Gun crime

[anna]

Right from the outset I would just like to say that I my very deepest thoughts are with the families and friends of those that have lost their lives today in Newton and hope that they in time are able to find some sort of peace to continue their broken lives.

I know that I risk opening up a can of worms, but I think its important to at least have open discussions when it comes to this kind of horrific crime to ensure that everyone has done their part to ensure it doesn't happen again.

There seems to be a general rolling of eyes and outcry when people outside the US criticise their "right to bear arms". I'm in the dark a little as to why they are so defensive of this right, nor that they seem to feel that they are in any way more protected or secure carrying arms against others that may have them.

To me the laws in the US regarding guns seem quite liberal, with anyone who wishes to purchase them walking into a shopping mall where you might buy your children's toys, and buying a weapon with bullets and the next day use it on your neighbour.

I understand that the link between these arguments and today's events may be tentative, indeed I don't know the details I dare say not many people do just yet, and it may indeed be that the person who committed this hideous atrocity may not have purchased this weapon at all and may have been obtained outside the law.

However it raises the same issue as to why it is a continued freedom, when it is clear that there is a much higher gun crime rate in the US when compared to Europe where it is prohibited to own such weapons.

The counter argument has always been that any person who is determined to cause such violence, will do so, and always find a way. I am not so naive as to dispute this notion either. Surely it is clear that without the immediate availability of such a weapon as a gun, it becomes something more of a hindrance for a deranged person to achieve their ultimate goal. Nor do I see this as a reason for the general public to carry arms "to protect themselves". This very idea seems without a logical rational behind it. If you are protecting yourself with a gun firstly it is assumed that you carry a weapon with you at all times, and that when someone attacks you, they miss, or you have drawn your weapon first as you have assumed them to be attackers (Im pretty sure that real life never runs the way it does in western films!).

In China today a school was attacked and 8 children were killed and 5 others wounded, I´m almost positive had the attacker had in his possession a gun that number would have been significantly higher.

Yes the crime would still happen irrespective of weapon, but surely allowing a product with one single purpose of taking lives to be widely available to the general public is nothing short of stupid. I know we often talk about our nanny state, but this surely isn't something that anyone should be allowed to chose?

[Kenzie]

I see comments pop up on Facebook a lot after things like this happen. Usually run along the lines of "when are they going to ban the guns". I doubt it will ever happen as who would re-elect a president who banned guns? All they would need to do is vote for the guy who would overturn it. Guns are so ingrained in the American culture I think there would be an uproar if someone said they can't own them. Like you say, if someone wants to commit a violent crime, they will find a way. There was a known criminal in the States recently who was gunned down by the police. The cop had his gun on him and screaming at him to get out of his truck. He got snagged in his seat belt and stumbled. The cop took this as non-complacence and gunned him down. It's a tough one. But guns don't kill people, people kill people. Maybe they need to tighten up how the guns are stored rather than banning them. I recon some people leave them in drawers and cupboards rather than locked gun cabinets where kids and undesirables can get hold of them.

[Fallout]

Firstly, they can't remove the right to bear arms because it'd be so unpopular it'd never pass. It'd be a campaign killer.

Secondly, US boarders (and the general countryside) are impossible to police thoroughly enough to prevent masses of illegal firearms entering the country. Making guns illegal would tip the balance in favour of criminals, or at least, this is the opinion of a large portion of the US. They believe that the knowledge that a home owner has a handgun or a shotgun prevents a huge amount of burglaries and various other crimes. It's not like the UK where illegal firearms are fairly hard to come by.

There are just too many guns there now and it's too ingrained in their culture to restrict them now. Making them illegal would just put them all in the hands of the criminals.

Guns make these horrific crimes a lot easier to commit, and perhaps removing them would prevent the legal gun owner who goes mental from commit these massacres. It'd probably also prevent a fair a lot of murders between (previously) non criminal, but in America, anyone who wants a gun could get one, legal or not, so mostly you'd be disarming the innocent.

There is something wrong with Americans though, if Michael Moore is to be believed. Just as many guns per person in Canada and places like Norway etc. but a tiny fraction of the gun crime.

Firstly, what keeps happening in these schools is horrific, I still can't fathom why they attack the young and innocent?

Secondly, you can't buy a gun in one day in America, it used to five days, so I assume it still is.

Thirdly, as I've said many times, considering how many people bare arms in America, the number of directly related deaths is proportionally low, sucks if you're one of the unlucky ones though.

I like guns, I like firing them, I like looking at them etc, I don't think it's fair I can't legally go to a gun range and fire guns, but due to knee jerk reactions after Dunblane, I can't.
It's punish the majority for the actions of the minority.

It's a problem in this country anyway, if it's an activity that people don't do themselves, they want it banned.

I get this in green laning for instance with ramblers, they want access everywhere and aren't prepared to share it with others, so want the lanes and byways closed to anyone but them.

Originally Posted by specialone

Firstly, what keeps happening in these schools is horrific, I still can't fathom why they attack the young and innocent?

Secondly, you can't buy a gun in one day in America, it used to five days, so I assume it still is.

Thirdly, as I've said many times, considering how many people bare arms in America, the number of directly related deaths is proportionally low, sucks if you're one of the unlucky ones though.

I like guns, I like firing them, I like looking at them etc, I don't think it's fair I can't legally go to a gun range and fire guns, but due to knee jerk reactions after Dunblane, I can't.
It's punish the majority for the actions of the minority.

It's a problem in this country anyway, if it's an activity that people don't do themselves, they want it banned.

I get this in green laning for instance with ramblers, they want access everywhere and aren't prepared to share it with others, so want the lanes and byways closed to anyone but them.

I believe in most US states there is only a "wait" on handguns, I believe rifle and shotguns can be taken home immediately.

As a firearm owned I am well aware of our daft gun laws, although the main reason for the knee jerk bans come from the public (through media mind control). Friends have often said to me "I can't believe you have a gun in the house and they are dangerous", interestingly in 4 months neither of my shotguns have managed to escape from their safe, loaded themselves and gone on a killing spree..........

Originally Posted by grimey121uk

I believe in most US states there is only a "wait" on handguns, I believe rifle and shotguns can be taken home immediately.

As a firearm owned I am well aware of our daft gun laws, although the main reason for the knee jerk bans come from the public (through media mind control). Friends have often said to me "I can't believe you have a gun in the house and they are dangerous", interestingly in 4 months neither of my shotguns have managed to escape from their safe, loaded themselves and gone on a killing spree..........

I agree mate and you're right about the rifles etc, it's about concealment, more likely to do something if you can conceal a weapon.

I'm planning on getting a shotgun license next year, not for hunting, want to get into clays.

Originally Posted by specialone

I agree mate and you're right about the rifles etc, it's about concealment, more likely to do something if you can conceal a weapon.

I'm planning on getting a shotgun license next year, not for hunting, want to get into clays.

Just remember its not a license, as a UK citizen your are automatically allowed to own as many shotguns as you can store as well as unlimited ammunition without any reason, as long as your not a danger to the public (mentally ill or a criminal). Its a shotgun certificate which is just a way to ensure you are not a wrong'en.
I'm in the process of a firearms certificate at the moment, licensing guy is coming out on Wednesday.

I got my first shotgun back in September, the Mrs has always been against the idea of guns yet she came out with me clay shooting on my first trip out, a week later her SGC arrived in the post. Months on she is a good shot although not as good as me

A few weeks ago she bought me another shotgun and loves it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWrwHi-qtmI

[MisterTommyH]

First of all - I like guns. I got marksmen awards etc when I was younger and me and a mate are looking into joining a club up here for clay pigeon shooting.... but the fact is that guns are far too widely available in the USA.

Their constitution only gives them the right to bear arms if you miss out the next part of the sentence - something which specific pressure groups are very good at doing and using it to whip up people who they preach to. They actually have a 'right to bear arms as part of a well regulated militia'. In other words as part of an institution which controls the use, circulation etc. This was from the past where there was not widespread law enforcement. Even if you ignore the fact that this law enforcement is now there - the wording is not currently enforced as there is nothing well regulated about it.

I agree that someone who is looking to cause harm will find a way, but why make it easy for them? Yes, a knife can also kill, but it is a close range tool and there is a higher chance of being overwhelmed, plus it can be run away from (a gun cannot). Yes a bomb can kill en masse, but it takes a certain skill to make and people without that skill/knowledge are likely to get caught searching for how to make it, or buying the materials. A gun is made to kill without much skill (at the ranges these things happen) and quickly.

For the sport argument - there is a bit of logic to it. I could not argue with someone who put the argument that guns could be used for marksmanship at a range, kept on a range and never allowed to leave (i.e. well regulated). But that is not what happens in America. There is little to no control, they can be carried, hidden, and are widely available - No one is going to use a gun for sport at a mall or in a school - therefore the argument is invalid with regards to gun control not banning. It's never going to happen, but personally I would give up mine, yours and everyone elses right to have a gun, if it meant we didn't get these events around the world.

Just as an aside - does anyone like archery? A legal sport in this country and america. Would you expect to be allowed to walk down the street with a bow and arrow and not get arrested? Either here or in the states.

Finally, the defense argument is a complete distraction. A gun is an offensive weapon, not a defensive one. As with the OP it requires the defender to be competent and get the shot in first, or the offender to miss. I would be fairly confident that the statistics re guns in america would be similar to the statistics re knives in this country - where it is often the defenders own knife that is taken off them and used against them.

[Dave-the-rave]

"The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." -- Henry St. George Tucker, in Blackstone'ss 1768 Commentaries on the Laws of England




"Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right to bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used and that definite rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of the citizen to bear arms is just one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible." -- Hubert Horatio Humphrey, 1960



"I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people ... To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." -- George Mason (who opposed ratification oof the Constitution without the Bill of Rights)



"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed" -- Noah Webster


"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right – a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world." -- Abraham Lincoln, 1848


"[A]ll power is inherent in the people ... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed," -- Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Cartwright, 1824


“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed...” -- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, 1787



This way of thinking about democracy may be somewhat alien in Britain but not in the USA.

Banning guns will achieve nothing, it will penalise the law abiding citizen and do nothing to stop criminal use, as it hasn't over here.
If you know the right people to ask, it's not hard to get one over here tbh.


Bombs are illegal, we still have had enough people killed by them, so banning does not work.