July 16, 201610 yr Who knows? It's total speculation: Maybe none, maybe half, maybe all. Problem with an armed society is maybe you stop that terrorist attack that 1% of a time, but what do you do the other 99% of the time. It is a double edged sword. IMO, France's problem is not the lack of guns it's an underlying animosity with the Muslim world. Something I fear is growing here. And whose fault would that be? Not seen any French over in the middle east killing Muslims.
July 16, 201610 yr Author Data doesn't support that' date=' JA. Trained police officers do use guns to apprehend or kill those who wish to harm others. Sure did. Even France has police to react when citizens need protected.[/quote'] Agenda meet facts. * Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day. [1] This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. [2] As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse. Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" -- a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig
July 16, 201610 yr And whose fault would that be? Not seen any French over in the middle east killing Muslims. I think the animosity started prior to the past few years. Both sides are guilty.
July 16, 201610 yr Agenda meet facts. * Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day. [1] This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. [2] As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse. Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" -- a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig There's lots of questions about the survey you reference. 1.5 million sounds awful high, when there are only roughly 1.2 reported violent crimes (rape, robbery, murder, assault) in the country per the 2014 FBI stats. How can more crimes be stopped than are reported, since those stopped would also show up in the numbers??
July 16, 201610 yr I think the animosity started prior to the past few years. Both sides are guilty. I get so tired of the "both sides are guilty" argument. NO!! France is under attack by radical Islamist terrorists. It's not the other way around. Same as here in America and many other countries. These radicals don't hate us for any other reason than the fact of our lifestyles that they hate. Period. Time for everyone to quit trying to be PC and play both sides of the fence and call it what it is.
July 17, 201610 yr I get so tired of the "both sides are guilty" argument. NO!! France is under attack by radical Islamist terrorists. It's not the other way around. Same as here in America and many other countries. These radicals don't hate us for any other reason than the fact of our lifestyles that they hate. Period. Time for everyone to quit trying to be PC and play both sides of the fence and call it what it is. Cap, I agree with you, but the Islamic community in France has felt oppressed for a while, and...well..when groups feel persecuted they get violent. Add a world presence radicalizing them like ISIS, and we get the acts we are getting. I would never excuse the horrific acts, but history tells us that when a group feels oppressed they will do anything to alleviate that oppression.
July 17, 201610 yr Cap, I agree with you, but the Islamic community in France has felt oppressed for a while, and...well..when groups feel persecuted they get violent. Add a world presence radicalizing them like ISIS, and we get the acts we are getting. I would never excuse the horrific acts, but history tells us that when a group feels oppressed they will do anything to alleviate that oppression. When a person or group of people move to a new country, it is incumbent upon them to assimilate into the new society, not the other way around. Feeling oppressed and being oppressed are two different things. If they are not willing to assimilate into the new society, there's no anchor tied to their backside.
July 17, 201610 yr When a person or group of people move to a new country, it is incumbent upon them to assimilate into the new society, not the other way around. Feeling oppressed and being oppressed are two different things. If they are not willing to assimilate into the new society, there's no anchor tied to their backside. How do we fit into your narrative?
July 17, 201610 yr Our nation. If I move to France, I should assimilate to their culture. I should learn to speak French, follow their laws, etc. I don't demand they learn English or follow USA laws.
July 17, 201610 yr Our European ancestors did not assimilate. Sure they did. When they came to the USA years ago they learned to speak English, became citizens, worked very hard to succeed. They kept some of their customs and traditions. They didn't demand that we follow the laws of the country that they came from.
July 17, 201610 yr Sure they did. When they came to the USA years ago they learned to speak English, became citizens, worked very hard to succeed. They kept some of their customs and traditions. They didn't demand that we follow the laws of the country that they came from. Tell that to the Cherokee, Apache, Cheyenne, etc. Also, when it comes to the era of post-Native conquest, for immigrants that came and did not speak English, research shows that it usually took until the third generation for assimilation. The first generation kept most of their original customs and language, the second generation would be a mix and the third generation assimilated.
July 17, 201610 yr Tell that to the Cherokee, Apache, Cheyenne, etc. Also, when it comes to the era of post-Native conquest, for immigrants that came and did not speak English, research shows that it usually took until the third generation for assimilation. The first generation kept most of their original customs and language, the second generation would be a mix and the third generation assimilated. Did they demand we follow their laws instead of ours? I don't think so.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.