The U.S.A. Mass Shootings Thread
Discussion
NMNeil said:
Thank you, but the standard knee jerk reaction was expected.
I'm not pro gun, don't belong to the NRA, consider the bible a work of fiction and am a firm believer in keeping guns, knives and cars out of the hands of people who can't be trusted with a deadly weapon, no matter what that weapon or potential weapon is.
But every time a nutter goes on a rampage and killing spree with a gun the media are all over it with cries of "ban guns". This was the same reaction in the UK and Australia, so they effectively banned guns with only those who had been thoroughly vetted being allowed to own one, such as Jake Davison, showing that vetting doesn't work.
So rather than insult me PH members, what do you suggest to stop the madness of nutters with guns, knives and cars? We know the problem, so come up with a solution rather than just sit in your chair throwing unwarranted insults.
Vetting may work if it is done properly, but it is not; Hamilton slaughtered children in a school in 1996 with guns he should not have possessed due to being unfit. After the tabloid-pleasing handgun ban no real effort was made to correct this regulatory failing and it's been repeated many times since, most recently with Jake Davison. firearms officers are too few in number, there seems to be little oversight and no means by which to compel GPs to respond in a timely manner(or at all).I'm not pro gun, don't belong to the NRA, consider the bible a work of fiction and am a firm believer in keeping guns, knives and cars out of the hands of people who can't be trusted with a deadly weapon, no matter what that weapon or potential weapon is.
But every time a nutter goes on a rampage and killing spree with a gun the media are all over it with cries of "ban guns". This was the same reaction in the UK and Australia, so they effectively banned guns with only those who had been thoroughly vetted being allowed to own one, such as Jake Davison, showing that vetting doesn't work.
So rather than insult me PH members, what do you suggest to stop the madness of nutters with guns, knives and cars? We know the problem, so come up with a solution rather than just sit in your chair throwing unwarranted insults.
Tankrizzo said:
The thing that boggles my mind is that the law allowed an 18 year old boy - just a kid really - to buy a weapon like that and ammo. We all know 18 year old lads, I wouldn't trust them with driving a car properly let alone handling a weapon like that.
If my 18 year old were allowed free unfettered use of a semi auto rifle, there would be no one left in our London Borough.Utter madness
NMNeil said:
Thank you, but the standard knee jerk reaction was expected.
I'm not pro gun, don't belong to the NRA, consider the bible a work of fiction and am a firm believer in keeping guns, knives and cars out of the hands of people who can't be trusted with a deadly weapon, no matter what that weapon or potential weapon is.
But every time a nutter goes on a rampage and killing spree with a gun the media are all over it with cries of "ban guns". This was the same reaction in the UK and Australia, so they effectively banned guns with only those who had been thoroughly vetted being allowed to own one, such as Jake Davison, showing that vetting doesn't work.
So rather than insult me PH members, what do you suggest to stop the madness of nutters with guns, knives and cars? We know the problem, so come up with a solution rather than just sit in your chair throwing unwarranted insults.
Vetting does work. Jake Davidson shouldn't have been allowed anywhere near his shotguns. Three officers suspended currently, pending investigation.I'm not pro gun, don't belong to the NRA, consider the bible a work of fiction and am a firm believer in keeping guns, knives and cars out of the hands of people who can't be trusted with a deadly weapon, no matter what that weapon or potential weapon is.
But every time a nutter goes on a rampage and killing spree with a gun the media are all over it with cries of "ban guns". This was the same reaction in the UK and Australia, so they effectively banned guns with only those who had been thoroughly vetted being allowed to own one, such as Jake Davison, showing that vetting doesn't work.
So rather than insult me PH members, what do you suggest to stop the madness of nutters with guns, knives and cars? We know the problem, so come up with a solution rather than just sit in your chair throwing unwarranted insults.
All of the UKs high profile shootings have been similar, Derek Bird and Thomas Hamilton (which was because he shared the same 'lodge' as a senior member of the local constabulary) both shouldnt have been allowed near their firearms.
We've needed reform of that process for a long time, it shouldn't sit with the police, but banning whichever guns were used is a stupid solution that only people who don't understand guns would suggest (see the recent motion to ban pump action shotguns, which would just push people toward the potentially more deadly semi automatics), but vetting (if done correctly) does work.
Sorry, this is sort of off topic, but its worth a response.
hidetheelephants said:
Vetting may work if it is done properly, but it is not; Hamilton slaughtered children in a school in 1996 with guns he should not have possessed due to being unfit. After the tabloid-pleasing handgun ban no real effort was made to correct this regulatory failing and it's been repeated many times since, most recently with Jake Davison. firearms officers are too few in number, there seems to be little oversight and no means by which to compel GPs to respond in a timely manner(or at all).
What’s been “repeated many times since”? Certainly not mass shootings in the UK. The worst instances subsequently were mainly NI related as far as I can see
gotoPzero said:
I think something you have to remember is roughly 15% of all males in the United States currently alive have military experience and are trained on the M4. Thats a lot of people.
So if you are going to go and buy a rifle do you buy a rifle you don't know how to shoot, clean, maintain etc or do you buy one you perhaps have years of experience on type?
I know which I would do. Added to that your average AR15 is cheap and can be bought pretty much any where excluding 3 states.
It will be interesting to see how things change once the M4 is dropped. Sig have just got the contract to make the XM5 which is a totally different rifle to the M4 and chambered in 6.8mm so this may play a part in years to come.
I expect the popularity of the 5.56 and the AR15 will decline and we will see civilian variants of the XM5 take over. We have already seen a big move towards 6.5 in the competition shooting arena.
Its also very interesting that the .280cal intermediate cartridge selected is firmly in the hunting range..... like you say why don't the Army have hunting rifles...well from 2025 they will!
I'm sure that will reassure the future schoolchildren that are shot with them and the parents grieving for themSo if you are going to go and buy a rifle do you buy a rifle you don't know how to shoot, clean, maintain etc or do you buy one you perhaps have years of experience on type?
I know which I would do. Added to that your average AR15 is cheap and can be bought pretty much any where excluding 3 states.
It will be interesting to see how things change once the M4 is dropped. Sig have just got the contract to make the XM5 which is a totally different rifle to the M4 and chambered in 6.8mm so this may play a part in years to come.
I expect the popularity of the 5.56 and the AR15 will decline and we will see civilian variants of the XM5 take over. We have already seen a big move towards 6.5 in the competition shooting arena.
Its also very interesting that the .280cal intermediate cartridge selected is firmly in the hunting range..... like you say why don't the Army have hunting rifles...well from 2025 they will!
Talk about wood and trees
BikeBikeBIke said:
Tankrizzo said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
Why are school shootings such an American problem? There must be plenty of countries where guns are a free-for-for all and (unless the media are missing it) their nutters aren't doing this.
Theories?
I'm pretty sure although I haven't checked in a while, but the number of guns per head is by far the highest in the USA. Like, they're way, way out in front.Theories?
Edited by HM-2 on Friday 27th May 15:39
NMNeil said:
Thank you, but the standard knee jerk reaction was expected.
I'm not pro gun, don't belong to the NRA, consider the bible a work of fiction and am a firm believer in keeping guns, knives and cars out of the hands of people who can't be trusted with a deadly weapon, no matter what that weapon or potential weapon is.
But every time a nutter goes on a rampage and killing spree with a gun the media are all over it with cries of "ban guns". This was the same reaction in the UK and Australia, so they effectively banned guns with only those who had been thoroughly vetted being allowed to own one, such as Jake Davison, showing that vetting doesn't work.
So rather than insult me PH members, what do you suggest to stop the madness of nutters with guns, knives and cars? We know the problem, so come up with a solution rather than just sit in your chair throwing unwarranted insults.
Fair play that is some flex to say "vetting doesn't work" when we have very, very few incidents like this. Really just a couple every decade or so.I'm not pro gun, don't belong to the NRA, consider the bible a work of fiction and am a firm believer in keeping guns, knives and cars out of the hands of people who can't be trusted with a deadly weapon, no matter what that weapon or potential weapon is.
But every time a nutter goes on a rampage and killing spree with a gun the media are all over it with cries of "ban guns". This was the same reaction in the UK and Australia, so they effectively banned guns with only those who had been thoroughly vetted being allowed to own one, such as Jake Davison, showing that vetting doesn't work.
So rather than insult me PH members, what do you suggest to stop the madness of nutters with guns, knives and cars? We know the problem, so come up with a solution rather than just sit in your chair throwing unwarranted insults.
gotoPzero said:
ATG said:
Indeed, and its exactly the same reason that people chose to buy AR-15s for self-defence. They are compact, light, semi-automatic, large capacity magazines are standard. They aren't very accurate at long range. They're designed for shooting things nearby and are usually fitted with sights that let you quickly aim and shoot at close targets. They are designed to do a particular job and they're very good at it and that's what people buy them for. And that's before you start considering the "coolness" factor and the army fantasy bollcoks. Anyone saying AR-15s and similarly designed guns are no more or less of a threat than any other type of gun might want to explain why you don't equip the army with hunting rifles. The more effective a weapon is, the more dangerous it is when misused. It is rather odd to try to argue otherwise.
I think something you have to remember is roughly 15% of all males in the United States currently alive have military experience and are trained on the M4. Thats a lot of people.So if you are going to go and buy a rifle do you buy a rifle you don't know how to shoot, clean, maintain etc or do you buy one you perhaps have years of experience on type?
I know which I would do. Added to that your average AR15 is cheap and can be bought pretty much any where excluding 3 states.
It will be interesting to see how things change once the M4 is dropped. Sig have just got the contract to make the XM5 which is a totally different rifle to the M4 and chambered in 6.8mm so this may play a part in years to come.
I expect the popularity of the 5.56 and the AR15 will decline and we will see civilian variants of the XM5 take over. We have already seen a big move towards 6.5 in the competition shooting arena.
Its also very interesting that the .280cal intermediate cartridge selected is firmly in the hunting range..... like you say why don't the Army have hunting rifles...well from 2025 they will!
ATG said:
It's not about the individual model of rifle. It's about what it is designed to do and where it sits in people's imagination. AR-15 or any other form of assault or battle rifle ALL differ from a hunting rifle in the same way. The latter are all about being able to place single shots accurately, the former are all about being able to attack or defend against people who are similarly armed. So, no, no army is going to be equipped with anything like a hunting rifle even if the military rifle happens to be chambered for a round you could also use to kill a deer.
You have been sadly misinformed. The AR-15 is neither an assault rifle or "battle rifle" it looks similar to the M4 which is a military firearm but that's it.Which of the two rifles below would you ban?
Clue, they both shoot the same cartridge, they both take the same magazines, they are both semi automatic with similar rates of fire. The main difference is the top one is in pole position on the "guns to ban" list because it looks scary, the bottom one doesn't get a second look as it looks like granddad's hunting rifle.
I repeat my statement that the rifle does not trigger the crime, make the AR-15 magically vanish and the shooters would simply choose something else. The problem is the person holding the gun not the gun they are holding. Stop selling guns to unsuitable people and the problem will reduce (not go away, that's a point for another day).
If you look at statistics that speeding motorists mostly drive Audis it should not lead you to the conclusion to ban selling Audis. The problem is the driver, not the car.
Edited by MKnight702 on Friday 27th May 16:09
Tankrizzo said:
Fair play that is some flex to say "vetting doesn't work" when we have very, very few incidents like this. Really just a couple every decade or so.
In his world something only works if there are never any more, just a s
tload fewer makes no difference. Because knives and cars.
ATG said:
It's not about the individual model of rifle. It's about what it is designed to do and where it sits in people's imagination. AR-15 or any other form of assault or battle rifle ALL differ from a hunting rifle in the same way. The latter are all about being able to place single shots accurately, the former are all about being able to attack or defend against people who are similarly armed. So, no, no army is going to be equipped with anything like a hunting rifle even if the military rifle happens to be chambered for a round you could also use to kill a deer.
A lot of hunting is done with old military rifles, assault or battle rifles of yesteryear, and likewise, there's a lot of footage of soldiers in Ukraine with common hunting rifles (seen quite a few Savage 110s and even a Sauer and Steyr Scout).Besides, AR-15s are perfect for some types of hunting, especially coyotes or hogs.
NMNeil said:
So rather than insult me PH members, what do you suggest to stop the madness of nutters with guns, knives and cars? We know the problem, so come up with a solution rather than just sit in your chair throwing unwarranted insults.
Wait... Wait... I know this one. Put the knives on the wheels and the guns on the wings and race for freedom. https://twitter.com/MaggieAstor/status/15292172486...
"After Sandy Hook, I read about how the group of parents waiting in a firehouse had dwindled until finally they were told that if they were still there, their children were dead. The reporters wrote that the screaming could be heard from the street.
I will never forget that."
Keep telling me how having far, far less guns will make no difference.
Keep telling me how the right to own one beats the right to stay alive.
"After Sandy Hook, I read about how the group of parents waiting in a firehouse had dwindled until finally they were told that if they were still there, their children were dead. The reporters wrote that the screaming could be heard from the street.
I will never forget that."
Keep telling me how having far, far less guns will make no difference.
Keep telling me how the right to own one beats the right to stay alive.
HM-2 said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
Tankrizzo said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
Why are school shootings such an American problem? There must be plenty of countries where guns are a free-for-for all and (unless the media are missing it) their nutters aren't doing this.
Theories?
I'm pretty sure although I haven't checked in a while, but the number of guns per head is by far the highest in the USA. Like, they're way, way out in front.Theories?
Edited by HM-2 on Friday 27th May 15:39
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff