: (Score:2)
you can own it... but can you carry it openly on the street? My guess would be no. I do know a little about dutch law... and owning a fully functional and battle ready sword is allowed. You don't need a permit or licence for it. But you can't just wear it openly on the street.
Re: (Score:2)
It's quite obvious that guns should not be freely available to just anybody.
They aren't in the US.
Distrust of the government is fine but the view that having everyone have guns as a defence against the government is just an absurd rationalisation of testosterone-driven desire to own firepower.
Shall we ascribe your rant to estrogen-driven fear of guns? Or are you simply bereft of an understanding of the relevant philosophy, history, and current events?
Re: (Score:2)
I think he was merely stating the obvious idea that with the weapons used by current day military, the whole defence-against-government argument for gun ownership is no longer valid. Whatever car roof-mounted machinegun you might have is laughably underpowered for the task of overpowering government.
The argument was a good one when both government and civilians had access to the same class of weaponry. Unless you want the public to be able to own strike drones, bombers and nuclear rockets, the argument shou
Re: (Score:3)
I think he was merely stating the obvious idea that with the weapons used by current day military, the whole defence-against-government argument for gun ownership is no longer valid. Whatever car roof-mounted machinegun you might have is laughably underpowered for the task of overpowering government.
That's funny, that's what they said in Viet Nam.
Unless you want the public to be able to own strike drones, bombers and nuclear rockets,
What I want is for the military to not have those things. It's no more ridiculous to let private citizens have those things than this proven-criminal government, which has demonstrated again and again that it will misuse them by murdering citizens without due process, contributing to genocide (remember Panama? That wasn't very long ago) and generally acting in the worst possible ways. Remember who the only country to ever nuke anyone is?
Re: (Score:2)
You are an idiot if you think that the North Vietnamese citizenry defeated the US war machine without serious superpower backing of their own.
Who says that American insurgents couldn't get some backing? The proliferation of weapons across the country is meant to make taking the citizenry expensive, not impossible. But people want to claim otherwise to support the assertion that taking away the guns makes sense if the purpose of the second amendment is a hedge against tyranny.
I don't think the founders ever foresaw the development of world-destroying weapons. But then, I doubt they would have seen wisdom in their construction.
Re: (Score:2)
How would a state form a well regulated militia?
Re: (Score:2)
How indeed?
Army National Guard [wikipedia.org]
Air National Guard [wikipedia.org]
Army National Guard Vision 2010 [army.mil]
A Full Spectrum Land Force
The Army National Guard is fully committed to implementing the joint operational concepts of dominant maneuver, precision engagement, focused logistics and full-dimensional protection. With 34 percent of the Army's strength, more than half of the combat power, nearly 70 percent of field artillery, and more than a third of its combat support and combat service support capabilities, the Army National Guard is a full partner in rapid strategic mobility, tailor-to-task organizational flexibility, and, ultimately, a key component in a seamless joint force that can be committed cross-dimensionally along the entire spectrum of contingencies.
Army National Guard Combat Power [google.com]
A visual representation of the Army National Guard's brigades. This represents the National Guard's Infantry and Heavy brigades but also includes Engineer, Field Artillery and Aviation brigades as well. .
Re: (Score:2)
What you say did happen, and it wasn't considered treason. Presser vs Ill., an important 2nd amendment case.
From wiki...
The indictment charged in substance that Presser, on September 24, 1879, in the county of Cook, in the State of Illinois, "did unlawfully belong to, and did parade and drill in the city of Chicago with an unauthorized body of men with arms, who had associated themselves together as a military company and organization, without having a license from the Governor,
Re: (Score:2)
Factors like trying to limit civilian casualties?
The era of true, full-blown, kill-or-be-killed wars is behind us.
Modern wars are waged using politics with military force just one of many pawns.
If the US (or other nuclear countries) wanted to, they could wipe ISIS territory completely off the map, collatoral damage be damned.
Re: (Score:2)
It's quite obvious that guns should not be freely available to just anybody.
That's true. In Japan, these laws might make sense. But here in the USA, a cop is roughly equally likely to be convicted of a crime as a citizen, except rape. They're four times more likely to be convicted of rape at some point, in spite of the blue wall, the blue code of silence etc. They're also about four times more likely to shoot an innocent bystander in a given armed attempt to defuse a situation than a private citizen. In Japan, the cops may be more responsible than the citizenry, but here in the USA
Re: (Score:2)
Though this is somewhat a troll (the testosterone part particularly)... YOu do fail to miss a point.
At least in the states, we have the history of the Colonial Independence. We didn't have an army at the time, mostly a bunch of guys with guns that did eventually beat the British (with a bit of help from the French and some Polish help), or at least made subjugating us a bigger pain in the ass than letting us go.
Im sure there are other examples if you search for War for Independence [wikipedia.org]. I need to get other s
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Weren't the guns laws in Japan first imposed by the US military occupying the country?
No, they were imposed prior to either World War, when Japan was in its Isolation period. But most of the current laws do stem from the occupation, it's just important to note that from a cultural point of view they have never been a gun-loving society.
Re:That's the way the gyoza goes (Score:5, Insightful)
If I recall, this goes all the way back to their first European contact, where guns were outlawed in order to preserve the advantage the feudal lords and their swordsmen had over the people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:That's the way the gyoza goes (Score:4, Informative)
I can't find an easy cite at the moment but I seem to remember that peasants were forbidden from possessing any purpose built weapons.
Depends on the time period. Naginata e.g. where originally farmers weapons and partly weapons of citizens in towns (in the later case used to crash down houses in case of fire, not only for fighting)
And that many martial arts weapons were improvised from farming tools or other items that weren't necessarily weapons.
Depends on the region. That is mainly true in Okinawa.
The main "ban" is that it is forbidden for a _non samurai_ to wear _two swords_ Especially the short one indicates its nobility.
It was most of the time allowed that merchants etc.while traveling could bear weapons, but depending on period again: not ready to draw in their belt.
Later normal peasants where not even allowed to leave their town, birth region. So the question about weapons was a bit mitigated.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Having just spent two weeks in Japan earlier this month, I noticed that airsoft guns are freely available in department stores. Here in my home country of Australia, such items are prohibited.
Re: (Score:2)
They probably don't worry about guns that are incapable of killing anyone. Technically they are toys and not weapons. To me they look a little too real and I'd worry about a trigger happy cop killing my kid.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
When liberty itself is feared
Yep, you're right - It's really important for gun nuts to have the liberty to gun down children at school.
Man, nothing makes me angrier than gun-fanatics championing "liberty." You want "liberty?" Go DO SOMETHING to preserve your democracy, to make America better. Buying another Glock has nothing to do with liberty. .
When the police are more militarized than the military, when the government listens in on your phone calls and literally reads your emails, arming yourself has EVERYTHING to do with liberty.
But you? Bow down to your masters.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Buying another Glock has nothing to do with liberty. .
When the police are more militarized than the military, when the government listens in on your phone calls and literally reads your emails, arming yourself has EVERYTHING to do with liberty.
But you? Bow down to your masters.
Buying a handgun, will not defend you from an over militarised police. It won't even defend you from normal police. There are lots more of them around. You may shoot one but they will get you.The same could be said about any weapons system less than the maximum force your chosen foe can point back at you.
All carrying that nice Glock or AR15 will do for you is identify you as a potential hostile,
It will not remove your tax liabilities - It may mean that the IRS carries bigger guns when they talk to you.
Re: (Score:3)
Buying a handgun, will not defend you from an over militarised police. It won't even defend you from normal police. There are lots more of them around. You may shoot one but they will get you.The same could be said about any weapons system less than the maximum force your chosen foe can point back at you.
Haven't paid attention to the last few people who went on cop-shooting sprees, have you? When a few lone gunmen can throw an area's police force into chaos, that doesn't bode well for your "easily overwhelmed" scenario. (What happens when it's 2 gunmen? 3? Pissed off militia?)
When you talk about how easily the US military will win, consider its record against guerillas. Weapons systems like an aircraft carriers really aren't an effective weapon against a dispersed opponent. Intimidating, for sur
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Nothing makes me sadder than idiots who think that people who own guns all want to kill kids at school. If everyone who owned a gun was kill crazy there would be 100 million dead people by the end of the year not 10 thousand or so. If you think getting rid of guns would make all the 10,000 people who will be killed by a gun this year live then you're an idiot too. If I want someone dead I'm fully capable of doing it without a gun. In fact, if I wanted to get away with it I'd never use a gun for murder.
Re: (Score:3)
I own a pump 12 gauge shot gun for home defense. I've actually had someone break in my house years back. My wife heard noise and woke me up and whispered to me that there was someone in the house. I reached under my bed and pulled my shotgun out. I got out of bed and crept to the bedroom door and could hear someone opening the cabinet in my living room. I jacked a shell into the chamber and shouted "Get the fuck out of here or I'll blow you're fucking head off." The dude tripped over the coffee table
Re: (Score:2)
Japan loves its "traditions". He would of got away with a 3D printed samurai sword.
Swords are also controlled. Japan is a tiny little overstuffed nation full of people who take everything to its logical conclusion. It's like one big institutionalized, industrialized version of Survivor. Toe the line, or you're off the island.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: gun laws (Score:3, Funny)
Not only that: you must impose a rigid class system in which you can't even address a person without pondering their social and professional status, gender and seniority and without understanding where you are compared to them. A system where even your "free" time is heavily regulated and that has no place for non-conformism. Accept that and not only you will be free from that particular danger, but you will be free to be exactly what they want you to be.
Easily done: (Score:5, Funny)
Japan never had a gun problem in the first place. Maybe the USA should indeed imitate them to solve its own gun violence issues ? It would be simple, too: just go back several centuries in time, and get heavily prejudiced against guns from the very beginning by emphasising the moral and cultural values attached to swords for a couple centuries, then go lose a world war and dismantle most of your armament producing capability under scrutiny by an occupying force.
Also, it'll help if you become an island.
Re: (Score:2)
then go lose a world war and dismantle most of your armament producing capability under scrutiny by an occupying force.
The USA (under Bush Jr. and Obama) has been encouraging Japan to become increasingly militaristic over the years.
They're trying to create a stronger military partner to help counterbalance China's burgeoning military spending.
And the current Japanese PM, Shinzo Abe, is essentially the Japanese equivalent of a Holocaust denier,
in that he's repeatedly gone on the record to deny or downplay Japanese war crimes.
His brand of nationalism is also pissing off South Korea, which certainly doesn't promote regional st
Re:Easily done: (Score:5, Insightful)
Who commits 90% of the gun crime in the U.S.? Certainly not law abiding citizens.
Clearly not by definition.
MILLIONS of crimes are prevented every year by law abiding citizens either brandishing (99% of the time) or using (1% of the time) their legally held guns.
Citation needed, I think.
Even assuming this is true, how many averted robberies are worth the loss of a human life? One? a hundred? a thousand? How many averted crimes are worth the 100 children that are accidentally killed by guns each year [theguardian.com]?
Secondly: look up what the word 'democide' means. You're an idiot who wants to get us all killed by our government.
Still, only 200 million people were killed by their own governments in the last century, so it's no big deal.
Perhaps you should look up the word "democracy". You'll find that the way bad governments are removed in a democracy is by voting them out of office. The USA is allegedly one of those, so that' the way to remove a government, not by making war on it.
Re: (Score:2)
They is one major academic publication, by one Dr. DB Kates that they can cite their "millions" thing from but any sort of serious analysis of the methodology of the thing raises huge problems.
#1 It's a phone based poll, where they used percentage of respondents as an analogue of the population. This, in-and-of-itself is pretty reasonable.
#2 The crucial metric of "percentage of respondents who say they used a gun to defend themselves in the past 5 years" is well under the 3%ish of people who freely lie on
Re: (Score:3)
100 children die every year in the US from guns (your source) and there are 310 million guns in the US.
700 children die every year in the US from swimming pools (source: CDC) and there are less than 10 million pools in the US.
Clearly therefore, a swimming pool is 217 times or 21600% more dangerous than a gun! A swimming pool also has no real crime prevention use!
Demonstrably, we must ban swimming pools long before we even talk about banning guns. I hope you will write to your congressman immediately, and de
Re: (Score:2)
Would it bother you if your argument, however much it seems to make sense from a "story" point of view, flies in the face of actual data on levels of gun violence versus levels of gun ownership/legality?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Maybe it's time... (Score:5, Interesting)
I cannot repeal laws in a country where I am not a citizen. But sadly, the USA blindness on this topic has impacted our lives.
I am Mexican. Believe whatever you want, but during my lifetime, I have not seen a single firearm besides those in control of the security force (and a very old rifle used for hunting, ~25 years ago, in quite a rural setting).
However, our territory is very vast and varied. And you have surely heard we do have violence problem. And you most likely heard about stupid "research" USA programs, such as "Fast and Furious", where guns were *knowingly to the USA authorities* smuggled out of the USA and into Mexico, to help "trace the paths"of the druglords.
Our druglords buy uncontrolled firearms (both "regular" and high-power) in the USA, and use them here. So, yes, I do have basis for complaining on the status quo.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Maybe it's time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Banning firearms will not finish the problem, but will very likely decrease it.
I know that single-account experiences are not statistically important, but anyway, it's not the only time I have heard such an account — And all I know is what I (or my close ones) have lived.
My family in Argentina were robbed at home, at gunpoint. The robbers asked them to hand over (in this order) firearms, jewels and money.
If firearms are harder to come by, they will not be likely to be found in a regular person's home. Of course, the black market will still have them — But the black market will have higher prices for them. Fewer wrongdoers will be able to get their hands on weapons.
If you add to this programs such as one implemented in my city, where the local government asks you to (voluntarly) hand over any guns you have paying for them in more useful goods (such as a computer, or even cash), the amount of guns in the street decreases. That means, the amount of armed people decreases. And the price for individual guns (let alone "specialty" guns, which should just be banned outside of army use) goes up. Everybody wins.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:gun laws (Score:5, Interesting)
Japans draconian gun laws are not the reason for its low violent crime rate. They have a very low murder rate generally, and don't need such heavy penalties.
The US however does have a serious violent crime problem.
But not all the US: places such as New England, Iowa, the Dakotas, Minnesota, Wyoming, Utah all have homicide rates not so much worse than Europe and Australia.
( Restricting handguns could well reduce the gap.)
What do all these states have in common? Similar racial mix. There is only one state with both a large racial minority and a low murder rate: Hawaii.
Importantly, the white-only homicide rate in the US overall is still much higher than the total homicide rate in the above states, so the cause is not simple.
People in those states have a lower murder rate regardless of race.
You cannot possibly understand the US murder rate without looking at race and guns. The left do not want to talk about race, and the right don't want to talk about guns, so we're screwed.
Re: (Score:3)
In the cases of Violent Crimes, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia rank 30th, 18th, and 19th, respectively according to census.gov.
http://www.census.gov/statab/r... [census.gov]
These aren't exactly low figures.
Let's look at some other poorer states.
South Carolina is 1st.
Tennessee is 2nd.
Nevada is 3rd.
Florida is 4th.
Looking at the following report on income disparity between states, I am seeing some similar names at the top of that list:
http://www.epi.org/publication... [epi.org]
Florida
Nevada
Interestingly enough, Mississippi actu
Re: (Score:2)
My post was appropriate because I later backed up claims with evidence that race was not a factor in violent crime.
Mississippi of all places supports my claim in that the racial diversity in that state is the highest, by overall, violent crime is ranked 30th.
The previous poster didn't have any evidence to back up his or her claim. His or her claim was uneducated and therefore based out of ignorance. Ergo, I have every right to call him or her a racist idiot.
If you wish to further dispute this, give me som
Re: (Score:2)
Technology has a way of improving over time. They're trying to address the issue now, so that in a few years when printers and printable gun designs are that much more effective, the law is already in place.
All caused by one idiot in the US making a lot of noise about 3d printing guns.