US Gun Control

[Mac 60]

I read somewhere that the Uk is safer now to live in than ever before in its history. We,ve had less wars, less murders,and less theft than at any other time. I suppose it just dosent feel that way if your unlucky enough to be one of the victims of crime.

[chico]

I can't argue with a lot of what Beemer Dood has said, but the only conclusion of this thread he's totally skipped over, is the mindset/psyche issues.

Normal law abiding American families are fearful and paranoid enough to feel the need to keep a loaded gun near the bed.

It may well be the best form of defence, but here in Europe it's just not necessary.

Come live over here Beemer Dood, you'll sleep better, you'll get more holidays, less working hours, and more money. And you can drive into almost any neighbourhood you want without having to worry about getting shot.

yeah, when I got into bed last night I realised i'd left my back door unlocked, so I locked it when I left for work this morning.....

[skipper]

I read somewhere that the Uk is safer now to live in than ever before in its history. We,ve had less wars, less murders,and less theft than at any other time. I suppose it just dosent feel that way if your unlucky enough to be one of the victims of crime.

Thats only because no one bothers to report crime as the police don't want to turn up anymore.

[Nigel]

Fact is, i know that you don't want to be confused by them, is that the US, oh and let's not forget a coalition of about 60 other nations, went to war over a belief that a nation had weapons of mass destruction and had threatened to use them against the rest of the world to further their religious jihad.

Funny that I thought "we" went to war because of oil :whistle: oh sorry they did find the WMD`s :whistle:

[AndyB]

Fact is, i know that you don't want to be confused by them, is that the US, oh and let's not forget a coalition of about 60 other nations, went to war over a belief that a nation had weapons of mass destruction and had threatened to use them against the rest of the world to further their religious jihad.

Funny that I thought "we" went to war because of oil :whistle: oh sorry they did find the WMD`s :whistle:

You haven't read the script have you?

If you want the alternative view on the US overseas policy try watching Team America (thumbs)

[Beemer Dood]

Took about 1 millisecond to realise you, Mr Dood, are an American.

Your powers of observations are truly astounding! LOL.

You really are wasting your time attempting to justify your country's outdated laws regarding weapons.

I'm not trying to "justify" anything. I don't need to justify what is a basic human right, self defense. The fact that you have allowed your legislators to take away that right is quite telling. Centuries of you folks being subjects, rather than citizens has taken its toll. And our laws are hardly "outdated." There are new ones coming down the pike regularly.

Arming idiots really isn't a good or virtuous policy, it's just dumb.

The problem is that here, as anywhere in the world, it's all but impossible to weed out the "idiots."

[Beemer Dood]

Earlier I wrote,

There's quite a bit of evidence to show that these "nutters" purposefully look for these GFZ's to commit their acts of violence. One of them, who was captured alive, has even admitted that fact. With others, there's proof that they drove to an area they were looking to shoot up, saw that armed guards were present, and kept 'shopping' until they found one that was free of such guards.

Hmmm, I still don't buy this.

That's interesting, but your opinion is simply wrong. The latest FACT on this is the shooter from the theater in Aurora. There were about seven theaters in his neighborhood that were showing the Batman movie. He drove to the one that was FARTHEST from his home. ALL of the other theaters allowed their patrons to carry their legally licensed firearms. The ONLY ONE THAT DID NOT, was the one that he chose. That was a GFZ! Except for the criminal's gun, that is.

SECOND, as if this was only a coincidence, he told this to the detectives who were questioning him.

A few years ago we had a horrific incident in the UK at a Primary School caused by a Nutter with a gun that led to the tightening of Gun laws UK wide. Although the solution may be questionable in it's effectiveness to avoid a repeat of some such incident

Thanks for making my point. The laws that were passed there affected ONLY honest people. They turned in their guns, eliminating their ability to defend themselves. But the crooks and the nutters didn't turn in their guns. I find it difficult to accept that reasonably intelligent people can't see the fallacy in this. It has NOT been effective in "avoiding a repeat" of the incident.

again I really doubt the solution would have been to send 7 year-olds off to school with a Gun just in-case this may happen again, or even to encourage Miss Jean Brodie to arm herself with a 9mm in her handbag ditto the headmaster, caretaker et-al becausae it's their right to defend theirself.

Please try to stick to reality, OK? NO ONE has advocated arming 7 year olds so that's nothing but a straw man argument, a logical fallacy. There are many retired police officers who would be willing to work for minimum wage to keep children safe. They've had extensive training with firearms during their careers. There are also many teachers, instructors and administrators who already have their CCW's (licenses to 'carry a concealed weapon.' But the law that establishes schools as GFZ's prevents them from carrying there. Take a look at my previous published link, (here it is again, http://controversialtimes.com/issues/co ... source=GSL ) and you you'll see that the very first rescuer was an assistant principal who "retrieve[d] his gun ... from his truck." The next rescuer owned the banquet hall where a school function was being held. The next two rescuers were law enforcement who had to retrieve their guns from their cars before taking action at their law school. In another story the rescuer was the School Resource Officer. There's no shortage of people who are trained and willing to take on those duties here.

I would never feel comfortable with my child at a school where this policy was in place simply because the Nutter in question may just be a disgruntled teacher or pupil who decided to use his/her right to bear arms against my child

Laughable really. Those who are licensed to carry have to undergo background checks that include their legal AND their mental history. Of course anyone can go off at anytime but the chances of your fears coming true for someone in this position, are much smaller than for it to be some random person who has not gone through these screenings.

which given such a policy based on the laws of probability would be the most likely case.

You're simply wrong, given the "very laws of probability" that you cite. Given a random group of people, those who have passed such a screening who 'go off' will be far less than those who have not.

The simple solution would be to ban the GUN in society in the first place,

Even more laughable than your last proposition. The best estimates are that there are about 875,000,000 firearms in the world right now. Even if ALL guns were to be banned EVERYWHERE, only the honest people would turn them in. NONE of those in the hands of criminals would be turned in, leaving the entire population at their mercy. When you come into possession of that magic wand that will eliminate ALL guns EVERYWHERE, please get back to us.

and from there I prefer my child to take his/her chances.

The chances of anyone's child being involved in one of these incidents is statistically very low. But if there was someone armed at the school to stop the killers, it would be even lower. The sooner these people are stopped during such incidents, the fewer people they can kill.

I honestly believe lifting the GFZ would solve nothing, I cannot see how it would reduce risk at all.

You are of course to hold any opinion that you like. The validity of such an opinion is obviously not present. The ONLY thing that stops these killer is someone with a gun. If that person is present on the campus, he can take action much faster than someone who has to drive there from miles away.

[Beemer Dood]

Yeah, the reality that the murder rate in your gun crazed country is 5 X higher than countries with sensible gun laws...go ahead stick your own head in the sand,...

If someone only looks at the surface statistics on this, as you've just done, they are completely ignorant of quite a lot. You might take a look here.

If you examine statistics from population centers over 250,000, where most violent crimes occur, you discover that in the UK (just for England and Wales) the rate of violent crime is about 3.5 times the rate for the US. You can argue this all you like but it's based on statistics from the FBI in the US and the Home Office in the UK. The US has about 185 areas where the population is over 250,000. The UK has only 32 such areas. The US has about six times more of these population centers than does the UK. The rate of violent crime in the US has dropped about 50% in the last 20 years. The biggest reason for the high numbers was probably 'the cocaine turf wars' in the 1990's where gangs were growing and criminals were mainly killing each other. The murder rate in the US in these areas is only minutely bigger than the same figures for the UK. Your comparison is the typical one that we see. It 'conveniently' overlooks many facts that show the reality.

you've had 200 years of unfettered gun ownership

I have no idea where such nonsense originates. As I stated earlier, there are well over 20,000 gun laws here. They don't seem to have done much good.

and so far have failed to make your country as safe as many 3rd world countries.......

A classic example of GIGO. Start out with bad information (your reference to "unfettered gun ownership") and you end up with an absurd conclusion.

[Beemer Dood]

The high number of multiple shootings in public places (mass executions?) simply goes to prove that you can't live a normal life in an abnormal society.

To clarify that; you can't even send your kids to school and be sure a nutter won't run in and STAB, HIT WITH A HAMMER, BEAT TO DEATH WITH FISTS, a number of them because society allows people to roam the streets with KNIVES, HAMMERS, and HANDS.

FIFY. You're welcome.

BTW the number of mass shootings, defined by the FBI as "shooting incidents where more than 4 people are killed (not including the shooter)" in the US is lower today than it was in years past. Here, the highest rate of these incidents was in 1929, some 86 years ago.

When you adjust for population size, the US falls from #1 in mass shootings to #6. The UK is only three behind, rated at #10. The top five nations all have gun regulation that is described as "restrictive." These researchers call the US regulations "permissive."
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/06/348197- ... him-wrong/

[Beemer Dood]

or you could say that some folks have developed their society to the point whereby they don't need to be armed to live in safety

Such a utopian society is a pipe dream. It does not exist and probably never will. It may be your perception that you are "liv[ing] in safety," but the fact is that at anytime, in anyplace, you can be killed by someone who illegally has a gun. So can I, of course. But since the chances of me being among the first ones to be shot in a mass shooting situation are very small, (even smaller than it happening to me in the first place) and I because carry a gun, I may have the opportunity to stop the shooter from harming me, my family, or those around us. If it's very early in the situation and the police have not had the time to arrive, I'm going hunting, and if I find the shooter, I'll do my best to stop him.

don't drag a situation down to make yours look normal

I've done nothing of the kind.

you are no freer than anyone else by having guns

I made no such claim. I WILL SAY that I am safer. I am here today ONLY because I was carrying a gun when I was violently assaulted.

the downside to your constitutional right is that you have never experienced life without guns,

Neither have you. Neither has ANYONE on the planet who has lived after the invention of guns.

and therefore have to assume/believe that any country that has worked to be gun free

There is no such place. If you disagree, please give us an example of a country that is as you claim, "gun free."

is "nannied" you can't see that your situation is not the "a priori" one.

Again, no country is "gun free." Pretending that you are, is well, just a pretense.

and we have also "kicked the butts" of many would be oppressors

Yes, you have. But not recently. We're talking about today, not 200 years ago.

but then consciously decided afterwards that we can trust our armed forces to do the defending

I seem to recall a couple of Muslims hacking one of your soldiers in the streets, not too long ago. He couldn't even defend himself.

no need for guns in our everyday life, (while being ready to arm if we had to)because we can decide for ourselves when we feel secure.

What's the saying about "those who do not understand history being doomed to repeat it. At the start of both world wars, the US had to supply guns to your country AND train your soldiers to use them. You had neither guns nor skills. Of course those were the wars to end all wars, right?

however, to be fair, (and to say to you that i'm not anti US) relative to your constitution and normal level of guns available, I don't think you have a gun problem, millions of your citizens are fine with guns, i'd have no more fear of the "gun problem" in the US if I visited than I would of rattlesnakes or bears, if you want to own guns its up to you.......

That's quite a reasonable statement. Thanks. BTW when I go into 'bear country,' I carry an appropriate gun.

but you do seem to have a massacre problem,

We do not do a good job of handling our mentally ill. But the answer is not disarming the honest people.

and that's the difference

The fact is that no place in the world is free from massacres. Here it's mostly the mentally ill. But elsewhere it's done in the name of jihad, or some other form of nationalism.

surely its not beyond the pro gun supporters to come up with some sort of arrangement/compromise to stop unstable people getting guns, its in their interests, seems to me arming everyone just takes things down to the lowest common denominator

There are several misconceptions there. NOT "everyone" is armed. Only those who chose to be so and then, only after passing background checks, which include mental health concerns.

Tell you what, you propose here some realistic legislation, keeping in mind that a basic bit of our laws demands the availability of guns, that would prevent the last mass shooting we had here. None of our legislators has been able to do so. Neither, in fact have yours. Laws that demand that guns be kept at shooting clubs, that require jumping through hoops before possession is legally allowed simply do not stop criminals. This is such a basic fact, that it's amazing that some won't see it.

strangely enough, in one of our rare massacres, the man involved was a licensed gun holder.....

Not "strange" at all. Anyone can snap.

its not easy building a free society, we've been trying for a couple of thousand years....not there yet, but as you say, a few hundred years ago the US had a blank canvas...so, we'll wait and see...

ANOTHER excellent statement. Remember that our blank slate was focused on what we perceived as oppression and many of its provisions were aimed directly at that issue. I don't think this issue will ever go away. But as long as I'm capable, I'll be carrying a gun. It's saved my life once already.