Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Guns, Privacy, and Crime

nber.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 149 posts

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#131

Post by em-bee »

em-bee wrote: post #116
darksaints wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about your neighbors in Austria, Finland, Iceland, Czech Republic, Switzerland, or Norway? Because tons of those neighbors also own guns, but you aren't really any more likely to get shot there than you are in Germany (all of those countries have less than 3 deaths by firearms per 100k people). And if you're just looking at crime that is not intentionally self-inflicted, you're looking at less than 1 death per 1…

gun laws across the EU are pretty similar because they are all based on the same EU laws. switzerland is actually the most liberal and it doesn't have more guns either. there are no more guns in austrian cities than there are in germany, or as far as i could tell, anywhere else in europe. maybe more people in the country side have guns because they use them for hunting. a lot of guns are also used for sport. you woul…

"sometimes" was meant to be "something". i blame a slip on the word suggestions from my keyboard

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#132

Post by bitcuration »

stevenicr wrote: post #123
3-cheese-sundae wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s called brandishing and it’s still illegal

I have heard some people say this - and I am sure you may find some that wanted to charge it that way.. but I'm not sure that holding a firearm at your waist pointed toward the ground is necessarily brandishing or illegal. Surely other factors could contribute to make such a situation more or less a threat - things said, or even a particular location compared to another. I understand the GP comment person feels that…

At least in California, just touching holster is considered brandishing. Not sure it's the same in Texas though.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#133

Post by 29083011397778 »

verisimi wrote: post #130
diego_moita wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have no defence against the government and its agents. Oh, I am sorry to hear that. In both my native (Portugal) and adoptive (Canada) country we do have defences: votes, freedom of assembly and speech, passports,... They're far more effective than guns.

You can choose red or blue and someone to represent you for 4-5 years (this is not democracy, its 'representative democracy' - the people choose nothing); you can't choose not to follow government edicts - eg shutting down schools, the economy; you do not have freedom of assembly (in Canada you can have your bank account frozen); in Canada you cannot travel by plane or train if you are not vaccinated; passports are a…

How is a gun a defence for any of the above? Do you think shooting a cop would have left the freedom convoy better off?

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#134

Post by rco8786 »

stevenicr wrote: post #126
rco8786 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guns are one of the most common things burglars are looking for when they’re robbing a home. Contrary to some popular rhetoric, people with guns effectively never stop crimes in progress.

agree that they are sought by burglars and add that much of the car crime has that as primary focus it seems. disagree that they never stop crimes. many of the times they stop crimes they are not reported, and even if reported would not make it to any stats. It's easy to see this if you just think of the hundreds of stops each day in every city in which an armored car pulls up to get money. Literally hundreds of time…

If it wasn’t clear from context, I was targeting that statement around private gun ownership rather than security focused professions.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#135

Post by rco8786 »

matt-attack wrote: post #84
rco8786 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guns are one of the most common things burglars are looking for when they’re robbing a home. Contrary to some popular rhetoric, people with guns effectively never stop crimes in progress.

Hmm you sure about that? It literally just happened: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/intruder-shot-in-armed-... Have you considered the possibility that your media sources intentionally withhold such news cases such that you’ve evidently been left with a confused view of the reality?

Every week people win the lottery too.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#136

Post by rco8786 »

HideousKojima wrote: post #110
rco8786 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guns are one of the most common things burglars are looking for when they’re robbing a home. Contrary to some popular rhetoric, people with guns effectively never stop crimes in progress.

Even the lowest estimates by pro gun control groups and researches put defensive gun uses in the US at 55k+ a year. Most estimates range from 500k to several million a year.

Those all include police and other security personnel usages as far as I am aware. I guess my statement lacked the proper context but I’m focused more on private gun ownership.

The idea that having a gun in our home is ample protection from a burglar, for instance, is rooted in an egotistical vision of ourselves saving the day from the bad guy. Not any sort of reality. It happens, but it is exceedingly rare and you’re much more likely to have that gun stolen or injure someone by accident than you are to stop a home invader.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#137

Post by soco »

stevenicr wrote: post #122
yongjik wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pointing a gun at someone is generally a crime in the US. I thought the major pro-gun argument was that criminals don't care for law? You know, the whole "If you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns" thing. (Which is also patently false, by the way. Criminals in Germany usually don't have guns.)

you actually made the point of it.. when the populace is unarmed, the thugs can bully / rob / coerce just using muscle and knives, which makes the law abiding citenzry less safe imho.. but of course some will see it that way and some will not - much of individuals view point depends on where live / work.. people in nice places, surrounded by other nice places are more insulated from the more prevalent daily violence…

When the thugs actually use their muscle to rob you, you get a twisted arm. When the thugs actually use their gun, you get dead. One is less healthy than the other.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#138

Post by soco »

darksaints wrote: post #92
Simon_O_Rourke wrote: post #12

I lived out in Berlin where basically nobody except the police and the (really) bad guys are armed. Sure, there's burglary, but much more likely was bicycle theft... I had three stolen in one calendar year. To be honest, I was more comfortable that none of my a-hole neighbors were armed, because they would have pulled a gun on you for leaving out the rubbish an hour too early or talking to loudly after 8pm.

What about your neighbors in Austria, Finland, Iceland, Czech Republic, Switzerland, or Norway? Because tons of those neighbors also own guns, but you aren't really any more likely to get shot there than you are in Germany (all of those countries have less than 3 deaths by firearms per 100k people). And if you're just looking at crime that is not intentionally self-inflicted, you're looking at less than 1 death per 1…

Just so I understand: while those countries you named try to solve poverty (and thus protect the richer) on the state level, the US leaves this responsibility to the riches themselves - which will have to stock on weaponry obviously. So basically pushing for more personal freedom brings as a collateral those street wars. Another example where applied philosophy fails (thinking about communism as well)

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#139

Post by soco »

jonhohle wrote: post #79
giraffe_lady wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a place where gun ownership was the norm, and I have had a gun pulled on me in anger following a mutual fault car accident. People fuck up and get mad, confrontation happens. It is better for everyone if having firearms at hand is not the norm. Aside from that I also caught a stray bullet in the hand when I was 15. I was in the woods, it was hunting season, I should have known better, etc etc. Hundreds o…

I know you’re being sarcastic, but it most definitely was the fault of the shooter who did not follow basic firearm safety rules (either not knowing what they were shooting at or what was beyond what they were shooting at). Firearm ownership is a right, but also must be taken seriously and responsibly. Regardless of the “mistake”, the offender should have been charged (hopefully with a felony).

If there are say 1% stupid people who won't follow safety rules, the sheer amount of personal danger is quite different if you have 100 gun owners or 10.000.

Re: Guns, Privacy, and Crime

#140

Post by soco »

prepend wrote: post #85
andrewstuart2 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt the narrative that someone who would pull out a gun over trash would spare the time to think twice.

The pull a gun over trash scenario is kind of ridiculous because the gun puller would be arrested. And it just doesn’t happen. It would go like this: 1) I leave trash out 2) Neighbor yells and pulls out gun 3) I put up trash 4) I call police, neighbor is arrested and gun is taken away forever. I think there’s a perception of “crazy people owning guns” means they are just randomly doing things. Gun owners are typicall…

They would get arrested maybe - but only after I was already shot.
Post reply on HN