[Archived] Gun Law Debate: Please keep posts civil and conversational

[Baz]

8 hours ago, Vinjay17 said:

Will post this article as a response to that. It also notes (as I discussed above) just how difficult it would be for federal agents to carry out "door to door" confiscations.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425021/australia-gun-control-obama-america

Make it illegal (or far far more restrictive), have a gun amnesty. If you remove 50% to start with, then great, then start prosecuting, make the punishment heavy and very public, have a second amnesty. 

If you don't try, you 100% won't succeed.

[MarkBRFC71]

1 hour ago, Baz said:

Make it illegal (or far far more restrictive), have a gun amnesty. If you remove 50% to start with, then great, then start prosecuting, make the punishment heavy and very public, have a second amnesty. 

If you don't try, you 100% won't succeed.

Agreed.  I believe Australia carried out a government buyback of guns to further incentivise people to hand them over.  The US should do the same, and then after say six months or a year make it very clear that unlicenced firearms are illegal and impose very heavy, and example-making, custodial penalties (and I'm talking 20+ years) upon anyone found to be in possession of an unlicenced gun, to make sure that people realise how serious it is.

However, the reality (under the current regime at least) is that the US is a plutocracy; half the GOP are 'lobbied' (aka bribed) by the NRA (who also peddle paranoia among the population to ensure a steady demand for guns) and so there is no chance anything will happen until there's a change in power.  The NRA are the real problem here - they started out as a glorified gun club but are now basically a mouthpiece and front for gun companies to 'buy' political favours and influence.  I read somewhere that they contributed over $21m to Trump's campaign, John McCain has had around $7m, Marco Rubio $3m etc etc - it's a long list of people in positions of power with the blood of children on their hands.

As already stated above, the finger of blame has already been pointed at 'mental health' by Trump, when it was the orange cretin himself who rolled back legislation preventing the sale of guns to people with mental health issues, because, Obama. 

Although I love living here, this is a seriously messed up country in many ways.  For example, an 18 year old can't pause to watch someone gamble in a Las Vegas casino, or buy a beer - but could be suffering from mental health issues, be on a terrorist 'no-fly' list, be a fugitive (so long as they haven't crossed state lines) - and still be able to legally buy an AR-15 assault rifle.  Madness.

[joey_big_nose]

It's a weird situation where allowing access to weapons is prioritised above mass deaths of innocents. It's illogical any way you look at it. You have to feel for parents in the US who have to live with the real possibility their kids will one day be killed in an attack. It's an inhumanity beyond any experienced in first world nations.

But it is such a fundamentally structural issue - politically, socially, historically - that it will never be resolved until a state secedes because of it. That may seem extreme, but it is realistically the only option as it will never be resolved at the federal level.

I live in London and while I or my family could be killed in a terrorist attack (still a hugely less likely event than being killed with a firearm in most major US cities) at least there is the comfort that the government is working to reduce the opportunity for terrorists to do that. 

To live in a nation where you are effectively told to accept the risk must be hard to take. I lived in Seattle for a year while studying, and my current employer HQ is in US with the prospect of promotion to a role over there , but I could never raise my family over there for the gun issue, along side health care and social concerns.

 

[Guest]

The constitutional right to bear arms could be kept, and at the same time, keep both traditionalists and reformists happy, if the government allowed people to own bear arms instead of firearms. No more shootings, although a slight increase in bear arm crimes.

[Vinjay]

2 hours ago, OnePhilT said:

The constitutional right to bear arms could be kept, and at the same time, keep both traditionalists and reformists happy, if the government allowed people to own bear arms instead of firearms. No more shootings, although a slight increase in bear arm crimes.

Yeah but what about cruelty to those poor bears? Don't bears have a right to keep their arms? What about the foreleg/arms argument with bears? I'm not sure you have an...erm...leg to stand on.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Vinjay17 said:

Yeah but what about cruelty to those poor bears? Don't bears have a right to keep their arms?

Salmon also have the right to keep their heads attached, so for every salmon decapitated, a bear will lose its arm, and Americans will gain one.

#VoteForMeToSortItOut

[Reedy You're A Star]

[darrenrover]

You really have to have spent time in The States and live with Americans, particularly in the southern states, to comprehend the passion with firearms.

It matters not one iota how many mass killings there are, Hell will freeze over before the mass majority of Americans would consider relinquishing their right to bear (and carry) arms.

I'm friendly with several families, all of whom are proud to own an arsenal of firearms but see it as their right and see themselves as a modern day 'Home Guard'.

They're fantastic folk, speak English but they don't think like the vast majority of us.

 

[Vinjay]

I know it starts bringing up silly issues like banning cars, etc but seriously what are the odds? Nowhere near as high as people think though with Cruz some people were genuinely fearful he was capable of doing what he ultimately did.

Look at it this way do people really care about every single terrible thing that happens? Some go on twitter, send their prayers (as if they will help) and then carry on with their lifes. I care more about the US than Papua New Guinea certainly but people are still people. Most people focus on what directly impacts them and its selfish but that's part of a capitalist society. Same for pretty much every society aside from those socialist utopias that never fail to succeed . Of course there's some illogical feelings for me because I'll focus a bit more on terrorist attacks (of course some argue that's what this incident was) despite the odds being even lower. Granted its more of a global issue rather than just centred on the US.

Those who are pro gun estimate personal risk and they are willing to live with it. Its not really illogical. Of course they might change their mind if a major mass shooting happens in their community. Or then again they might not. I'm not saying the US isn't debating issues like healthcare enough but gun control shouldn't even come close in terms of importance. For anyone to say they wouldn't move to the US due to fear of being shot (not always the sole reason of course) is extreme paranoia. Its probably the same people who in the immediate aftermath of the London terrorist attacks said they wouldn't set foot there. Is Manchester or Birmingham off limits for them as well? I've not been to London in the past couple of years but I've walked through Manchester Victoria station without being paranoid. There's probably more chance of being hit by a piece of fallen roof (20 million refurbishment but it didn't stop some panels falling and injuring a couple of people less than a year later) than being murdered there. I haven't been inside the Manchester Arena for a number of years but it wouldn't put me off going. I certainly cared more about that than this latest shooting but its still exceptionally low odds.

 Its illogical but so many people are like that. Look at Yorkshire when the ripper was at his height numerous women were afraid to go out at night. Or after the James Bulger murder when there was a huge raise in toddler rein sales. You have to look at the size of Yorkshire though and just how freakish JB's murder was. It would be notorious enough if an adult had done it never mind 2 children.

Acid attacks have gained some notoriety in the UK. Since some people are attached to terrestrial Tv even in this day and age (another illogical habit) quite a number of people on here probably just saw the issue covered in a primetime soap. Should we all stay indoors and never venture outside? Or commit suicide? Not to mention all kinds of other attacks like knifes, etc that could happen.  

The gun lobbyists, etc should support strong laws on mental health and sales of guns at the very least. I'm not convinced such people couldn't just steal a gun though anyway (or of course use another weapon though Trump's analogy they would use bombs instead was ludicrous) and of course that's why some favor mandatory confiscation. All that will do though is cause civil unrest on a larger scale than most shootings and create a gigantic black market.

 

[darrenrover]

On 16/02/2018 at 18:53, joey_big_nose said:

It's a weird situation where allowing access to weapons is prioritised above mass deaths of innocents. It's illogical any way you look at it. You have to feel for parents in the US who have to live with the real possibility their kids will one day be killed in an attack. It's an inhumanity beyond any experienced in first world nations.

But it is such a fundamentally structural issue - politically, socially, historically - that it will never be resolved until a state secedes because of it. That may seem extreme, but it is realistically the only option as it will never be resolved at the federal level.

I live in London and while I or my family could be killed in a terrorist attack (still a hugely less likely event than being killed with a firearm in most major US cities) at least there is the comfort that the government is working to reduce the opportunity for terrorists to do that. 

To live in a nation where you are effectively told to accept the risk must be hard to take. I lived in Seattle for a year while studying, and my current employer HQ is in US with the prospect of promotion to a role over there , but I could never raise my family over there for the gun issue, along side health care and social concerns.

 

Based on my experiences joey, the US is still a fantastic place and if you get the opportunity grasp it with open arms.

I studied in US many moons ago and I'm still close to my pals and families 40 odd years on and we still meet up either side of 'the pond' every 4 or 5 years or so and speak regularly in between.

The one thing that I could never grasp was the gun situation. They are always proud to show off their armoury: the extent of which is to us beyond comprehension (Uzis, Various high powered shot guns and rifles, I don't know the names but serious machine guns etc.)  laid out on the bed. You then try to debate the number of deaths in US as a consequence of shootings  (13,286 in 2015 btw.) but it all falls on deaf ears.

The family I'm closest to were due to come and spend a few weeks in France and Uk with us last summer but cancelled as a consequence of the terrorist attacks in London and Paris. They are absolutely petrified to travel to Europe! There's no talking logic, they're Americans!

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Nothing will ever change in America. This is a pointless conversation really. They're happy to pay the price of the odd school massacre as long as they can own a cupboard full of deadly weapons. It's as simple as that.

[Vinjay]

I believe if Trump was shot and survived he would respond exactly the same as Reagan did. This article says Reagan was more supportive of gun control after leaving office. Prior to and even after being shot he was very supportive of the NRA, etc. Of course the NRA as noted are a useful political tool but I think Trump would be pro guns even if their support wasn't anywhere near as useful.

https://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/08/republicans-didnt-always-march-to-the-national-rifle-associations-drum/

I'm sure some of those students who were hiding in closets, etc held pro gun views. I bet a few of them still do even now. 

 

[Mike E]

It is NOT about the right to bear arms imo, it's about the calibre of weapons available right up to fully automatic ones! An easy compromise would be to restrict weapons sold to US citizens to hand guns or sports weapons.

Not ideal, but a start and an easy compromise. If you 'need a gun to stop a gunman', have a handgun.

I'm baffled that the murderer's right to a gun is more important than the survivor's right to healthcare.

[joey_big_nose]

21 hours ago, darrenrover said:

Based on my experiences joey, the US is still a fantastic place and if you get the opportunity grasp it with open arms.

Personally I enjoyed my time in the US, and would happily go back to work there on my own, but my point is I can't raise a child there due to the gun and healthcare madness that prevails.

[jim mk2]

13 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Nothing will ever change in America. This is a pointless conversation really. They're happy to pay the price of the odd school massacre as long as they can own a cupboard full of deadly weapons. It's as simple as that.

 

Entrenched positions, rather like the Brexit voters who are beginning to realise the chaos and disruption and long term economic damage it will cause, yet still want it to go ahead. There's no point arguing. 

[joey_big_nose]

Good on the students taking the fight to the frontline.

It will be a very hard for the gun lobby and politicians to ignore them or shout them down.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/5164939/march-for-our-lives-florida-shooting

[Mike E]

6 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

Good on the students taking the fight to the frontline.

It will be a very hard for the gun lobby and politicians to ignore them or shout them down.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/5164939/march-for-our-lives-florida-shooting

Quite literally:

'What you gunna do? Shoot us?'

Good on them taking a stand. A video circulated earlier of a gun nut sawing his guns up as enough is enough. Hope more follow.

[Baz]

9 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

Good on the students taking the fight to the frontline.

It will be a very hard for the gun lobby and politicians to ignore them or shout them down.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/5164939/march-for-our-lives-florida-shooting

The NRA will try and do exactly that, theyll rely on the media moving on. 

[philipl]

This Tweet:

The same people that said 13 and 14 year olds were perfectly mature enough to date Roy Moore are now saying 17 and 18 year olds are too immature to have opinions on gun control. 

[JacknOry]

8 hours ago, philipl said:

This Tweet:

The same people that said 13 and 14 year olds were perfectly mature enough to date Roy Moore are now saying 17 and 18 year olds are too immature to have opinions on gun control. 

Thanks for that - didnt need my glasses

[Baz]

10 hours ago, philipl said:

This Tweet:

The same people that said 13 and 14 year olds were perfectly mature enough to date Roy Moore are now saying 17 and 18 year olds are too immature to have opinions on gun control. 

In Minnesota you can legally own a rifle at the age of 14, vote at 18, and drink at 21. 

 

[K-Hod]

Saw a very sobering tweet shared by one of BRFCS's own on Facebook.

'Right now there are Republicans in America who received money from the NRA, accusing children who survived a massacre of being paid to speak out on guns'.

Absolutely shameless and crazy.

[Paul]

This man is quite unbelievable. 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/22/nra-wayne-lapierre-gun-control-cpac-speech-2018

According to Wayne LaPierre Americans need to be on guard against “so called European socialists.” He also refers to “Evil walking among us” - between them he and Trump have adequately demonstrated that today. 

[Norbert Rassragr]

Yeah, so let's give the 'evil among us' free access to enough firepower to start a war with Holland..................The NRA do not represent those who may buy a hand gun to keep at home just so they might be better protected if a violent thief is on the loose. They represent the lunatics that walk into the schools and kill people, the swivel eyed lunatics who think every traffic warden/civil servant/non baseball fan is a secret agent spying on them, and will send them to a gulag to turn them into gay Muslims. Islamic terrorists don't need to fly another plane into a building, Americans are doing their work for them.

[Audax]

Mass Shooting Deaths in the USA as a percentage of total shooting deaths, can one guess it? This website details the statistics.

http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/

So far, 2018:

Mass Shooting Deaths: 34

Total Shooting Deaths:  2112

So, these "school shootings" and other shootings of this sort are only 1.6% of total shootings. I know, school shootings or even "theatre shootings", that fellow shot up a theatre in Aurora Colorado, so all mass shootings actually is a small number.

Liberal democratically controlled cities like Chicago, New Orleans, Baltimore, there they have many more deaths by gun shootings. So, why aren't these noticed as much? Skin colour? They aren't white kids? Ask yourself. Oh, yeah, NRA's fault I suppose.  I guess, then one can break it down into handguns, etc.

FBI and Law Enforcement, as they often do,  knew about this young man.