Another US Campus mass shooting.
Discussion
Corpulent Tosser said:
I never mention unfettered access.
Gun ownership has never been common in Britain, so the virtual ban post Dunblane affected very few people, it was popular, unnecessary in my opinion but popular, so the government did it.
Gun ownership is ingrained in the American way of life and a ban is not going to work there, gun control can work, but even that will have minimal effect.
Not true. Historically gun ownership in the UK was at huge levels. There were hundreds of gunmakers and related professions in Birmingham alone at one time. Gun ownership has never been common in Britain, so the virtual ban post Dunblane affected very few people, it was popular, unnecessary in my opinion but popular, so the government did it.
Gun ownership is ingrained in the American way of life and a ban is not going to work there, gun control can work, but even that will have minimal effect.
Edited by Corpulent Tosser on Saturday 3rd October 14:55
There were essentially no gun laws at all until 1903 and none of much significance until the 1920's. Ten year olds could legally purchase firearms. Until 1969 a shotgun licence was available on demand at the Post Office with no checks on the person. It wasn't even until 1988 that shotguns were brought into a registration scheme which identified individual guns.
The USA was enacting gun laws decades before we did.
REALIST123 said:
How many people, anywhere in the world, are deliberately killed each year by alcohol or something related to alcohol, or by cars?
Deliberately killed.
That, then, makes alcohol even worse as it clearly can't be bothered safely if people are unintentionally dying because of it. Compare with firearms which are one of the safest consumer products out there as far as L fatalities go. Deliberately killed.
La Liga said:
ome being about 240, which are combination of individual and third parties. So not a large absolute figure, and that number has been reducing since attitudes, laws and regulation has been gradually introduced.
Unlike gun deaths where any rational introduction of such measures are, generally, completely rejected for irrational reasons.
The majority of alcohol-related deaths are the individual abusing it. It is a health problem. It isn't the individual killing someone else.
Apples and oranges.
Most (just over half) of US shooting deaths are the individual shooting themselves intentionally. Unlike gun deaths where any rational introduction of such measures are, generally, completely rejected for irrational reasons.
The majority of alcohol-related deaths are the individual abusing it. It is a health problem. It isn't the individual killing someone else.
Apples and oranges.
VX Foxy said:
Are you suggesting there are fewer robberies due to the chances of the victim having a gun? My guess is that you are very wrong. Fancy digging up some stats?
The reaction Depends on the perp' I guess, but think of it this way; every time a crime is committed the crim risks being locked up - would he prefer to be locked up for murder/armed robbery, or burglary?
I don't have the figures to hand but it is a well accepted fact that invasions of occupied properties (so called 'hot' burglaries) are way lower in the USA than many other places. That is because criminals know that there s a significant chance of meeting an armed occupant. The reaction Depends on the perp' I guess, but think of it this way; every time a crime is committed the crim risks being locked up - would he prefer to be locked up for murder/armed robbery, or burglary?
VX Foxy said:
Are you suggesting there are fewer robberies due to the chances of the victim having a gun? My guess is that you are very wrong. Fancy digging up some stats?
The reaction Depends on the perp' I guess, but think of it this way; every time a crime is committed the crim risks being locked up - would he prefer to be locked up for murder/armed robbery, or burglary?
I don't have the figures to hand but it is a well accepted fact that invasions of occupied properties (so called 'hot' burglaries) are way lower in the USA than many other places. That is because criminals know that there s a significant chance of meeting an armed occupant. The reaction Depends on the perp' I guess, but think of it this way; every time a crime is committed the crim risks being locked up - would he prefer to be locked up for murder/armed robbery, or burglary?
ATG said:
Matt Harper said:
Absolutely no utility in personal or home defense of course. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that - but the whole point of a firearm as a defensive weapon (rather than a sporting tool) is that it be accessible and ready for use.
Yes, but the utility of a firearm for self defence is so close to zero that removing it from that sphere altogether makes no difference to people safety except by reducing the chance of accidents or the gun being stolen. Self defence with a firearm in your own house is a fantasy. If you look at countries like South Africa where the chance of encountering armed crime is far far higher than in the States, people don't arm themselves to the teeth. They carry panic buttons. They fit electric and razor wire fences. This is the difference between practical experience of dealing with crime versus fantasy risk and fantasy self defence.
A case in point: a Zimbabwean relative has a small arsenal of weapons that were used appropriately for self protection during the civil war. They weren't left sitting around the house in the bedside table just in case. Someone would be out on guard, or driving in an organised convoy. 30 years later he got wind that his farm was about to be invaded. First thing he did was empty the strong room of all the ammunition, automatic pistols, AR15s and a large number of hunting rifles and drive them back to town to secure them before returning to the farm. No point escalating the coming confrontation, disastrous if the weapons fell into the wrong hands. If someone is coming over to try to kill you, then by all means try and kill them. If they are coming over to rob you, best not to up the ante to the point that they decide to try to kill you.
Edited by ATG on Monday 5th October 13:07
I am not particularly worried about being victim to a home invasion crime - most are perpetrated by criminals on other criminals. That said, I'm a great believer in the concept of insurance. I wasn't particularly worried about my house receiving a direct hit from a hurricane, but that happened to me. I was allowed to and could afford insurance for that eventuality thankfully. I feel the same regarding my home defense weapon - it's just insurance that I don't anticipate ever having to call upon. I also know how it works, what it's capabilities and limitations are and how to use it effectively - I'm no Rambo, by any stretch, but have benefitted from quite comprehensive training from an expert.
DoJ said:
One or more household members knew the offenders in some manner
in 65% of the 266,560 burglaries that took place while someone
was present and experienced violence (table 17). Overall,
household members knew approximately a third of these offenders
as intimates (current or former) (31%), or relatives,
well-known individuals, or household acquaintances (34%). A
stranger perpetrated the violence in 28% of households
burglarized while someone was home and violence occurred.
in 65% of the 266,560 burglaries that took place while someone
was present and experienced violence (table 17). Overall,
household members knew approximately a third of these offenders
as intimates (current or former) (31%), or relatives,
well-known individuals, or household acquaintances (34%). A
stranger perpetrated the violence in 28% of households
burglarized while someone was home and violence occurred.
p1stonhead said:
Sometimes comedians speak far more sense than politicians, this is one of those times.
How a significant proportion of gun owners imagine themselves during a "home invasion":
The reality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-rGnMKszxg
The reality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-rGnMKszxg
jjlynn27 said:
You are a nutjob. You shouldn't be allowed outside unsupervised. When I type 'great loss for UK' I wasn't being serious. Adverts on your survivalblog.com are telling; http://www.infidelbodyarmor.com/
Seriously now, do you carry survivalblog ip address in your wallet? Once the governments and NWO have their way, you'll need bigger wallet for their ipv6.
Where do you get off in thinking you have the right to dictate, control and govern what I choose to buy to protect my family and myself. Seriously now, do you carry survivalblog ip address in your wallet? Once the governments and NWO have their way, you'll need bigger wallet for their ipv6.
Frankly I love living in a country where I have the CHOICE to posses firearms or not.
5ohmustang said:
jjlynn27 said:
You are a nutjob. You shouldn't be allowed outside unsupervised. When I type 'great loss for UK' I wasn't being serious. Adverts on your survivalblog.com are telling; http://www.infidelbodyarmor.com/
Seriously now, do you carry survivalblog ip address in your wallet? Once the governments and NWO have their way, you'll need bigger wallet for their ipv6.
Where do you get off in thinking you have the right to dictate, control and govern what I choose to buy to protect my family and myself. Seriously now, do you carry survivalblog ip address in your wallet? Once the governments and NWO have their way, you'll need bigger wallet for their ipv6.
Frankly I love living in a country where I have the CHOICE to posses firearms or not.
5ohmustang said:
Frankly I love living in a country where I have the CHOICE to posses firearms or not.
Good for you, and I'm glad I live in a country where children can go to school without the very real fear of someone with a legally owned gun can come in and shoot down them and their friends.The statistics from your country are horrific and quoting a 200 plus year old written amendment as a valid reason to have semi automatic weapons in a household is plain nuts. Do you think when the second amendment was written they had the foresight to think that in the future people would want military f=grade weapons in their home no one needs these guns, but I'm afraid America is too far gone, that was proved when nothing happened after sandyhook, which is utterly disgusting in my view
The very fact people feel the need to have firearms for protection is interesting in itself. As I see it - as someone who has traveled widely, including numerous trips to some very diverse bits of the USA - guns are merely the (viciously sharp) tip of the iceberg.
Gun ownership per se, is not necessarily a 'bad thing', but in the context of what we're seeing in the USA, it needs to be questioned. The core of the problem is deeper-rooted. The insularity which sees such incredibly low percentages of citizens possessing a passport, let alone actually traveling and being informed of world affairs, is indicative of a siege mentality, aided and abetted by media hysteria.
It's been done to death - the contrast for example between the USa and it's nearest developed economy neighbour Canada - but it would seem the pro-gun lobby are never going to understand and the nation which, for avoidance of doubt, I'm very fond of, is doomed to repeat its mistakes.
Gun ownership per se, is not necessarily a 'bad thing', but in the context of what we're seeing in the USA, it needs to be questioned. The core of the problem is deeper-rooted. The insularity which sees such incredibly low percentages of citizens possessing a passport, let alone actually traveling and being informed of world affairs, is indicative of a siege mentality, aided and abetted by media hysteria.
It's been done to death - the contrast for example between the USa and it's nearest developed economy neighbour Canada - but it would seem the pro-gun lobby are never going to understand and the nation which, for avoidance of doubt, I'm very fond of, is doomed to repeat its mistakes.
chrispmartha said:
Good for you, and I'm glad I live in a country where children can go to school without the very real fear of someone with a legally owned gun can come in and shoot down them and their friends.
The statistics from your country are horrific and quoting a 200 plus year old written amendment as a valid reason to have semi automatic weapons in a household is plain nuts. Do you think when the second amendment was written they had the foresight to think that in the future people would want military f=grade weapons in their home no one needs these guns, but I'm afraid America is too far gone, that was proved when nothing happened after sandyhook, which is utterly disgusting in my view
Statistics, sure. Who's statistics? The democratics? Have you actually lived in the U.S. for more than a few weeks?The statistics from your country are horrific and quoting a 200 plus year old written amendment as a valid reason to have semi automatic weapons in a household is plain nuts. Do you think when the second amendment was written they had the foresight to think that in the future people would want military f=grade weapons in their home no one needs these guns, but I'm afraid America is too far gone, that was proved when nothing happened after sandyhook, which is utterly disgusting in my view
200 year old law? And how old are the outdated laws in the UK? Whose country has a how many hundred year old monarchy that obtained power through murder and oppression.
Sandy hook is a prime example of a gun free zone. Cops have guns, the military has guns, bodyguards, security guards yet children are not valued enough to have armed school security guards?
The American people have spoken, as for you liberals keep on having a victim mentality. Enjoy your socialist lives, i'm out.
OpulentBob said:
How a significant proportion of gun owners imagine themselves during a "home invasion":
The reality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-rGnMKszxg
What are you basing this proclamation on - or is it just how you imagine things to be?The reality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-rGnMKszxg
I don't think that a hand gun is appropriate for such a scenario either.
Digga said:
The very fact people feel the need to have firearms for protection is interesting in itself. As I see it - as someone who has traveled widely, including numerous trips to some very diverse bits of the USA - guns are merely the (viciously sharp) tip of the iceberg.
Gun ownership per se, is not necessarily a 'bad thing', but in the context of what we're seeing in the USA, it needs to be questioned. The core of the problem is deeper-rooted. The insularity which sees such incredibly low percentages of citizens possessing a passport, let alone actually traveling and being informed of world affairs, is indicative of a siege mentality, aided and abetted by media hysteria.
It's been done to death - the contrast for example between the USa and it's nearest developed economy neighbour Canada - but it would seem the pro-gun lobby are never going to understand and the nation which, for avoidance of doubt, I'm very fond of, is doomed to repeat its mistakes.
This is a good point. I have been to the States quite a lot and not just to the usual touristy bits. I think it can be quite nicely encapsulated by the reporting of news. In the UK we report International news first, National news second and local news last. In the US its the complete opposite with around 5 minutes given over to international news at the end of the programme. I would even go as far to say that the majority of Americans probably don't even know what's going on in Syria for example.Gun ownership per se, is not necessarily a 'bad thing', but in the context of what we're seeing in the USA, it needs to be questioned. The core of the problem is deeper-rooted. The insularity which sees such incredibly low percentages of citizens possessing a passport, let alone actually traveling and being informed of world affairs, is indicative of a siege mentality, aided and abetted by media hysteria.
It's been done to death - the contrast for example between the USa and it's nearest developed economy neighbour Canada - but it would seem the pro-gun lobby are never going to understand and the nation which, for avoidance of doubt, I'm very fond of, is doomed to repeat its mistakes.
5ohmustang said:
chrispmartha said:
Good for you, and I'm glad I live in a country where children can go to school without the very real fear of someone with a legally owned gun can come in and shoot down them and their friends.
The statistics from your country are horrific and quoting a 200 plus year old written amendment as a valid reason to have semi automatic weapons in a household is plain nuts. Do you think when the second amendment was written they had the foresight to think that in the future people would want military f=grade weapons in their home no one needs these guns, but I'm afraid America is too far gone, that was proved when nothing happened after sandyhook, which is utterly disgusting in my view
Statistics, sure. Who's statistics? The democratics? Have you actually lived in for more than a few weeks?The statistics from your country are horrific and quoting a 200 plus year old written amendment as a valid reason to have semi automatic weapons in a household is plain nuts. Do you think when the second amendment was written they had the foresight to think that in the future people would want military f=grade weapons in their home no one needs these guns, but I'm afraid America is too far gone, that was proved when nothing happened after sandyhook, which is utterly disgusting in my view
200 year old law? And how old are the outdated laws in the UK? Whose country has a how many hundred year old monarchy that obtained power through murder and oppression.
Sandy hook is a prime example of a gun free zone. Cops have guns, the military has guns, bodyguards, security guards yet children are not valued enough to have armed school security guards?
The American people have spoken, as for you liberals keep on having a victim mentality. Enjoy your life, out.
Listen to yourself...
5ohmustang said:
jjlynn27 said:
You are a nutjob. You shouldn't be allowed outside unsupervised. When I type 'great loss for UK' I wasn't being serious. Adverts on your survivalblog.com are telling; http://www.infidelbodyarmor.com/
Seriously now, do you carry survivalblog ip address in your wallet? Once the governments and NWO have their way, you'll need bigger wallet for their ipv6.
Where do you get off in thinking you have the right to dictate, control and govern what I choose to buy to protect my family and myself. Seriously now, do you carry survivalblog ip address in your wallet? Once the governments and NWO have their way, you'll need bigger wallet for their ipv6.
Frankly I love living in a country where I have the CHOICE to posses firearms or not.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff