US school shooting
Discussion
Jimbeaux said:
The full force should not have been needed, you still vastly outnumbered us, were better trained and equipped. You still lost is the short answer but let's not talk about that, it is not polite. 
Come on Jim... The French won you that Hugo a Gogo said:
Jimbeaux said:
TheHeretic said:
Jimbeaux said:
No, totally different; it is seen as government over reaching.
Would you get the same reaction if they decreased blood alcohol levels for drink driving, or made the driving test harder, and so on? If these things were do e at the state level, like NY, would that be OK?
FurtiveFreddy said:
Sorry, not much help either.
Storing guns at home is the reason people are killed by guns? Please don't tell you read that ridiculous article written by The Guardian's SA reporter?
Isn't the availability of guns at home a high cause of accidental shootings involving kids etc? Likewise isn't the easy access to a gun in the bedroom (or wherever) part of the reason for domestic shootings?Storing guns at home is the reason people are killed by guns? Please don't tell you read that ridiculous article written by The Guardian's SA reporter?
im said:
Isn't the availability of guns at home a high cause of accidental shootings involving kids etc?
If loaded guns are left lying around in homes where they can be picked up someone other than those responsible for them, then that is a bad thing, it could lead to people getting hurt and it needs to be addressed.That is not a reason to somehow stop all gun owners from storing their guns at home.
This tired old argument of "if the gun wasn't there, it couldn't be used to kill" is not going anywhere. Guns are there and in significant numbers in the U.S., South Africa, UK and many other civilised and un-civilised countries. They are not going to be handed in, destroyed, locked up in a big safe or taken away from their owners any time soon.
FurtiveFreddy said:
im said:
Rubbish.
How many guns are in the UK?Make sure you include the illegally held ones...
You made the assertion - time for YOU to supply the numbers.
I can tell you how many people in the UK died from gun-related incidents in 2011...39
I can also tell you that in the UK a gun in the home (which is rare to begin with) has to be stored in a locked cabinet SEPERATE from the (likewise secured) amunition and not in view of anyone peering into the house from outside unless you've had an inspection from the local police force to approve otherwise which again is rare.
I know all of this because I applied for a shotgun licence myself and that was 10 years ago.
im said:
You made the assertion - time for YOU to supply the numbers.
Tell you what, you tell me what sort of number *you* would deem 'insignificant' and I'll tell you if you're right or not.
It doesn't even matter what the numbers are, because the term 'significant' is debatable anyway. And we'll never know how many illegally-held guns are out there (which was why I made the point).
However, there IS a significant number in the UK and elsewhere in the world and they are not going to disappear so we all need to look at what might be done other than these 'ban them', 'take them away', 'lock them all up in gun clubs' suggestions we hear all the time.
I'm glad you have a SGC because perhaps you have some understanding of why it would be impractical to stop gun owners from keeping their guns at home?
BTW, keeping guns at clubs was looked at when the UK handgun ban was being discussed and it was ruled out for a number of reasons. You may think it's rare to own a gun here, but when you do look at the numbers involved you'll see it's ridiculous to think you could store all legally held guns in secure storage facilities.
And while we're looking at numbers, where do you get the number 39 (gun related deaths) from? It's wrong.
Edited by FurtiveFreddy on Wednesday 20th February 12:55
davepoth said:
I love this comment -I am officially a member of the NRA as of yesterday. - Justinian, Buffalo, Thanks for letting us know. I join the NHRA and have been a member of the BMWCCA for a few year. BMW car club of American. I am seriously thinking of joining the CPF CandlePowerForums, I love flashlights. Thanks again for letting us know, I will keep you informed as well. - AngleIron, Sonoma.
Breadvan72 said:
If they had been armed, and had shot firstest and fastest with the mostest, the dead dude count would still be about 39. Add in a few
Mexican standoffs and the number would have gone up.
But it would be 39 dead bad dudes wearing black hats, not 39 good dudes wearing white hats. Dead bad dudes wearing black hats doesn't count & is good. Mexican standoffs and the number would have gone up.
smartphone hater said:
But it would be 39 dead bad dudes wearing black hats, not 39 good dudes wearing white hats. Dead bad dudes wearing black hats doesn't count & is good.
Would it? There categorically wouldn't be any wrongful deaths?http://nbclatino.com/2013/01/29/georgia-man-shoots...
pokethepope said:
Would it? There categorically wouldn't be any wrongful deaths?
http://nbclatino.com/2013/01/29/georgia-man-shoots...
My answer wasn't a really serious methodically calculated one.http://nbclatino.com/2013/01/29/georgia-man-shoots...
But as far as your link. Phillip Sailors used excessive force = bad dude in black hat. If Rodrigo Diaz was legally carrying a firearm he could have shot Sailors as he ran towards him brandishing his firearm & quite rightly claimed self defence. The results, dead bad dude in black hat, good live dude in white hat drives off into the sunset.
Edited.. I've answered your question so could you answer this, what might have happened if Sailors didn't have a firearm?
Edited by smartphone hater on Thursday 21st February 01:08
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff