5 ms·

And part of the reason why cops are armed to the teeth is because the citizens are. It would require real total mutual disarmament of citizens and police to cha

And part of the reason why cops are armed to the teeth is because the citizens are. It would require real total mutual disarmament of citizens and police to change anything in the USA. So I don't see it changing any time soon.

talmand 11y ago
American citizens have always been armed to the teeth, so to speak. American police departments were not, this is a more recent phenomenon. It's partly due to the Federal level programs that are equipping the police with surplus military hardware. I find it doubtful that a regular street cop is going to encounter a situation in their day-to-day to justify the level of armament as if they were on the SWAT team.
hnal943 11y ago
...because the criminals are. And therein lies to fatal flaw of gun control - only people who are law abiding would comply with the new laws.
- LyndsySimon 11y ago
  I don't believe that US criminals are more heavily-armed than those in other countries. In fact, the opposite is likely true. In the US most criminals who are armed have inexpensive, unreliable handguns. An armed criminal in the UK (while less common) would seem more likely to have something like a submachinegun or a machine pistol. If the penalty is severe and the gun is rare and expensive... why go through all that trouble and risk for a .32 revolver, when you could just as easily obtain a Skorpion?
  - maxerickson 11y ago
    What about the criminals in the UK that do not obtain any firearm? Someone carrying a cheap pistol is still more heavily armed than someone carrying brass knuckles. I'm not going to go find the facts and figures, still, I'm pretty sure that the incidence of gun crime is higher in the US, pointing out that gun buying criminals in the UK probably buy nicer guns doesn't change that.
    - LyndsySimon 11y ago
      > What about the criminals in the UK that do not obtain any firearm? There are likely a greater portion of unarmed criminals in the UK. Since their potential victims are also unarmed, that means that are at the mercy of physically dominating criminals. I fail to see how this is an improvement. > Someone carrying a cheap pistol is still more heavily armed than someone carrying brass knuckles. Practically speaking, a person with a 6" knife can do far more damage to a person and have a higher likelihood of inflicting a mortal wound than someone with a .38 revolver. > I'm not going to go find the facts and figures, still, I'm pretty sure that the incidence of gun crime is higher in the US, pointing out that gun buying criminals in the UK probably buy nicer guns doesn't change that. Yeah, me neither, and rates don't really factor into this thread. My entire point is that more restrictions means that it's in the best interest of an armed criminal to obtain the most effective firearm possible.
      - maxerickson 11y ago
        A statement like I don't believe that US criminals are more heavily-armed than those in other countries. sure sounds like a statement that is inclusive of rates to me. Say 1 guy uses a legitimate high caliber machine gun to commit some crime, is that the only crime that gets used when describing how criminals are armed in that country?
        LyndsySimon 11y ago
        OK, let me rephrase then - "I believe that the average effectiveness of the weapons possessed by those criminals who are armed with firearms in jurisdictions where firearms are heavily restricted is almost certainly much greater than the average effectiveness of the weapons possessed by those criminals who are armed with firearms in jurisdictions with comparatively permissive firearms laws"
        maxerickson 11y ago
        Cool beans, my mission is accomplished. This is a much softer claim than the one in your comment above. edit: I changed 'weaker' to 'softer', because it's a stronger claim, it's likely to stand up to scrutiny, it's almost a banality.
  - pjc50 11y ago
    You're thinking like an American: bigger is better :) UK armed robberies are often [citation needed] carried out with imitation or deactivated firearms, as the robbers neither need nor want to kill anyone and it's considerably cheaper, easier to get hold of, and less illegal. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_352297.pdf http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/htt... page 6 has a breakdown graph into shotguns, handguns, imitation (includes air and BB), and "other".
  - ascorbic 11y ago
    Because you couldn't just as easily. It's hard and expensive for a criminal to get hold of even a real revolver. Machine pistols and submachineguns are the preserve of organised crime. There's no way any regular criminal will be able to get their hands on one. Most handguns used by criminals are reactivated antiques and replicas. Guns are rare and expensive, but some are rarer and more expensive than others. Even when handguns were legal they were not common, as the licensing laws were already tight.
- psychometry 11y ago
  Sigh...good guys with guns, again? Right. Your good guy with a gun is only that up until the moment he decides to go on a mass shooting spree. Is he still a good guy with a gun then?
  - TallGuyShort 11y ago
    That's why we should stop thinking that government employees are always good guys too. I've been through more background checks than most cops, and through about as much training as most young cops - but that doesn't make a difference in most gun control schemes that get discussed in the US.
    - LyndsySimon 11y ago
      Hear, hear!
- firethief 11y ago
  You seem to be dividing people into "law abiding" and "law disregarding". I posit that it's more complicated, and a law can disincentivize an activity even for people who break other laws.
throwaway21816 11y ago
>And part of the reason why cops are armed to the teeth is because the citizens are. The vast majority of deaths from firearms result from handguns not AR15s. You dont have criminals in Level 4 hard plates roaming around down town LA with shoulder fired rockets.
- arprocter 11y ago
  Going after scary 'military assault' guns is an easier political sell than tackling handguns. The majority of US gun murder is one guy with a handgun shooting another person, which won't ever make national headlines

talmand 11y ago

American citizens have always been armed to the teeth, so to speak. American police departments were not, this is a more recent phenomenon. It's partly due to the Federal level programs that are equipping the police with surplus military hardware. I find it doubtful that a regular street cop is going to encounter a situation in their day-to-day to justify the level of armament as if they were on the SWAT team.

hnal943 11y ago

...because the criminals are. And therein lies to fatal flaw of gun control - only people who are law abiding would comply with the new laws.

LyndsySimon 11y ago
I don't believe that US criminals are more heavily-armed than those in other countries. In fact, the opposite is likely true. In the US most criminals who are armed have inexpensive, unreliable handguns. An armed criminal in the UK (while less common) would seem more likely to have something like a submachinegun or a machine pistol. If the penalty is severe and the gun is rare and expensive... why go through all that trouble and risk for a .32 revolver, when you could just as easily obtain a Skorpion?
- maxerickson 11y ago
  What about the criminals in the UK that do not obtain any firearm? Someone carrying a cheap pistol is still more heavily armed than someone carrying brass knuckles. I'm not going to go find the facts and figures, still, I'm pretty sure that the incidence of gun crime is higher in the US, pointing out that gun buying criminals in the UK probably buy nicer guns doesn't change that.
  - LyndsySimon 11y ago
    > What about the criminals in the UK that do not obtain any firearm? There are likely a greater portion of unarmed criminals in the UK. Since their potential victims are also unarmed, that means that are at the mercy of physically dominating criminals. I fail to see how this is an improvement. > Someone carrying a cheap pistol is still more heavily armed than someone carrying brass knuckles. Practically speaking, a person with a 6" knife can do far more damage to a person and have a higher likelihood of inflicting a mortal wound than someone with a .38 revolver. > I'm not going to go find the facts and figures, still, I'm pretty sure that the incidence of gun crime is higher in the US, pointing out that gun buying criminals in the UK probably buy nicer guns doesn't change that. Yeah, me neither, and rates don't really factor into this thread. My entire point is that more restrictions means that it's in the best interest of an armed criminal to obtain the most effective firearm possible.
    - maxerickson 11y ago
      A statement like I don't believe that US criminals are more heavily-armed than those in other countries. sure sounds like a statement that is inclusive of rates to me. Say 1 guy uses a legitimate high caliber machine gun to commit some crime, is that the only crime that gets used when describing how criminals are armed in that country?
      - LyndsySimon 11y ago
        OK, let me rephrase then - "I believe that the average effectiveness of the weapons possessed by those criminals who are armed with firearms in jurisdictions where firearms are heavily restricted is almost certainly much greater than the average effectiveness of the weapons possessed by those criminals who are armed with firearms in jurisdictions with comparatively permissive firearms laws"
        maxerickson 11y ago
        Cool beans, my mission is accomplished. This is a much softer claim than the one in your comment above. edit: I changed 'weaker' to 'softer', because it's a stronger claim, it's likely to stand up to scrutiny, it's almost a banality.
- pjc50 11y ago
  You're thinking like an American: bigger is better :) UK armed robberies are often [citation needed] carried out with imitation or deactivated firearms, as the robbers neither need nor want to kill anyone and it's considerably cheaper, easier to get hold of, and less illegal. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_352297.pdf http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/htt... page 6 has a breakdown graph into shotguns, handguns, imitation (includes air and BB), and "other".
- ascorbic 11y ago
  Because you couldn't just as easily. It's hard and expensive for a criminal to get hold of even a real revolver. Machine pistols and submachineguns are the preserve of organised crime. There's no way any regular criminal will be able to get their hands on one. Most handguns used by criminals are reactivated antiques and replicas. Guns are rare and expensive, but some are rarer and more expensive than others. Even when handguns were legal they were not common, as the licensing laws were already tight.
psychometry 11y ago
Sigh...good guys with guns, again? Right. Your good guy with a gun is only that up until the moment he decides to go on a mass shooting spree. Is he still a good guy with a gun then?
- TallGuyShort 11y ago
  That's why we should stop thinking that government employees are always good guys too. I've been through more background checks than most cops, and through about as much training as most young cops - but that doesn't make a difference in most gun control schemes that get discussed in the US.
  - LyndsySimon 11y ago
    Hear, hear!
firethief 11y ago
You seem to be dividing people into "law abiding" and "law disregarding". I posit that it's more complicated, and a law can disincentivize an activity even for people who break other laws.

throwaway21816 11y ago

>And part of the reason why cops are armed to the teeth is because the citizens are. The vast majority of deaths from firearms result from handguns not AR15s. You dont have criminals in Level 4 hard plates roaming around down town LA with shoulder fired rockets.

arprocter 11y ago
Going after scary 'military assault' guns is an easier political sell than tackling handguns. The majority of US gun murder is one guy with a handgun shooting another person, which won't ever make national headlines