Why no Cannons on Police Helicopters?

Charles Gray wrote in
:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 15:45:52 +0200, "Paul J. Adam"
wrote:

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
...
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in
:
Aren't the criminals deterred by the armed citizens?

Welll,due to those who are against people using,carrying,or even
owning firearms,most US citizens do not own guns,nor carry them.Thus
the chances of criminals encountering armed citizens is not high
enough yet to deter such crimes.

So you've got the crime anyway, and the armed criminals, and the
accidental deaths and suicides... and the answer is "more guns"?

There are many excellent reasons to own and enjoy firearms of all
sorts, but this notion that more weapons equals increased safety just
isn't one of them - not at an overall level, anyway. If the level of
firearm ownership you have in the US isn't already sufficient to deter
criminals, increasing ownership (unavoidably including that segment of
the population known as "criminals not yet identified or convicted")
is unlikely to help.

There is a body of evidence that suggests that open ownership of
guns and their general possession reduces some sorts of crimes-- but
it also increases others, mainly crimes of passion.


And those folks have enough previous police records on domestic violence
that their firearms would have been confiscated(under court order).


I think the problem is that many progun enthusiasts are taking the
experience of rural areas, and uncritically assuming you can transfer
that to urban areas. My family lived in a rural community where guns
were omnipresent, and it was a polite community...and not one with a
lot of gunplay.
I live twenty miles outside of LA, and if everyone in LA had a gun,
every rush hour would be a mass slaughter. The two situations are
simply not comparable.

First of all,in all the 34+ states that allow concealed carry,that stuff
simply has not happened,no "blood running in the streets" from LEGAL gun
owners.LA isn't the only urban area to have big traffic jams.

But anyone who wanted to in LA -could- own a gun legally if they chose
to,provided they met the standard restrictions.And those who live in other
parts of California can and do carry concealed in the LA area legally.



And in many states,defending property with lethal force IS
illegal,protecting the criminals,making it safer for them to commit
such crimes.

What's the property value that justifies homicide, out of interest?

Can I kill a man for stealing my car? (About $7,000 at last check).

Can I kill a man for stealing my watch? (About $100)

Can I kill a man for stealing a loaf of bread?


In california, none of the above. In the 1970's, using a weapon
even against an armed intruder could see you being taken off to jail.
Now, the general standard is that you are presumed to be "at fear for
your life" if you are confronted. It is not a blanket protection--
if the fellow you said you were afraid of dies after being chased down
the street, cornered and shot five times, the DA.... will have some
questions.
Other states tend to give different levels of this-- some pretty
much give a homeowner ON HIS OWN PROPERTY a blanket right of self
defense. I believe texas is the most forgiving in this case, but
there's so much variation it's hard to say-- ditto for gun carrying
laws.



ISTR that in the so-called "Wild West",where many people were
armed,people could leave doors unlocked,horses unattended,without
much fear of theft.

I seem to remember much talk of hanging horse thieves, suggesting that
this "golden age" was illusory.

Lower population densities-- and again not comparable, either for
or against the idea of general gun possession in a modern society.
But I will say that the experience of other nations where everyone has
an AK-47 do not make me confident.



And those places never had the rule of law,either. ISTR that millions(the
unarmed ones) lost their lives in Rwanda due to machetes.
OTOH,Israel and Switzerland allow their citizens to own firearms,and they
don't have much of a problem.In fact,once the Israeli teachers began
carrying guns in their schools,the terrorists stopped trying to shoot up
the school children.
And the Swiss have real automatic rifles.

Violence is more of a cultural thing than due solely to the presence of
guns.



My grandparents *did* live with doors unlocked, but that was because
(a) they lived in a close-knit community where everyone knew everyone
and theft would have been seen, (b) they were poor and frankly had
very little to steal. (No guns, in case you were wondering)





--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net