FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Gun laws USA
Gun laws USA
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots getting killed in London without guns." I know there is a thread in the forums dedicated to knife crimes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"[Removed from holster by poster at 08/11/18 22:44:16]" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots getting killed in London without guns." And that would reduce with less gun restrictions? What probably would happen is more deaths from domestic violence and minors getting their hands of the extensive range of firearms libereal gun laws would bring about | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't really see how knife crime is comparable to guns really, you'd find it pretty hard to commit a mass stabbing I think. Unfortunately Americans seem to think that more guns is the answer to guns and Obama was never allowed to bring in tighter restrictions which seemed pretty sensible to me. I think it's probably too late to do anything about it now with the sheer amount they have in circulation, but I would probably restrict which kinds of guns people can own - no bump stocks or guns which aren't single shot." Sniper rifles are single shot | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The second amendment can be changed, the clues in the name. However there is a massive pro-gun lobby in America, also with millions of legally held guns in circulation, there’s this phenomena that occurs everywhere that gun laws change and tighten up controls or outright ban some types of weapon. A percentage disappear. Either reported stole, lost, sold then later the buyers licence turns out to be fake etc. This happens here after the pistol ban and the semi auto centre fire rifle ban. It happened in the states during some 80’s and 90’s and earlier gun legislation/bans. The percentage of missing weapons are now illegal and anyone possessing one is a criminal. So every ban- actually puts weapons into criminal hands. " I pointed this out on an American biker forum, shame the point was lost on them. As they couldn't see that the 2nd amendment was just that, a change or addition. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The second amendment can be changed, the clues in the name. However there is a massive pro-gun lobby in America, also with millions of legally held guns in circulation, there’s this phenomena that occurs everywhere that gun laws change and tighten up controls or outright ban some types of weapon. A percentage disappear. Either reported stole, lost, sold then later the buyers licence turns out to be fake etc. This happens here after the pistol ban and the semi auto centre fire rifle ban. It happened in the states during some 80’s and 90’s and earlier gun legislation/bans. The percentage of missing weapons are now illegal and anyone possessing one is a criminal. So every ban- actually puts weapons into criminal hands. I pointed this out on an American biker forum, shame the point was lost on them. As they couldn't see that the 2nd amendment was just that, a change or addition." Expose them to Jim jefferies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As Clem said , how can you protect yourself without one ? And as others have said , we’ve had 250 killings in London alone without guns , and we have a fraction of the population here . So until we can sort our own shit out , we are hardly in a position to sort anyone else’s ."  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots getting killed in London without guns." more murders in London than New York  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I4yFDsVPczk Cos Chicago and LA are top of the murder pops in the US, both gun control areas. California has some of the toughest gun laws in the states, closely followed by Chicago county. "And what is stopping someone from another gun pro state coming to LA and selling guns on the black market? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots getting killed in London without guns. more murders in London than New York "London amounts to about a 8th of UK population. New york amounts to about 38th of U.S. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I4yFDsVPczk Cos Chicago and LA are top of the murder pops in the US, both gun control areas. California has some of the toughest gun laws in the states, closely followed by Chicago county.
And what is stopping someone from another gun pro state coming to LA and selling guns on the black market?
"Federal law, but if gun control works, Sweden wouldn’t be in the grip of a gun crime epidemic, those cheeky Serbs are even throwing in free hand grenades to sweeten gun deals. I’ve never tried to obtain an illegal firearm in this country, but I would be willing to lay odds I could get one within 24 hours. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots getting killed in London without guns." I've never head of a mass stabbing though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots getting killed in London without guns. more murders in London than New York "No there isnt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots getting killed in London without guns. I've never head of a mass stabbing though" Borough market. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Australia enacted strict gun control laws over 20 years ago - there was resistance from gun owners but there has only been one gun massacre since (a family murder/suicide). It is not illegal to own a gun in Australia you do need a justifiable reason - self defence is not a justifiable reason. We are talking about mass killings on an almost daily basis - 280 mass shootings this year alone; not murders, not individual shootings, not stabbings but mass shootings. It is easy to point fingers and we need to sort out our knife crime issue but one mass shooting was enough for Australia to change it’s gun laws almost immediately. " Exactly. And there's no point in descending into whataboutery. The world is not perfect nor ever will be - the goal is to make it better. Nobody in Australia was looking at gun law reform and saying, "Yeah but people can still stab each other". They just dealt with it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Lots getting killed in London without guns. I've never head of a mass stabbing though Borough market. " Those nutters at London Bridge | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe the Americans should worry more about mental health, especially after care for ex armed forces, rather than pissing in the wind about gun control." They're both important. But if you must triage then get rid of the killing tool first. There have been 308 mass shootings in Ammerica in 2018. Going off post gun-law reform anywhere else in the world, those aren't just going to be replaced by 308 other mass assaults. Lives are going to be saved in considerable number. Ideally US health care reform would run alongside. No reason why not. It's appalling people are priced out of it so easily, although the mid-terms have seen Medicaid return to another half million. It's a start. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Australia enacted strict gun control laws over 20 years ago - there was resistance from gun owners but there has only been one gun massacre since (a family murder/suicide). It is not illegal to own a gun in Australia you do need a justifiable reason - self defence is not a justifiable reason. We are talking about mass killings on an almost daily basis - 280 mass shootings this year alone; not murders, not individual shootings, not stabbings but mass shootings. It is easy to point fingers and we need to sort out our knife crime issue but one mass shooting was enough for Australia to change it’s gun laws almost immediately. " What happened to all the guns that people already had? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Maybe the Americans should worry more about mental health, especially after care for ex armed forces, rather than pissing in the wind about gun control. They're both important. But if you must triage then get rid of the killing tool first. There have been 308 mass shootings in Ammerica in 2018. Going off post gun-law reform anywhere else in the world, those aren't just going to be replaced by 308 other mass assaults. Lives are going to be saved in considerable number. Ideally US health care reform would run alongside. No reason why not. It's appalling people are priced out of it so easily, although the mid-terms have seen Medicaid return to another half million. It's a start." Fuck me it’s gone up by 28 since last night | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Our gun laws are there and will always be there for one simple reason.... If the government ever tried to takeover and become a dictatorship.... the citizens can always fight back... Also during times of war it deters invasion.... General Tojo said “ There is a gun behind every blade of grass in the United States “ When asked if he would try to invade the USA during WW2.... So although we will always have mass killings , we will never give up our firearms..." yeah yeah yeah..and yet Trump is still alive. If guns are in such public circulation for protection how come it always seem to be the Police that shoot the mass killing person, not a 'right to bear arms' citizen? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Australia enacted strict gun control laws over 20 years ago - there was resistance from gun owners but there has only been one gun massacre since (a family murder/suicide). It is not illegal to own a gun in Australia you do need a justifiable reason - self defence is not a justifiable reason. We are talking about mass killings on an almost daily basis - 280 mass shootings this year alone; not murders, not individual shootings, not stabbings but mass shootings. It is easy to point fingers and we need to sort out our knife crime issue but one mass shooting was enough for Australia to change it’s gun laws almost immediately. What happened to all the guns that people already had?" The government provided a buy back scheme. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Our gun laws are there and will always be there for one simple reason...." https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/radiolab-presents-more-perfect-gun-show | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Our gun laws are there and will always be there for one simple reason.... If the government ever tried to takeover and become a dictatorship.... the citizens can always fight back... Also during times of war it deters invasion.... General Tojo said “ There is a gun behind every blade of grass in the United States “ When asked if he would try to invade the USA during WW2.... So although we will always have mass killings , we will never give up our firearms... yeah yeah yeah..and yet Trump is still alive. If guns are in such public circulation for protection how come it always seem to be the Police that shoot the mass killing person, not a 'right to bear arms' citizen?" Not enough people "packing"? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not enough people "packing"?" Army veteran gun owner reckons no: https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/i-m-army-veteran-gun-owner-good-guy-gun-theory-ncna821976 Chewing over the Texas church shooting... https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/6/16612014/sutherland-springs-shooting-good-guy-gun One of countless other takedowns: https://medium.com/@nadinbrzezinski/the-good-guy-with-a-gun-fallacy-cfb4478ecdd7 Even in 2018, where up might as well be down, the 'Good guy with a gun' line is the biggest bullshit of all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anything can be used as a murder weapon -should we ban spoons?" Can a spoon do the same devistating damage as a semi automatic assault rifle? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anything can be used as a murder weapon -should we ban spoons? Can a spoon do the same devistating damage as a semi automatic assault rifle? " If you have the inclination and enough time on your hands -yes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anything can be used as a murder weapon -should we ban spoons? Can a spoon do the same devistating damage as a semi automatic assault rifle? If you have the inclination and enough time on your hands -yes" Jason Bourne killed somebody with a pencil | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anything can be used as a murder weapon -should we ban spoons?" Spoons are not designed to kill, you blathering dunce. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anything can be used as a murder weapon -should we ban spoons? Can a spoon do the same devistating damage as a semi automatic assault rifle? If you have the inclination and enough time on your hands -yes Jason Bourne killed somebody with a pencil "Fucking sick those pencil pushers | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anything can be used as a murder weapon -should we ban spoons? Spoons are not designed to kill, you blathering dunce." Never seen a gun kill anybody either -it usually takes someone to pull the trigger and even then it's usually just the bullet that does all the damage. "Terrorists" the world over are quite skilled at making bombs out of household objects -should we now ban fertiliser being within 100 meters of an ignition device or give chlorine and Jeys fluid separation orders? The cat is out the bag btw -the open gun brigade have already released 3d printing patterns for the lower reciever -the only legislated part of a gun you can't buy online. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anything can be used as a murder weapon -should we ban spoons? Can a spoon do the same devistating damage as a semi automatic assault rifle? If you have the inclination and enough time on your hands -yes" Ban the disposable straw! Anyone with the inclination and time could fill it with hard setting compound and grind it to a sharpened point and be packing one of those bad boys! I'm shocked and appalled by the fast food industry and it's flagrant disregard for our safety!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I agree and disagree regarding to civilians owning firearms It’s a sport, it’s something farmers use to protect their cattle. I came across a man with a knife trying to attack me when I chased him down for stealing petrol out of my car and I was very lucky I was strapped at that time(in America). In the other hand, I would much rather get shot by a gun than stabbed by a knife." Conversely, I would much rather have the opportunity to leg it from a knife wielder than try to outrun a bullet | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I agree and disagree regarding to civilians owning firearms It’s a sport, it’s something farmers use to protect their cattle. I came across a man with a knife trying to attack me when I chased him down for stealing petrol out of my car and I was very lucky I was strapped at that time(in America). In the other hand, I would much rather get shot by a gun than stabbed by a knife." Been shot at a number of times in my life -thankfully all missed (some quite narrow escapes) and have had a knife pulled on me a few times too -would have to agree that the second is more scary. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Conversely, I would much rather have the opportunity to leg it from a knife wielder than try to outrun a bullet" You's be amazed at how bad most peoples aim is -despite what the news says, most gun shots are non fatal. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I agree and disagree regarding to civilians owning firearms It’s a sport, it’s something farmers use to protect their cattle. I came across a man with a knife trying to attack me when I chased him down for stealing petrol out of my car and I was very lucky I was strapped at that time(in America). In the other hand, I would much rather get shot by a gun than stabbed by a knife. Been shot at a number of times in my life -thankfully all missed (some quite narrow escapes) and have had a knife pulled on me a few times too -would have to agree that the second is more scary." Most people understand the concept of, drawing the firearm, aim it, pull the trigger, target injured/dead. What they don’t understand is, in such situations where you’ve been running to chase after to run away, your mind is distracted and all over the place. To aim and hit the target as accurate as within a 20p is not impossible but definitely not easy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I've never been knifed, although I've been threatened with one. I've been shot, but never threatened with a gun. It's hard to rank fear, but there's no denying guns kill quicker and with less thought or effort than any other weapon. See how many of those dicks who go on safari would sign up if they were taking on elephants with a knife." Don't see many elephant hunters doing it with pipe bombs either -nothing to do with the weapon not being a quick enough killer me thinks! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Conversely, I would much rather have the opportunity to leg it from a knife wielder than try to outrun a bullet You'd be amazed at how bad most people's aim is -despite what the news says, most gun shots are non fatal." Pistols are apparently notoriously inaccurate in even trained hands. Other than rifle/pistol range experience and clay pigeon shoots I can't comment first hand on how hard it would be to hit a moving target but going back to the gist of the thread, I am still very glad that it's far harder (not impossible, I know) to aquire firearms here than in The States. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Conversely, I would much rather have the opportunity to leg it from a knife wielder than try to outrun a bullet You'd be amazed at how bad most people's aim is -despite what the news says, most gun shots are non fatal. Pistols are apparently notoriously inaccurate in even trained hands. Other than rifle/pistol range experience and clay pigeon shoots I can't comment first hand on how hard it would be to hit a moving target but going back to the gist of the thread, I am still very glad that it's far harder (not impossible, I know) to aquire firearms here than in The States. " I think we should just ban the internet and be done with it -after all, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Don't see many elephant hunters doing it with pipe bombs either -nothing to do with the weapon not being a quick enough killer me thinks!" Nothing you say on this subject makes any sense. Your mind is made up despite a huge swell of evidence to the contrary, and there'd no point engaging with you over it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Don't see many elephant hunters doing it with pipe bombs either -nothing to do with the weapon not being a quick enough killer me thinks! Nothing you say on this subject makes any sense. Your mind is made up despite a huge swell of evidence to the contrary, and there'd no point engaging with you over it." Ooh -I do so love libertarians -any other subjects out there where you feel there is only one perspective worth having? Evidence -hmmm, love to know what page of the daily mail you got that nugget from? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Pistols are apparently notoriously inaccurate in even trained hands. Other than rifle/pistol range experience and clay pigeon shoots I can't comment first hand on how hard it would be to hit a moving target but going back to the gist of the thread, I am still very glad that it's far harder (not impossible, I know) to aquire firearms here than in The States. I think we should just ban the internet and be done with it -after all, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" If someone only aquires their knowledge and bases their opinions solely on what they glean from t'internet and wikis rather than actual real life interactions and experiences that wouldn't be so much dangerous as ignorant. Banning it might be seen as a bit harsh. Maybe you could start a thread about getting rid of the internet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ooh -I do so love libertarians -any other subjects out there where you feel there is only one perspective worth having? Evidence -hmmm, love to know what page of the daily mail you got that nugget from?" I'm quoting this for posterity. It's so bizarre there's nothing I can say to it. Me - the guy opposing the gun lobby - is a libertarian getting lines from the Daily Mail. Wow. Up is down. Left is right. You are vulrits. Amazing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing you say on this subject makes any sense. Your mind is made up despite a huge swell of evidence to the contrary, and there'd no point engaging with you over it." Ok so lets talk evidence shall we: The top 10 countries for gun ownership per 100 head of population are: 1: United States 120.5 2: Yemen 52.8 3: Serbia 39.1 4: Montenegro 39.1 5: Canada 34.7 6: Uruguay 34.7 7: Cyprus 34 8: Finland 32.4 [note 3] 9: Lebanon 31.9 10: Iceland 31.7 Of those, Half are not war zones (No's 1,5 6, 8 and 10) and out of that half, nearly 60% have among the lowest gun homicides per capita in the world ( Yes, I'm looking at you Canada, Finland and Iceland). Even if we look at No. 1 on the list (good ol U.S.A.), their own Data (from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) help frame the issue: Boring into the 146,571 injury deaths for all age groups, homicide by firearm was the fifth-leading cause (12,979) behind suicide by gun (22,018), accidental fall (33,381), motor vehicle collisions (36,161) and accidental poisoning (47,478), which is mostly drug overdoses. The FBI’s annual Crime in the United States report breaks down types of weapons used in murders (not all homicides are murders). The report showed a total of 13,455 murders in 2015, of which 9,616 involved firearms -yes this is a high proportion but do you think a murderer is really going to not do the act id he/ she doesn't have a gun handy? There were a handful of highly publicized mass shootings in 2015 involving assault rifles that totaled 21 deaths -nothing a small pipe bomb couldn't have done equally well. Now lets look at the uk shall we, According to our own office for national Statistics, There were 709 homicides in the year ending March 2017, 141 more (25% increase) than in the previous year. The most common method of killing was by knife or other sharp instrument with 215 victims killed in this way, accounting for 30% of homicides -me wonders what killed the rest -bad vibes alone? So in short, even though we are nowhere near the levels of a war zone or the USA, we have a 25% rise in fatal incidents yet countries with gun ownership many multiples of our own (and rapidly approaching that of the USA) are relatively stable in the fatal incident sphere -now could something else be at play here? And, just in case you're wondering, all this information is just a small google search away | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing you say on this subject makes any sense. Your mind is made up despite a huge swell of evidence to the contrary, and there'd no point engaging with you over it. Ok so lets talk evidence shall we: The top 10 countries for gun ownership per 100 head of population are: 1: United States 120.5 2: Yemen 52.8 3: Serbia 39.1 4: Montenegro 39.1 5: Canada 34.7 6: Uruguay 34.7 7: Cyprus 34 8: Finland 32.4 [note 3] 9: Lebanon 31.9 10: Iceland 31.7 Of those, Half are not war zones (No's 1,5 6, 8 and 10) and out of that half, nearly 60% have among the lowest gun homicides per capita in the world ( Yes, I'm looking at you Canada, Finland and Iceland). Even if we look at No. 1 on the list (good ol U.S.A.), their own Data (from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) help frame the issue: Boring into the 146,571 injury deaths for all age groups, homicide by firearm was the fifth-leading cause (12,979) behind suicide by gun (22,018), accidental fall (33,381), motor vehicle collisions (36,161) and accidental poisoning (47,478), which is mostly drug overdoses. The FBI’s annual Crime in the United States report breaks down types of weapons used in murders (not all homicides are murders). The report showed a total of 13,455 murders in 2015, of which 9,616 involved firearms -yes this is a high proportion but do you think a murderer is really going to not do the act id he/ she doesn't have a gun handy? There were a handful of highly publicized mass shootings in 2015 involving assault rifles that totaled 21 deaths -nothing a small pipe bomb couldn't have done equally well. Now lets look at the uk shall we, According to our own office for national Statistics, There were 709 homicides in the year ending March 2017, 141 more (25% increase) than in the previous year. The most common method of killing was by knife or other sharp instrument with 215 victims killed in this way, accounting for 30% of homicides -me wonders what killed the rest -bad vibes alone? So in short, even though we are nowhere near the levels of a war zone or the USA, we have a 25% rise in fatal incidents yet countries with gun ownership many multiples of our own (and rapidly approaching that of the USA) are relatively stable in the fatal incident sphere -now could something else be at play here? And, just in case you're wondering, all this information is just a small google search away " facts don't care about your feelings | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Spoons can kill people - but only if you are seriously committed and able to use it with leathal force. Pipe bombs do kill indiscriminately but are not on sale to Joe public. Semi automatic weapons can kill easily and effectively, without much training and are on sale to Joe public. At what point does your average member of the public need a semi automatic assault rifle? They are not used for hunting, the are not used for sport ... they are soley designed to kill people! " Horse bolted there -look up 3D printing a lower reciever or ghost guns -oh and if it's the scale of destruction you're worried about -you have no-one other than your own defence industry to blame for that -enjoy the irony of celebrating your poppy from within your trident fortified waters is all I can say. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sod it... I'd carry one if it were legal in this country ... my pepper spray/ dye doesn't have the same deterrent effect... just sayin' ...don't judge me x" Hate to break it to you but carrying pepper spray is classed as an offensive weapon and is already illegal -rather just walk around with a bag of fertiliser and an improvised detonator -far less legal trouble there when it accidentally goes off in your hand/ manbag. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sod it... I'd carry one if it were legal in this country ... my pepper spray/ dye doesn't have the same deterrent effect... just sayin' ...don't judge me x Hate to break it to you but carrying pepper spray is classed as an offensive weapon and is already illegal -rather just walk around with a bag of fertiliser and an improvised detonator -far less legal trouble there when it accidentally goes off in your hand/ manbag." Don't care... it works for me ... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Very interesting statistics and yes only a small Google search away. Over 300 mass shootings this year alone in the good ol’ USA. I refer you back to my previous post about Australia - one mass shooting in the last 20 years since the implemented strict gun laws after a mass shooting. I am not saying there is not other crime in the world but give me a good reason why a member of the public needs a semi automatic assault rifle? And “personal protection” is not a valid answer. " Your missing the point -I'm not advocating for anyone to have guns -just that banning things doesn't necessarily solve the issue if you don't first get a handle on what is really driving the high murder rate. Much like prohibition or the war on drugs have had feck all affect in curbing either. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Your missing the point -I'm not advocating for anyone to have guns -just that banning things doesn't necessarily solve the issue if you don't first get a handle on what is really driving the high murder rate. Much like prohibition or the war on drugs have had feck all affect in curbing either." The point is Australia implemented strict gun control (banning semi automatic assault rifles) and it did solve the mass shooting problem. I rest my case. It can be done and it has been done. We are not talking about murders/stabbing or crime in general but mass shootings. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Your missing the point -I'm not advocating for anyone to have guns -just that banning things doesn't necessarily solve the issue if you don't first get a handle on what is really driving the high murder rate. Much like prohibition or the war on drugs have had feck all affect in curbing either. The point is Australia implemented strict gun control (banning semi automatic assault rifles) and it did solve the mass shooting problem. I rest my case. It can be done and it has been done. We are not talking about murders/stabbing or crime in general but mass shootings. " And I am saying the weapon doesn't matter it's the intent -I do note that the effectiveness banning guns in Australia was more tto do with cultural midset than anything else -how else do you explain how a conservative prime minister was able to confiscate some 650,000 privately owned firearms and ban semiautomatic weapons without a single reported act of violence -I somehow doubt the american population would be as meek or passive on the issue (una-bomber comes to mind). The UK already has these restrictions in place yet we are seeing a rise in the murder rate, should we just bite the bullet now and ban steak knives in restaurants? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Your missing the point -I'm not advocating for anyone to have guns -just that banning things doesn't necessarily solve the issue if you don't first get a handle on what is really driving the high murder rate. Much like prohibition or the war on drugs have had feck all affect in curbing either. The point is Australia implemented strict gun control (banning semi automatic assault rifles) and it did solve the mass shooting problem. I rest my case. It can be done and it has been done. We are not talking about murders/stabbing or crime in general but mass shootings. " A valid point. I don't like to get embroiled in the whole "other countries should" debate as we need to get our house in order first! The fact remains that yes, ultimately it's a person who pulls a trigger, but if they can't get their hands on modern weapons, semi automatic, automatic or otherwise it reduces their capability. It's also interesting that its not deemed a mass shooting until there's at least 4 victims? And that most perpetrators are suffering serious mental health issues, as opposed to gang motivated incidents like we're witnessing in the UK with stabbings. Banning may not eradicate the problem but it'll reduce it? But let's face it, it's embedded within the US culture and takes a lot of change. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Your missing the point -I'm not advocating for anyone to have guns -just that banning things doesn't necessarily solve the issue if you don't first get a handle on what is really driving the high murder rate. Much like prohibition or the war on drugs have had feck all affect in curbing either. The point is Australia implemented strict gun control (banning semi automatic assault rifles) and it did solve the mass shooting problem. I rest my case. It can be done and it has been done. We are not talking about murders/stabbing or crime in general but mass shootings. A valid point. I don't like to get embroiled in the whole "other countries should" debate as we need to get our house in order first! The fact remains that yes, ultimately it's a person who pulls a trigger, but if they can't get their hands on modern weapons, semi automatic, automatic or otherwise it reduces their capability. It's also interesting that its not deemed a mass shooting until there's at least 4 victims? And that most perpetrators are suffering serious mental health issues, as opposed to gang motivated incidents like we're witnessing in the UK with stabbings. Banning may not eradicate the problem but it'll reduce it? But let's face it, it's embedded within the US culture and takes a lot of change." Ok -so why are Australia's statistics in line with that of Canada, Finland and iceland yet the last 3 haven't done anything to curb gun ownership -might it have something more to do with cultural values than simple ownership statistics? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The FBI’s annual Crime in the United States report breaks down types of weapons used in murders (not all homicides are murders). The report showed a total of 13,455 murders in 2015, of which 9,616 involved firearms -yes this is a high proportion but do you think a murderer is really going to not do the act id he/ she doesn't have a gun handy?" Er, yes? Very often. As borne out by so many stats. You're an idiot. I'm sorry. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The FBI’s annual Crime in the United States report breaks down types of weapons used in murders (not all homicides are murders). The report showed a total of 13,455 murders in 2015, of which 9,616 involved firearms -yes this is a high proportion but do you think a murderer is really going to not do the act id he/ she doesn't have a gun handy? Er, yes? Very often. As borne out by so many stats. You're an idiot. I'm sorry." Again -sorry, your point is? You have a hard time with independent thinkers -that's fine, it's your prerogative to be that way, but i don't really see why we have to devolve to playground insults just because you can't have a rational debate going your way -I have a difference of opinion, nothing more and it certainly isn't a personal vendetta against your core values. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Your missing the point -I'm not advocating for anyone to have guns -just that banning things doesn't necessarily solve the issue if you don't first get a handle on what is really driving the high murder rate. Much like prohibition or the war on drugs have had feck all affect in curbing either. The point is Australia implemented strict gun control (banning semi automatic assault rifles) and it did solve the mass shooting problem. I rest my case. It can be done and it has been done. We are not talking about murders/stabbing or crime in general but mass shootings. A valid point. I don't like to get embroiled in the whole "other countries should" debate as we need to get our house in order first! The fact remains that yes, ultimately it's a person who pulls a trigger, but if they can't get their hands on modern weapons, semi automatic, automatic or otherwise it reduces their capability. It's also interesting that its not deemed a mass shooting until there's at least 4 victims? And that most perpetrators are suffering serious mental health issues, as opposed to gang motivated incidents like we're witnessing in the UK with stabbings. Banning may not eradicate the problem but it'll reduce it? But let's face it, it's embedded within the US culture and takes a lot of change. Ok -so why are Australia's statistics in line with that of Canada, Finland and iceland yet the last 3 haven't done anything to curb gun ownership -might it have something more to do with cultural values than simple ownership statistics?" It may do, but as I stated regarding the definition of a mass shooting, there's a lot more shootings in Canada than we get to hear about. It may be cultural values, but that with the possession syatistics creates a problem? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A steak knife is not designed to kill, a kitchen knife is not designed to kill, a car is not designed to kill, a spoon is not designed to kill. A gun is designed to kill and as such it should be severely restricted if not banned. Yes it is a constitutional right for people to bear arms ... written in 1791 “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state”. From the country that accounts for $639 billion on military spending this year (more than the next seven countries put together). If a country spends that amount of money on defence does it have a realistic and rational need for private citizens to own semi auromatic assault rifles to protect a “free state”? If it is to ensure that people can fight back against tyranny then surely $639 billion buys a lot of “sit down, shut up and I’ll do what I want” - which hardly conforms with a free state. What the answer is to reducing the crime and murder rate is I don’t know, however making it legal to buy semi automatic assault rifles is not the answer. " You can have access right now to one if you want -all you need is a 3d printer -banning them will not eliminate them from the face of the earth -like some modern day St. Patrick did with snakes in I Ireland (including all traces of fossil evidence -he was that thorough). If people really want to kill others in mass murders all the weapons prohibition / will in the world won't change that -it's the cultural mindset that needs to be re-programmed. Not many guns in prison yet an awful lot of murders happen there with improvised weapons (with spoons, toothbrushes and all manner of objects not designed as weapons) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It may do, but as I stated regarding the definition of a mass shooting, there's a lot more shootings in Canada than we get to hear about. It may be cultural values, but that with the possession syatistics creates a problem? " Even if that statement was somehow verifiable, am I to Infer from that, that Finland and Iceland too are a hotbed of mass shootings handily covered up by their magnificent tourist boards? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It may do, but as I stated regarding the definition of a mass shooting, there's a lot more shootings in Canada than we get to hear about. It may be cultural values, but that with the possession syatistics creates a problem? Even if that statement was somehow verifiable, am I to Infer from that, that Finland and Iceland too are a hotbed of mass shootings handily covered up by their magnificent tourist boards?" No idea on those countries, but I'm fairly comfortable on the others due to work and travel. I see your point on banning items, even if my experience is quite different, however with no other real solutions it's a start if slightly flawed? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think the starting point has to be stopping using the word ban and starting to use the word control. Most Americans want some gun control and most Americans also don't want to repeal the 2nd amendment. There's a middle ground there but neither side wants to buckle and so it becomes a constant stalemate." I totally agree -but think the chance at control has already slipped out the door -for me it's more important to tackle the underlying core values demanding this as a right. If you don't, all you will see happening is a skyrocketing in 3D printer sales as the spread of ghost weapons skyrockets. Tackle people on what their gun is really for and you may make more headway -otherwise you are just looking at a burgeoning "gun moonshine" apocalypse industry. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sod it... I'd carry one if it were legal in this country ... my pepper spray/ dye doesn't have the same deterrent effect... just sayin' ...don't judge me x Hate to break it to you but carrying pepper spray is classed as an offensive weapon and is already illegal -rather just walk around with a bag of fertiliser and an improvised detonator -far less legal trouble there when it accidentally goes off in your hand/ manbag. Don't care... it works for me ..." It's actually classed as a Section 5 firearm and comes with the attached penalties. There is a legal alternative sold on the internet. Don't know if it works but better than doing time... Ps I have a 3d printer...  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sod it... I'd carry one if it were legal in this country ... my pepper spray/ dye doesn't have the same deterrent effect... just sayin' ...don't judge me x Hate to break it to you but carrying pepper spray is classed as an offensive weapon and is already illegal -rather just walk around with a bag of fertiliser and an improvised detonator -far less legal trouble there when it accidentally goes off in your hand/ manbag. Don't care... it works for me ... It's actually classed as a Section 5 firearm and comes with the attached penalties. There is a legal alternative sold on the internet. Don't know if it works but better than doing time... Ps I have a 3d printer... "Good on you Frisky -can I use your 3d printer to ahem make toys for my friends this Christmas (just asking for the elves that is) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Nothing you say on this subject makes any sense. Your mind is made up despite a huge swell of evidence to the contrary, and there'd no point engaging with you over it. Ok so lets talk evidence shall we: The top 10 countries for gun ownership per 100 head of population are: 1: United States 120.5 2: Yemen 52.8 3: Serbia 39.1 4: Montenegro 39.1 5: Canada 34.7 6: Uruguay 34.7 7: Cyprus 34 8: Finland 32.4 [note 3] 9: Lebanon 31.9 10: Iceland 31.7 Of those, Half are not war zones (No's 1,5 6, 8 and 10) and out of that half, nearly 60% have among the lowest gun homicides per capita in the world ( Yes, I'm looking at you Canada, Finland and Iceland). Even if we look at No. 1 on the list (good ol U.S.A.), their own Data (from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) help frame the issue: Boring into the 146,571 injury deaths for all age groups, homicide by firearm was the fifth-leading cause (12,979) behind suicide by gun (22,018), accidental fall (33,381), motor vehicle collisions (36,161) and accidental poisoning (47,478), which is mostly drug overdoses. The FBI’s annual Crime in the United States report breaks down types of weapons used in murders (not all homicides are murders). The report showed a total of 13,455 murders in 2015, of which 9,616 involved firearms -yes this is a high proportion but do you think a murderer is really going to not do the act id he/ she doesn't have a gun handy? There were a handful of highly publicized mass shootings in 2015 involving assault rifles that totaled 21 deaths -nothing a small pipe bomb couldn't have done equally well. Now lets look at the uk shall we, According to our own office for national Statistics, There were 709 homicides in the year ending March 2017, 141 more (25% increase) than in the previous year. The most common method of killing was by knife or other sharp instrument with 215 victims killed in this way, accounting for 30% of homicides -me wonders what killed the rest -bad vibes alone? So in short, even though we are nowhere near the levels of a war zone or the USA, we have a 25% rise in fatal incidents yet countries with gun ownership many multiples of our own (and rapidly approaching that of the USA) are relatively stable in the fatal incident sphere -now could something else be at play here? And, just in case you're wondering, all this information is just a small google search away " All those statistics and you still miss the point. The incentive behind banning gun ownership is to reduce, not eliminate gun related deaths. A stastic you forgot to mention is that U.S. has 56x higher gun related mortality per 100,000 people than UK. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All those statistics and you still miss the point. The incentive behind banning gun ownership is to reduce, not eliminate gun related deaths. A stastic you forgot to mention is that U.S. has 56x higher gun related mortality per 100,000 people than UK." And I'm saying that gun ownership has nothing to do with murder rates -people are going out and waantonly murdering people for a whole host of resons none of which happen to be about being a gun owner. Removing guns from the eauation (even if you could) will not necessarily stop the incidence of mass killings. As for statists -how do you explain canada, Finland and Iceland then? If youu want a very simple primer on what i'm on about, may I suggest you re/ watch Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and then talk to me about the correllations between gun ownership and gun violence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All those statistics and you still miss the point. The incentive behind banning gun ownership is to reduce, not eliminate gun related deaths. A stastic you forgot to mention is that U.S. has 56x higher gun related mortality per 100,000 people than UK. And I'm saying that gun ownership has nothing to do with murder rates -people are going out and waantonly murdering people for a whole host of resons none of which happen to be about being a gun owner. Removing guns from the eauation (even if you could) will not necessarily stop the incidence of mass killings. As for statists -how do you explain canada, Finland and Iceland then? If youu want a very simple primer on what i'm on about, may I suggest you re/ watch Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and then talk to me about the correllations between gun ownership and gun violence." Dude, guns make murdering others MUCH MUCH EASIER, the reason behind murders is a whole another issue. What is important is reducing one of the factors (guns). You can't buy a gun in Canada at your local walmart for $50, unlike some states in U.S. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Guns in America is one of the best things about their country. The only reason they are illegal in the UK is because the Scottish and Irish would basically start a war with as easy access to guns. Imagine telling Scotland they had to shut the fuck up and leave the EU despite voting to stay, if every single one of them had a gun. Maybe brexit wouldn't push them to war, but it would force the UK to take their stance very very seriously. This is why a lot of colonial european countries ban them. And its absolutley amazing that america can have them, and will always be able to stop the politicians mugging them." They aren't stopping no politicians from anything. U.S. government is just as corrput as any other government and is fucking over their public in one way or the other. The fact that the citizens can carry guns is no threat to the government. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Guns in America is one of the best things about their country. The only reason they are illegal in the UK is because the Scottish and Irish would basically start a war with as easy access to guns. Imagine telling Scotland they had to shut the fuck up and leave the EU despite voting to stay, if every single one of them had a gun. Maybe brexit wouldn't push them to war, but it would force the UK to take their stance very very seriously. This is why a lot of colonial european countries ban them. And its absolutley amazing that america can have them, and will always be able to stop the politicians mugging them." And this is a clear example of why it's good some people don't have guns! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the government ever tried to takeover and become a dictatorship.... the citizens can always fight back..." The trouble with that argument is that people who have an arsenal in their house are a danger to the public, whether they shoot a gun off while cleaning it or if their kid takes one to school or if the family is burgled while they're out. Most people in the states don't carry guns and don't want to. Plus, you're assuming the gun collectors will always be in the right. There's a wannabe fascist dictatorship in power in the US right now. A significant number of the gun people, who are often easily stoked up by fear as we've seen in recent weeks, support this president. When the Mueller report is published, if Trump asked them to buy a Trump black shirt and await further orders what do you think they'd do? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the government ever tried to takeover and become a dictatorship.... the citizens can always fight back... The trouble with that argument is that people who have an arsenal in their house are a danger to the public, whether they shoot a gun off while cleaning it or if their kid takes one to school or if the family is burgled while they're out. Most people in the states don't carry guns and don't want to. Plus, you're assuming the gun collectors will always be in the right. There's a wannabe fascist dictatorship in power in the US right now. A significant number of the gun people, who are often easily stoked up by fear as we've seen in recent weeks, support this president. When the Mueller report is published, if Trump asked them to buy a Trump black shirt and await further orders what do you think they'd do?" The Handmaidens Tale. It's coming! Or is that winter? I'm so confused.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All those statistics and you still miss the point. The incentive behind banning gun ownership is to reduce, not eliminate gun related deaths. A stastic you forgot to mention is that U.S. has 56x higher gun related mortality per 100,000 people than UK. And I'm saying that gun ownership has nothing to do with murder rates -people are going out and waantonly murdering people for a whole host of resons none of which happen to be about being a gun owner. Removing guns from the eauation (even if you could) will not necessarily stop the incidence of mass killings. As for statists -how do you explain canada, Finland and Iceland then? If youu want a very simple primer on what i'm on about, may I suggest you re/ watch Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and then talk to me about the correllations between gun ownership and gun violence. Dude, guns make murdering others MUCH MUCH EASIER, the reason behind murders is a whole another issue. What is important is reducing one of the factors (guns). You can't buy a gun in Canada at your local walmart for $50, unlike some states in U.S." Hard to deny the efficiency. Man goes Tonto in Australia with knife. One dead two injured..Man goes Tonto in US with handgun, 12 dead, multiple injuries.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I4yFDsVPczk Cos Chicago and LA are top of the murder pops in the US, both gun control areas. California has some of the toughest gun laws in the states, closely followed by Chicago county.
And what is stopping someone from another gun pro state coming to LA and selling guns on the black market?
Federal law, but if gun control works, Sweden wouldn’t be in the grip of a gun crime epidemic, those cheeky Serbs are even throwing in free hand grenades to sweeten gun deals.
I’ve never tried to obtain an illegal firearm in this country, but I would be willing to lay odds I could get one within 24 hours. "I was once offered an Uzi with 20 32 round magazines, for the price of £200. Obviously I turned it down, thinking about it now I should have bought it and given it to the police. They might have been able to get some off the streets. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anything can be used as a murder weapon -should we ban spoons?" Forget spoons, I think we need to ban cars. They are getting used more and more in terror attacks. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sod it... I'd carry one if it were legal in this country ... my pepper spray/ dye doesn't have the same deterrent effect... just sayin' ...don't judge me x Hate to break it to you but carrying pepper spray is classed as an offensive weapon and is already illegal -rather just walk around with a bag of fertiliser and an improvised detonator -far less legal trouble there when it accidentally goes off in your hand/ manbag. Don't care... it works for me ... It's actually classed as a Section 5 firearm and comes with the attached penalties. There is a legal alternative sold on the internet. Don't know if it works but better than doing time... Ps I have a 3d printer...
Good on you Frisky -can I use your 3d printer to ahem make toys for my friends this Christmas (just asking for the elves that is)"In college I made a rudimentary zip gun, ok not very effective gun I know. It was a .22 calibre and never used, it was more to see if I could make it. If you have the tools and knowledge you can make a decent firearm. As there is enough information out there, you just need to know where to look and what you are doing. I have also seen a video of a shotgun stick, very cride gun but effective at close range. Jam it into someone, the gun fires and there is no escape. Ok both up close and personal weapons, but fairly easy to make. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In the US they often say guns don't kill people, people do. " Brilliant, you got the solution just ban people from the USA and all will be resolved
Sensibly I do think the work life balance, lack of decent health care etc. Is a prime cause of the mental stress that causes these frankly absurd gun massacres. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All those statistics and you still miss the point. The incentive behind banning gun ownership is to reduce, not eliminate gun related deaths. A stastic you forgot to mention is that U.S. has 56x higher gun related mortality per 100,000 people than UK. And I'm saying that gun ownership has nothing to do with murder rates -people are going out and waantonly murdering people for a whole host of resons none of which happen to be about being a gun owner. Removing guns from the eauation (even if you could) will not necessarily stop the incidence of mass killings. As for statists -how do you explain canada, Finland and Iceland then? If youu want a very simple primer on what i'm on about, may I suggest you re/ watch Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and then talk to me about the correllations between gun ownership and gun violence. Dude, guns make murdering others MUCH MUCH EASIER, the reason behind murders is a whole another issue. What is important is reducing one of the factors (guns). You can't buy a gun in Canada at your local walmart for $50, unlike some states in U.S." But you can buy a 3D printer or fertiliser and a shed load of spoons? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"All those statistics and you still miss the point. The incentive behind banning gun ownership is to reduce, not eliminate gun related deaths. A stastic you forgot to mention is that U.S. has 56x higher gun related mortality per 100,000 people than UK. And I'm saying that gun ownership has nothing to do with murder rates -people are going out and waantonly murdering people for a whole host of resons none of which happen to be about being a gun owner. Removing guns from the eauation (even if you could) will not necessarily stop the incidence of mass killings. As for statists -how do you explain canada, Finland and Iceland then? If youu want a very simple primer on what i'm on about, may I suggest you re/ watch Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and then talk to me about the correllations between gun ownership and gun violence. Dude, guns make murdering others MUCH MUCH EASIER, the reason behind murders is a whole another issue. What is important is reducing one of the factors (guns). You can't buy a gun in Canada at your local walmart for $50, unlike some states in U.S. Hard to deny the efficiency. Man goes Tonto in Australia with knife. One dead two injured..Man goes Tonto in US with handgun, 12 dead, multiple injuries.." And then man goes tonto in London underground with homemade bomb -if memory serves me right, a few more than 1 or 2 were killed by that in 7/7/ 2005 (52 I think it was)-compare that to 2015 the year with the largest number of mass shootings in the states occurred -only 21 kileed -hmmm | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The funny thing is that most anti-gun people are pro-abortion. You simply don't have the moral high ground if that's your position. If you can defend abortion, then you are simply not an intelligent person if you can't also understand how guns can be defended. " That is a very strange conflation of ideas -but then again this is fab. I would have thought that both were pro choice and neither was a binary endorsement of murder given that a guns exist and aren't always used for killing and b that abortion sometimes is used to save the life of the mother and is not always about terminating a life regardless of consequence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The funny thing is that most anti-gun people are pro-abortion. You simply don't have the moral high ground if that's your position. If you can defend abortion, then you are simply not an intelligent person if you can't also understand how guns can be defended. That is a very strange conflation of ideas -but then again this is fab. I would have thought that both were pro choice and neither was a binary endorsement of murder given that a guns exist and aren't always used for killing and b that abortion sometimes is used to save the life of the mother and is not always about terminating a life regardless of consequence." So you're learning for the first time that America is a two party system with one side pro gun and anti abortion and the other side being the reverse? Ok. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The funny thing is that most anti-gun people are pro-abortion. You simply don't have the moral high ground if that's your position. If you can defend abortion, then you are simply not an intelligent person if you can't also understand how guns can be defended. That is a very strange conflation of ideas -but then again this is fab. I would have thought that both were pro choice and neither was a binary endorsement of murder given that a guns exist and aren't always used for killing and b that abortion sometimes is used to save the life of the mother and is not always about terminating a life regardless of consequence. So you're learning for the first time that America is a two party system with one side pro gun and anti abortion and the other side being the reverse? Ok. " And you've just taken your first steps at bebeing patronising -how utterly charming. Not all Americans endorse either party -you might be amazed to learn that there are an awful lot of independent thinkers not endorsed by either party -look up 3rd party office holders or people such as Judith Butler, Noam Chomsky, Allan Gibbard, George Soros et al. And before you say that third party politics has no place in modern politics, please remember that the labour (previously Liberal)party in the UK was once one such party. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The funny thing is that most anti-gun people are pro-abortion. You simply don't have the moral high ground if that's your position. If you can defend abortion, then you are simply not an intelligent person if you can't also understand how guns can be defended. "  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The funny thing is that most anti-gun people are pro-abortion. You simply don't have the moral high ground if that's your position. If you can defend abortion, then you are simply not an intelligent person if you can't also understand how guns can be defended. That is a very strange conflation of ideas -but then again this is fab. I would have thought that both were pro choice and neither was a binary endorsement of murder given that a guns exist and aren't always used for killing and b that abortion sometimes is used to save the life of the mother and is not always about terminating a life regardless of consequence. So you're learning for the first time that America is a two party system with one side pro gun and anti abortion and the other side being the reverse? Ok. And you've just taken your first steps at bebeing patronising -how utterly charming. Not all Americans endorse either party -you might be amazed to learn that there are an awful lot of independent thinkers not endorsed by either party -look up 3rd party office holders or people such as Judith Butler, Noam Chomsky, Allan Gibbard, George Soros et al. And before you say that third party politics has no place in modern politics, please remember that the labour (previously Liberal)party in the UK was once one such party." Strawman. I said "most", not "all". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At times like these,I ask myself what would Jesus say about weapons. As America is a Christian nation last time I looked. Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword.Mathew 26:52 " "he who is weak eats vegetables only" Romans 14:2 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Common sense seems a rare comodity in the US. In the US they often say guns don't kill people, people do. Which is true. There are lots of nations around the world where the keeping and use of small arms is normal. Yet they have lower levels of gun related deaths. So the logic that guns don't kill people, people do is fair enough. But if people kill people with gun regualy in your country surely it makes sense to limit the access of people to fire arms in a democracy?" The problem is, everyone's talking about gun control in terms of getting their numbers down in American society. How do you plan to do that when there are more than 265 MILLION civilian guns in the US (at last count in 2015)?! How do you plan to get people to turn in their guns? Even if you made a law making gun ownership illegal, you're still talking going door to door in that case trying to enforce that law at the point of a law enforcement gun, against people who would be possibly inclined to pop a bullet into you before they let you take their guns away. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At times like these,I ask myself what would Jesus say about weapons. As America is a Christian nation last time I looked. Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword.Mathew 26:52 "he who is weak eats vegetables only" Romans 14:2" "Thou shall not kill" .#God | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At times like these,I ask myself what would Jesus say about weapons. As America is a Christian nation last time I looked. Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword.Mathew 26:52 "he who is weak eats vegetables only" Romans 14:2 "Thou shall not kill" .#God" I'll ask the Republicans to stop killing with guns if you ask the democrats to stop killing babies? 28x more Americans die from abortion than guns #justsaying | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The funny thing is that most anti-gun people are pro-abortion. You simply don't have the moral high ground if that's your position. If you can defend abortion, then you are simply not an intelligent person if you can't also understand how guns can be defended. That is a very strange conflation of ideas -but then again this is fab. I would have thought that both were pro choice and neither was a binary endorsement of murder given that a guns exist and aren't always used for killing and b that abortion sometimes is used to save the life of the mother and is not always about terminating a life regardless of consequence. So you're learning for the first time that America is a two party system with one side pro gun and anti abortion and the other side being the reverse? Ok. And you've just taken your first steps at bebeing patronising -how utterly charming. Not all Americans endorse either party -you might be amazed to learn that there are an awful lot of independent thinkers not endorsed by either party -look up 3rd party office holders or people such as Judith Butler, Noam Chomsky, Allan Gibbard, George Soros et al. And before you say that third party politics has no place in modern politics, please remember that the labour (previously Liberal)party in the UK was once one such party. Strawman. I said "most", not "all". " Fair point -but equally so, it would help your arguement if you used a little less condescencion -I would think most people have a fairly good grasp of how American politics works especially wrt gun control and abortion don't you? My point has always been that gun control won't work without addressing the mindset behind mass killings -i.e what are the triggers leading otherwise "normal" people to do this. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Fair point -but equally so, it would help your arguement if you used a little less condescencion -I would think most people have a fairly good grasp of how American politics works especially wrt gun control and abortion don't you? My point has always been that gun control won't work without addressing the mindset behind mass killings -i.e what are the triggers leading otherwise "normal" people to do this." Yeah but you have to admit that it would be a lot harder to kill like that if they had to reload every 8 shots. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Fair point -but equally so, it would help your arguement if you used a little less condescencion -I would think most people have a fairly good grasp of how American politics works especially wrt gun control and abortion don't you? My point has always been that gun control won't work without addressing the mindset behind mass killings -i.e what are the triggers leading otherwise "normal" people to do this. Yeah but you have to admit that it would be a lot harder to kill like that if they had to reload every 8 shots. " Again I'll go back to my 7/7 point -it was a lot more effective to do it with a homemmade bomb -the weapon is not really the issue, if anything it is a moot point -especially now that you can fabricate all the components with a 3D printer/ lathe and create a high caliber automatic weapon that effectively doesn't exist. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At times like these,I ask myself what would Jesus say about weapons. As America is a Christian nation last time I looked. Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword.Mathew 26:52 "he who is weak eats vegetables only" Romans 14:2 "Thou shall not kill" .#God I'll ask the Republicans to stop killing with guns if you ask the democrats to stop killing babies? 28x more Americans die from abortion than guns #justsaying" Whatsboutery | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Fair point -but equally so, it would help your arguement if you used a little less condescencion -I would think most people have a fairly good grasp of how American politics works especially wrt gun control and abortion don't you? My point has always been that gun control won't work without addressing the mindset behind mass killings -i.e what are the triggers leading otherwise "normal" people to do this. Yeah but you have to admit that it would be a lot harder to kill like that if they had to reload every 8 shots. Again I'll go back to my 7/7 point -it was a lot more effective to do it with a homemmade bomb -the weapon is not really the issue, if anything it is a moot point -especially now that you can fabricate all the components with a 3D printer/ lathe and create a high caliber automatic weapon that effectively doesn't exist." In such a scenario where technology proliferates to allow for homemade 3D-printed guns I'd say either strictly control such tech, and/or at the same time arm more of the population. More guns = less chance of a crazy managing to pop 12 people off without someone putting him or her down ASAP. Why do you think in history the American West was full of people all armed with guns, and yet they didn't see quite the same rate of gun-related death or trigger-happy lunatic mass shooting we see today? Because firstly, all the guns were open carried most of the time, and secondly because even a madman out for maximum blood would be given pause if he walked into a place and saw that it was full of people all with guns strapped to their waists and openly holstered, and he'd realise that he wouldn't get the carnage he wants so much without being dropped the moment he fires off a shot. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Fair point -but equally so, it would help your arguement if you used a little less condescencion -I would think most people have a fairly good grasp of how American politics works especially wrt gun control and abortion don't you? My point has always been that gun control won't work without addressing the mindset behind mass killings -i.e what are the triggers leading otherwise "normal" people to do this. Yeah but you have to admit that it would be a lot harder to kill like that if they had to reload every 8 shots. Again I'll go back to my 7/7 point -it was a lot more effective to do it with a homemmade bomb -the weapon is not really the issue, if anything it is a moot point -especially now that you can fabricate all the components with a 3D printer/ lathe and create a high caliber automatic weapon that effectively doesn't exist. In such a scenario where technology proliferates to allow for homemade 3D-printed guns I'd say either strictly control such tech, and/or at the same time arm more of the population. More guns = less chance of a crazy managing to pop 12 people off without someone putting him or her down ASAP. Why do you think in history the American West was full of people all armed with guns, and yet they didn't see quite the same rate of gun-related death or trigger-happy lunatic mass shooting we see today? Because firstly, all the guns were open carried most of the time, and secondly because even a madman out for maximum blood would be given pause if he walked into a place and saw that it was full of people all with guns strapped to their waists and openly holstered, and he'd realise that he wouldn't get the carnage he wants so much without being dropped the moment he fires off a shot. " Cats out the bag there -do remember that 3D printers can effectively replicate themselves? I think you'd have a far tougher job trying to disarm the 1st amendment nutters -i don't see them giving up "their right to bear arms" in anything near as meek and mild a manner as the Australians did -especially given that Australia never had such constitutional protections to start with. At the end of the day, it's not the weapon but the mindset. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"At times like these,I ask myself what would Jesus say about weapons. As America is a Christian nation last time I looked. Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword.Mathew 26:52 "he who is weak eats vegetables only" Romans 14:2 "Thou shall not kill" .#God I'll ask the Republicans to stop killing with guns if you ask the democrats to stop killing babies? 28x more Americans die from abortion than guns #justsaying Whatsboutery "It's not though. The OP doesn't understand "how can anyone justify the gun laws in the USA". It can largely be explained by party politics. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Fair point -but equally so, it would help your arguement if you used a little less condescencion -I would think most people have a fairly good grasp of how American politics works especially wrt gun control and abortion don't you? My point has always been that gun control won't work without addressing the mindset behind mass killings -i.e what are the triggers leading otherwise "normal" people to do this. Yeah but you have to admit that it would be a lot harder to kill like that if they had to reload every 8 shots. Again I'll go back to my 7/7 point -it was a lot more effective to do it with a homemmade bomb -the weapon is not really the issue, if anything it is a moot point -especially now that you can fabricate all the components with a 3D printer/ lathe and create a high caliber automatic weapon that effectively doesn't exist. In such a scenario where technology proliferates to allow for homemade 3D-printed guns I'd say either strictly control such tech, and/or at the same time arm more of the population. More guns = less chance of a crazy managing to pop 12 people off without someone putting him or her down ASAP. Why do you think in history the American West was full of people all armed with guns, and yet they didn't see quite the same rate of gun-related death or trigger-happy lunatic mass shooting we see today? Because firstly, all the guns were open carried most of the time, and secondly because even a madman out for maximum blood would be given pause if he walked into a place and saw that it was full of people all with guns strapped to their waists and openly holstered, and he'd realise that he wouldn't get the carnage he wants so much without being dropped the moment he fires off a shot. " As much as i am loathe to admit it, you do have a point there -the best parrallell to that would be the Cold war MAD doctrine that effectively stopped both Russia and the USA obliterating both themselves and the rest of the planet with Nuclear warheads. for myself though, even if this line of crazy defence was open to me, I would still excercise the right not to carry one -a sort of one man Switzerland in this crazy gun conntrol apocolypse. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More guns = less gun violence, your people's logic if shocking to me. Better start arming 9 year olds so they can defend themself at school!" I sort of sympathise with your point but equally so, I was shot at accidentally by my mate trying to show off his dads handgun (he'd worked out the combination to his dads gunsafe) -imagine how much worse that would be if said gun was a fully automatic ghost gun? That is why we need to get to the reasons why ownership is seen as a necessity rather than just ban weapons per se. Equally alarming was that at age 9 we (the neighbourhood kids that is) were making "bombs" out of Jeyes fluid and Chlorine -we had no idea how insanely stupid it was, we were just mischievious kids doing stuff -not that I would advocate guns for any child though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"More guns = less gun violence, your people's logic if shocking to me. Better start arming 9 year olds so they can defend themself at school!" Don't be idiotic. Nobody's talking about arming 9 year olds in school, and I defy you to find me an example of a mass shooting ANYWHERE in the world conducted by someone under the age of 12!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably different to a lot of people's view but in my opinion, and having worked in the security sector, the amount of illegally held firearms on the UK streets is far in excess of what most people would imagine. This makes a scenario where a majority of the firearms are in the hands of criminals. I was in Texas a while ago and almost every house and business has or has access to a firearm, this has actually made it resonably safe place in comparison to other areas, the facts are, as someone has already stated, the states where firearms control is the strictest have the biggest problems. Personally I can't see why a civilian would need an ar15 or a 50 cal sniper rifle, but a handgun owned by a responsible person who has been trained would be a bonus when things all go pear shaped. " You'll find it's often the civvie luvvies who have no experience of the rough side of law enforcement, or of firearms, or of serving in the military who are most anti-gun. As if it'd really protect them. Why would a civilian need or want an AR-15 or Barrett .50 cal? *shrugs* Heck, if I could get my hands on one as a civilian now myself I would, purely because I like them and I would love to own one and do target shooting at a range nearby. Maybe the fact I've also done time in the military before has possibly influenced me in such a manner... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"only nutters want guns ... and based on that fact, it's best that people who apply for gun licences get knocked back for being nutters "People who apply for gun licenses... some of them also happen to be police officers. Nice attitude you got there towards them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"only nutters want guns ... and based on that fact, it's best that people who apply for gun licences get knocked back for being nutters
People who apply for gun licenses... some of them also happen to be police officers.
Nice attitude you got there towards them. "acab ftp | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably different to a lot of people's view but in my opinion, and having worked in the security sector, the amount of illegally held firearms on the UK streets is far in excess of what most people would imagine. This makes a scenario where a majority of the firearms are in the hands of criminals. I was in Texas a while ago and almost every house and business has or has access to a firearm, this has actually made it resonably safe place in comparison to other areas, the facts are, as someone has already stated, the states where firearms control is the strictest have the biggest problems. Personally I can't see why a civilian would need an ar15 or a 50 cal sniper rifle, but a handgun owned by a responsible person who has been trained would be a bonus when things all go pear shaped. " Single shot AR15s and .22 semi-auto AR15s are perfectly legal in the UK, and quite common in the target shooting community. Likewise .50 cal is a legitimate target discipline out to long distances. All the spin is about lumping them in with military applications. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"only nutters want guns ... and based on that fact, it's best that people who apply for gun licences get knocked back for being nutters "People applying for firearms licences are amongst the most scrutinised in the country. They have to provide one or two referees as to their character, a report from their GP and are subject to criminal background checks and a face to face interview, having to repeat it all every five years. How many other past times require all that? Failures in the system have usually been human error/neglect. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably different to a lot of people's view but in my opinion, and having worked in the security sector, the amount of illegally held firearms on the UK streets is far in excess of what most people would imagine. This makes a scenario where a majority of the firearms are in the hands of criminals. I was in Texas a while ago and almost every house and business has or has access to a firearm, this has actually made it resonably safe place in comparison to other areas, the facts are, as someone has already stated, the states where firearms control is the strictest have the biggest problems. Personally I can't see why a civilian would need an ar15 or a 50 cal sniper rifle, but a handgun owned by a responsible person who has been trained would be a bonus when things all go pear shaped. Single shot AR15s and .22 semi-auto AR15s are perfectly legal in the UK, and quite common in the target shooting community. Likewise .50 cal is a legitimate target discipline out to long distances. All the spin is about lumping them in with military applications." Old Enfield, Mauser, Springfield and other old service rifles are popular as well for sporting shooting. But I’m not convinced some ones hobby and 1,000 responsible users are worth the one nutter going on a spree or murdering someone with one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well in an ideal world no-one would have firearms but it's not an ideal world and the worse case scenario is only People that shouldn't have access to them having them." In an ideal world anyone suitable and responsible enough who wants firearms for a legitimate purpose would have them without incurring hysteria from mis-informed non-shooters. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably different to a lot of people's view but in my opinion, and having worked in the security sector, the amount of illegally held firearms on the UK streets is far in excess of what most people would imagine. This makes a scenario where a majority of the firearms are in the hands of criminals. I was in Texas a while ago and almost every house and business has or has access to a firearm, this has actually made it resonably safe place in comparison to other areas, the facts are, as someone has already stated, the states where firearms control is the strictest have the biggest problems. Personally I can't see why a civilian would need an ar15 or a 50 cal sniper rifle, but a handgun owned by a responsible person who has been trained would be a bonus when things all go pear shaped. Single shot AR15s and .22 semi-auto AR15s are perfectly legal in the UK, and quite common in the target shooting community. Likewise .50 cal is a legitimate target discipline out to long distances. All the spin is about lumping them in with military applications. Old Enfield, Mauser, Springfield and other old service rifles are popular as well for sporting shooting. But I’m not convinced some ones hobby and 1,000 responsible users are worth the one nutter going on a spree or murdering someone with one. " Funnily enough, that's exactly the kind of logic that leads to a totalitarian state - that guns are there to prevent | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably different to a lot of people's view but in my opinion, and having worked in the security sector, the amount of illegally held firearms on the UK streets is far in excess of what most people would imagine. This makes a scenario where a majority of the firearms are in the hands of criminals. I was in Texas a while ago and almost every house and business has or has access to a firearm, this has actually made it resonably safe place in comparison to other areas, the facts are, as someone has already stated, the states where firearms control is the strictest have the biggest problems. Personally I can't see why a civilian would need an ar15 or a 50 cal sniper rifle, but a handgun owned by a responsible person who has been trained would be a bonus when things all go pear shaped. Single shot AR15s and .22 semi-auto AR15s are perfectly legal in the UK, and quite common in the target shooting community. Likewise .50 cal is a legitimate target discipline out to long distances. All the spin is about lumping them in with military applications. Old Enfield, Mauser, Springfield and other old service rifles are popular as well for sporting shooting. But I’m not convinced some ones hobby and 1,000 responsible users are worth the one nutter going on a spree or murdering someone with one. " Lots of things can and do result in death if misused or abused. Should we ban them all? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably different to a lot of people's view but in my opinion, and having worked in the security sector, the amount of illegally held firearms on the UK streets is far in excess of what most people would imagine. This makes a scenario where a majority of the firearms are in the hands of criminals. I was in Texas a while ago and almost every house and business has or has access to a firearm, this has actually made it resonably safe place in comparison to other areas, the facts are, as someone has already stated, the states where firearms control is the strictest have the biggest problems. Personally I can't see why a civilian would need an ar15 or a 50 cal sniper rifle, but a handgun owned by a responsible person who has been trained would be a bonus when things all go pear shaped. Single shot AR15s and .22 semi-auto AR15s are perfectly legal in the UK, and quite common in the target shooting community. Likewise .50 cal is a legitimate target discipline out to long distances. All the spin is about lumping them in with military applications. Old Enfield, Mauser, Springfield and other old service rifles are popular as well for sporting shooting. But I’m not convinced some ones hobby and 1,000 responsible users are worth the one nutter going on a spree or murdering someone with one. Lots of things can and do result in death if misused or abused. Should we ban them all?" no ... just the things that are designed to cause death obviously | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably different to a lot of people's view but in my opinion, and having worked in the security sector, the amount of illegally held firearms on the UK streets is far in excess of what most people would imagine. This makes a scenario where a majority of the firearms are in the hands of criminals. I was in Texas a while ago and almost every house and business has or has access to a firearm, this has actually made it resonably safe place in comparison to other areas, the facts are, as someone has already stated, the states where firearms control is the strictest have the biggest problems. Personally I can't see why a civilian would need an ar15 or a 50 cal sniper rifle, but a handgun owned by a responsible person who has been trained would be a bonus when things all go pear shaped. Single shot AR15s and .22 semi-auto AR15s are perfectly legal in the UK, and quite common in the target shooting community. Likewise .50 cal is a legitimate target discipline out to long distances. All the spin is about lumping them in with military applications. Old Enfield, Mauser, Springfield and other old service rifles are popular as well for sporting shooting. But I’m not convinced some ones hobby and 1,000 responsible users are worth the one nutter going on a spree or murdering someone with one. Funnily enough, that's exactly the kind of logic that leads to a totalitarian state - that guns are there to prevent " There is precedent, look at all the great dictatorships and totalitarian states. One of the first things they did was disarm the population. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably different to a lot of people's view but in my opinion, and having worked in the security sector, the amount of illegally held firearms on the UK streets is far in excess of what most people would imagine. This makes a scenario where a majority of the firearms are in the hands of criminals. I was in Texas a while ago and almost every house and business has or has access to a firearm, this has actually made it resonably safe place in comparison to other areas, the facts are, as someone has already stated, the states where firearms control is the strictest have the biggest problems. Personally I can't see why a civilian would need an ar15 or a 50 cal sniper rifle, but a handgun owned by a responsible person who has been trained would be a bonus when things all go pear shaped. Single shot AR15s and .22 semi-auto AR15s are perfectly legal in the UK, and quite common in the target shooting community. Likewise .50 cal is a legitimate target discipline out to long distances. All the spin is about lumping them in with military applications. Old Enfield, Mauser, Springfield and other old service rifles are popular as well for sporting shooting. But I’m not convinced some ones hobby and 1,000 responsible users are worth the one nutter going on a spree or murdering someone with one. Funnily enough, that's exactly the kind of logic that leads to a totalitarian state - that guns are there to prevent There is precedent, look at all the great dictatorships and totalitarian states. One of the first things they did was disarm the population." It's for their own safety comrade | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well in an ideal world no-one would have firearms but it's not an ideal world and the worse case scenario is only People that shouldn't have access to them having them." Trouble is, the people who hold them legally, have generally been the cause of more public incidents? Derek bird. Dunblane. Hungerford. Yes that's quite a time era between them all, but it demonstrates that people can lawfully possess them and due to emotional states or illness use them to kill effectively. As for the while poppycock argument that anything can kill you? Yes it can, but not so effectively and spontaneously without the same ability to stop it. Get real. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well in an ideal world no-one would have firearms but it's not an ideal world and the worse case scenario is only People that shouldn't have access to them having them. Trouble is, the people who hold them legally, have generally been the cause of more public incidents? Derek bird. Dunblane. Hungerford. Yes that's quite a time era between them all, but it demonstrates that people can lawfully possess them and due to emotional states or illness use them to kill effectively. As for the while poppycock argument that anything can kill you? Yes it can, but not so effectively and spontaneously without the same ability to stop it. Get real. " Someone has already mentioned bombs. Vans and pointy things are quite de rigueur at the moment. Is that real enough for you? Hungerford and Dunblane were failings/neglect within the system, both were on the radar but the authorities failed to act. Byrd wasn't, although his associates knew things were going bad. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As Clem said , how can you protect yourself without one ? And as others have said , we’ve had 250 killings in London alone without guns , and we have a fraction of the population here . So until we can sort our own shit out , we are hardly in a position to sort anyone else’s ." Thank you for putting it in perspective, and quite well said. The other point in the second amendment is for standing up against the government. The attitude of the left here to try and sabotage the Supreme Court confirmation. With false allegations. The witch hunt of trying to find Russian collusion against President Trump, but instead turning up blatant wrong doing by the fbi and hillary with no charges filed. The latest blatant vote tampering going on with Florida Governor and Senate race. A civil war might not be that far off! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"can get a walther creed for less than 300 with ammo over the counter in some shops. only law i agree with is the stand your ground. A stand-your-ground law (sometimes called "line in the sand" or "no duty to retreat" law) establishes a right by which a person may defend one's self or others (right of self-defense) against threats or perceived threats, even to the point of applying lethal force, regardless of whether safely retreating from the situation might have been possible. Such a law typically states that an individual has no duty to retreat from any place where they have a lawful right to be, and that they may use any level of force if they reasonably believe the threat rises to the level of being an imminent and immediate threat of serious bodily harm and/or death" Now that I like. Bet you get all the PC and holier-than-thou batteries firing at you pretty soon. I'll stand alongside you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Conversely, I would much rather have the opportunity to leg it from a knife wielder than try to outrun a bullet You'd be amazed at how bad most people's aim is -despite what the news says, most gun shots are non fatal. Pistols are apparently notoriously inaccurate in even trained hands. Other than rifle/pistol range experience and clay pigeon shoots I can't comment first hand on how hard it would be to hit a moving target but going back to the gist of the thread, I am still very glad that it's far harder (not impossible, I know) to aquire firearms here than in The States. I think we should just ban the internet and be done with it -after all, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" Well said | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sod it... I'd carry one if it were legal in this country ... my pepper spray/ dye doesn't have the same deterrent effect... just sayin' ...don't judge me x Hate to break it to you but carrying pepper spray is classed as an offensive weapon and is already illegal -rather just walk around with a bag of fertiliser and an improvised detonator -far less legal trouble there when it accidentally goes off in your hand/ manbag. Don't care... it works for me ..." To cover yourself legally get spray on deep heat for your "bad back" you need it for the hard to reach places, I bet it's just as bad in the face as pepper spray | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The right to personal nuclear warheads is covered by the second amendment . The term "arms" must also refer to weapons of war I would of thought . Where do you draw the line on the definition of arms. " Bearing in mind it was drawn up at a time when the military carried the same arms as the civilian population, barring artillery pieces. Things have moved on a tad. The military wouldn't let me keep my helicopter or Hellfire missiles. When I retired they wouldn't let me keep any of my firearms at all. Tyrants! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"can get a walther creed for less than 300 with ammo over the counter in some shops. only law i agree with is the stand your ground. A stand-your-ground law (sometimes called "line in the sand" or "no duty to retreat" law) establishes a right by which a person may defend one's self or others (right of self-defense) against threats or perceived threats, even to the point of applying lethal force, regardless of whether safely retreating from the situation might have been possible. Such a law typically states that an individual has no duty to retreat from any place where they have a lawful right to be, and that they may use any level of force if they reasonably believe the threat rises to the level of being an imminent and immediate threat of serious bodily harm and/or death Now that I like. Bet you get all the PC and holier-than-thou batteries firing at you pretty soon. I'll stand alongside you." We're under no obligation to retreat and it doesn't mean we can't claim to have been acting in self defence - r v bird 1985 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
