FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Guns dont kill, people do.

Jump to newest
 

By *hagTonight OP   Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

With the latest mass murder in the usa this month, it happens everyday, but not all get reported, is it time for a tigher gun law? There is a gun for every person there, you can argue that a sane person dont reach for a gun, what is your view?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ablo minibar123Woman
over a year ago

.

My view is 18 year olds shouldn't be sold assault rifles. Guns should be a lot harder to get hold of and more checks should be done beforehand.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

No body needs a gun in today's society its just a tool for evil!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I thought it was guns don’t kill people, rappers do?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

Guns don't kill people, but people with knives tend to have a lower body count.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oodmessMan
over a year ago

yumsville

I think it was Australia that banned guns after a mass shooting a few decades ago. Since then there's been no (or very few) gun related crime.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"With the latest mass murder in the usa this month, it happens everyday, but not all get reported, is it time for a tigher gun law? There is a gun for every person there, you can argue that a sane person dont reach for a gun, what is your view?"

I will openly admit, I learned something new today. I was under the impression, that in the US, gun laws were "tight", and as was pointed out to me that this is clearly not the case, state by state.

As to a solution? I am unsure, certainly ensure that all persons purchasing a firearm be thoroughly checked out for starters. Further than this, I've no idea.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"I think it was Australia that banned guns after a mass shooting a few decades ago. Since then there's been no (or very few) gun related crime. "

The Port Arthur massacre.

Not entirely banned and things have since been relaxed, but yes, the crime statistics speak for themselves.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Its been time for about 30 years. Lobbyists play way way too much part in politics, particularly true over the pond. Added to how they manage poverty, health care, prescription drugs, and their news it always has been a perfect storm for mass shootings.

Anyone who has been to America will tell you how horrifying the pharmaceutical TV commercials are, the disclaimers at the end are chilling.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

People with guns kill people and are only stopped by other people with guns.

People with knives are stopped by people with chairs, sticks, brollies, even narwal tusks. I know which i'd rather be facing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *r SensualMan
over a year ago

London


"I thought it was guns don’t kill people, rappers do? "

Did you see it in a documentary on BBC Two?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I thought it was guns don’t kill people, rappers do?

Did you see it in a documentary on BBC Two? "

Are we both talking about Goldy Looking Chain? If so no, if we aren’t then also no

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irthandgirthMan
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

America has been red-pilled for so long that more guns is the answer that now more guns is the answer. There are too many guns in circulation, 3D printing is now a thing, and it is so ingrained in their national psyche that you won't get them to shift. They will point at their second amendment and scream "Muh Freeeedum"

Truly dystopian.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *r SensualMan
over a year ago

London


"I thought it was guns don’t kill people, rappers do?

Did you see it in a documentary on BBC Two?

Are we both talking about Goldy Looking Chain? If so no, if we aren’t then also no "

I’m talking about Goldy Looking Chain, dunno if you are though? Only you can answer that

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *weetCruellaWoman
over a year ago

somewhere sweet and sour

Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *amantha TSWoman
over a year ago

Swindon


"People with guns kill people and are only stopped by other people with guns."

Unfortunately this is the primary defence of why Americans won't give up their right to bear arms. I can almost guarantee sales of pistols have gone up as a result of this atrocity as people "protect themselves".

Guns can be defeated by non-lethal action if used correctly. Tasers, CS sprays, ruber bullets, sound, hell there's even technology out there that fires targeted microwaves to incapacitate a target. More education and research into these areas could be a way forward, but there's just no appetite for it as the gun market is just too lucrative.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ack again100Man
over a year ago

Tamworth

Its just crazy that in America you cannot buy a can of beer until you are 21, yet at 18 you can buy multiple assault rifles

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rispyDuckMan
over a year ago

Chinese Takeaway near you

I don't think the laws will change until, a shooting happens that differently affects the people in powers close families

E.g school shooter kills the president/ high politicians grandkids or kids. It has to hit close to home for them to take action. Otherwise its just another statistic if it's someone else right

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"People with guns kill people and are only stopped by other people with guns.

Unfortunately this is the primary defence of why Americans won't give up their right to bear arms. I can almost guarantee sales of pistols have gone up as a result of this atrocity as people "protect themselves".

Guns can be defeated by non-lethal action if used correctly. Tasers, CS sprays, ruber bullets, sound, hell there's even technology out there that fires targeted microwaves to incapacitate a target. More education and research into these areas could be a way forward, but there's just no appetite for it as the gun market is just too lucrative."

The effective range of a taser is 10ft, the range of an assault rifle is in excess of a thousand, i think you can see the problem here. The measures you mention are only effective against knives.

The only answer is to stop people owning guns in the first place, the we wouldn't need other people with guns.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ean counterMan
over a year ago

Market Harborough / Kettering


"Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun. "

Over here getting a shotgun license is hard work whereas getting a firearms license (for rifles/pistols) is as near as dammit impossible. You need a good reason to justify owning a firearm and this reason is checked on a regular basis. The police want a record of what ammunition you've bought, where you've shot the missing bullets and if you've not shot enough they again ask you to justify why you need a firearm! Lots of people will simply fire bullets in to the ground to get around these questions. In America I think the main justification is "do you have a head?" Yes, ok here's a sub-machine gun and off you go! Bloody crazy !!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aysOfOurLivesCouple
over a year ago

Essex


"I was under the impression, that in the US, gun laws were "tight", and as was pointed out to me that this is clearly not the case, state by state."

In 44 states, it is easier to buy a large capacity semi-automatic assault rifle than bottle of beer

*but not a hand gun

You can buy a AR-15 at 18 but not buy alcohol until 21.

FYI Handguns are 21 too.

TFU!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

When I hear the oft trotted out bs that is the thread title (no dig at the op) it boils my piss..

A republican senator on R4 this morning was hiding behind the fact that elementary schools do not have armed guards, and that this latest slaughter of innocence might have been stopped if the there was greater surveillance of social media..

It's too tribal to be resolved, the political entrenchment and the lobbying of the gun industry and money that the NRA have distort any pragmatism..

Listening to the gut wrenching sobs of one of the parents at the school, truly harrowing..

Sadly won't be the last..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I was under the impression, that in the US, gun laws were "tight", and as was pointed out to me that this is clearly not the case, state by state.

In 44 states, it is easier to buy a large capacity semi-automatic assault rifle than bottle of beer

*but not a hand gun

You can buy a AR-15 at 18 but not buy alcohol until 21.

FYI Handguns are 21 too.

TFU!!

"

Yes, from what I've read into after being informed on another post, it seems shocking how easy it is to legally obtain a firearm, certainly compared to here in UK.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irthandgirthMan
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster


"When I hear the oft trotted out bs that is the thread title (no dig at the op) it boils my piss..

A republican senator on R4 this morning was hiding behind the fact that elementary schools do not have armed guards, and that this latest slaughter of innocence might have been stopped if the there was greater surveillance of social media..

It's too tribal to be resolved, the political entrenchment and the lobbying of the gun industry and money that the NRA have distort any pragmatism..

Listening to the gut wrenching sobs of one of the parents at the school, truly harrowing..

Sadly won't be the last.."

These were the same people that said wearing masks in schools was against their human right. They want to turn their schools into max prisons.

Fucking insane.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

If guns weren't available people wouldn't be able to kill with a gun.and more chance to restrain a person

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oodmessMan
over a year ago

yumsville


"I think it was Australia that banned guns after a mass shooting a few decades ago. Since then there's been no (or very few) gun related crime.

The Port Arthur massacre.

Not entirely banned and things have since been relaxed, but yes, the crime statistics speak for themselves."

You'd have thought Sandyhook would have been a turning point or the Las Vegas shooting... Maybe this will

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *partharmonyCouple
over a year ago

Ruislip

It seems pretty obvious to me that guns need restrictions. Surveys show that the majority of Americans agree.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) bankroll the Republican party to a significant extent, and they want to sell guns. Therefore the Republicans will always block any attempt at gun control. They care more about money and power than the lives of Americans.

These are the same people who say they are "pro-life". I find it unbelievable that so many people vote for them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I thought it was guns don’t kill people, rappers do?

Did you see it in a documentary on BBC Two?

Are we both talking about Goldy Looking Chain? If so no, if we aren’t then also no

I’m talking about Goldy Looking Chain, dunno if you are though? Only you can answer that "

I was but also wasn’t sure if anyone got the reference

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I thought it was guns don’t kill people, rappers do?

Did you see it in a documentary on BBC Two?

Are we both talking about Goldy Looking Chain? If so no, if we aren’t then also no

I’m talking about Goldy Looking Chain, dunno if you are though? Only you can answer that

I was but also wasn’t sure if anyone got the reference "

Turn the rap music off and step away from the stereo..

https://youtu.be/ICG0MuzEYzw

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *acavityMan
over a year ago

Redditch


"When I hear the oft trotted out bs that is the thread title (no dig at the op) it boils my piss..

A republican senator on R4 this morning was hiding behind the fact that elementary schools do not have armed guards, and that this latest slaughter of innocence might have been stopped if the there was greater surveillance of social media..

It's too tribal to be resolved, the political entrenchment and the lobbying of the gun industry and money that the NRA have distort any pragmatism..

Listening to the gut wrenching sobs of one of the parents at the school, truly harrowing..

Sadly won't be the last.."

But there was an armed guard and police saw the shooter walking in...

I'm not an American but the second amendment calls for "a well regulated militia" so it seems reasonable to make people apply for a gun license, like a driving license, with training and a test, before letting people have guns.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lhr1061Man
over a year ago

Warwickshire

People with access to guns kill people

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"When I hear the oft trotted out bs that is the thread title (no dig at the op) it boils my piss..

A republican senator on R4 this morning was hiding behind the fact that elementary schools do not have armed guards, and that this latest slaughter of innocence might have been stopped if the there was greater surveillance of social media..

It's too tribal to be resolved, the political entrenchment and the lobbying of the gun industry and money that the NRA have distort any pragmatism..

Listening to the gut wrenching sobs of one of the parents at the school, truly harrowing..

Sadly won't be the last..

But there was an armed guard and police saw the shooter walking in...

I'm not an American but the second amendment calls for "a well regulated militia" so it seems reasonable to make people apply for a gun license, like a driving license, with training and a test, before letting people have guns."

But Merica......

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The phrase is true but a human as proven doesnt need a gun to kill people so it kind of fucks up the argument if that kid went in the school bare fisted he may have been lucky to kill 1 without being stopped but there too dumb to see that

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"I think it was Australia that banned guns after a mass shooting a few decades ago. Since then there's been no (or very few) gun related crime.

The Port Arthur massacre.

Not entirely banned and things have since been relaxed, but yes, the crime statistics speak for themselves.

You'd have thought Sandyhook would have been a turning point or the Las Vegas shooting... Maybe this will"

I fear things will have to get much, much worse, before they get better.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"When I hear the oft trotted out bs that is the thread title (no dig at the op) it boils my piss..

A republican senator on R4 this morning was hiding behind the fact that elementary schools do not have armed guards, and that this latest slaughter of innocence might have been stopped if the there was greater surveillance of social media..

It's too tribal to be resolved, the political entrenchment and the lobbying of the gun industry and money that the NRA have distort any pragmatism..

Listening to the gut wrenching sobs of one of the parents at the school, truly harrowing..

Sadly won't be the last..

But there was an armed guard and police saw the shooter walking in...

I'm not an American but the second amendment calls for "a well regulated militia" so it seems reasonable to make people apply for a gun license, like a driving license, with training and a test, before letting people have guns."

He shot the officer, other officers exchanged fire with him before he entered the school and no doubt the decision's and actions taken will be looked into..

But an 18 year old should not be able on that very birthday be able to walk out of a gun store with 2 AR-15 assault rifles plus the types of magazines that he was able to..

That's the crux of the matter..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ools and the brainCouple
over a year ago

couple, us we him her.

My understanding is that the law is an amendment to the original bill.

Soooo surely if it's been ammended once it can be changed again.

Some small changes would make the world of difference.

A work colleague was telling me about his holiday to Florida a few years ago. His brother lives over there yeah they were standing in a queue you waiting for something and someone pushed in my work colleague I was about to remonstrate with the person when is brother informed him don't!!!

Apparently in the state of Florida even if someone feel slightly threatened they have the right to shoot you if they feel have justification, apparently his brother said people shoot you you even if you look at the wrong way.

I'm not sure how accurate this is but...

Fuck that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach


"I'm not an American but the second amendment calls for "a well regulated militia" so it seems reasonable to make people apply for a gun license..."

It comes from their history. The country successfully rebelled against British rule some time ago, and did it by way of the people standing up to the authorities.

That mindset is still part of America and a sizeable proportion of the populace still believe that the government is out to get them. Those people feel that the 2nd amendment guarantees their right to hold arms to protect themselves from the government. They see themselves as the "well regulated militia", who hold their weapons to ensure "the security of a free State".

These people see even a small step like licensing, as the first step to taking away everyone's ability to protect themselves from an evil over-reaching government.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ack688Man
over a year ago

abruzzo Italy (and UK)


"I thought it was guns don’t kill people, rappers do? "

It’s ‘guns don’t kill people, it’s people who say “guns don’t kill people” that kill people, with guns’

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bi HaiveMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Cheeseville, Somerset


"I don't think the laws will change until, a shooting happens that differently affects the people in powers close families

E.g school shooter kills the president/ high politicians grandkids or kids. It has to hit close to home for them to take action. Otherwise its just another statistic if it's someone else right "

You mean like the Brady Bill that changed laws on handguns after the attempted assassination of Reagan?

Yep.

Might work.

But you can guarantee that if someone had taken a pot shot as Trump or any of his family, or Ted Cruz for example that the right wing and republicans would still scream for more guns as the solution........

A

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"I don't think the laws will change until, a shooting happens that differently affects the people in powers close families

E.g school shooter kills the president/ high politicians grandkids or kids. It has to hit close to home for them to take action. Otherwise its just another statistic if it's someone else right

You mean like the Brady Bill that changed laws on handguns after the attempted assassination of Reagan?

Yep.

Might work.

But you can guarantee that if someone had taken a pot shot as Trump or any of his family, or Ted Cruz for example that the right wing and republicans would still scream for more guns as the solution........

A"

Except at places like NRA meetings.

No guns allowed. For security. Yup yup

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Guns in America are too readily accessible. Tighter gun laws need to be brought into place or banned altogether 100%.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There is zero need for people to own guns. They all just get a hard on about a line written hundreds of years ago. They conveniently ignore the other ‘outdated’ parts.

But if they HAVE to own a gun, there is no reason to sell automatic weapons. Just limit it to handguns. And as Chris Rock once said, charge £10,000 per bullet. If you want one for protection you’ll fork out for some. But you’ll think twice before shooting someone if it costs that much

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"There is zero need for people to own guns. They all just get a hard on about a line written hundreds of years ago. They conveniently ignore the other ‘outdated’ parts.

But if they HAVE to own a gun, there is no reason to sell automatic weapons. Just limit it to handguns. And as Chris Rock once said, charge £10,000 per bullet. If you want one for protection you’ll fork out for some. But you’ll think twice before shooting someone if it costs that much "

Farmers and hunters, where dangerous animals exist.

I'm as anti gun as anyone, but we should keep discussion nuanced

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *weetCruellaWoman
over a year ago

somewhere sweet and sour


"Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun.

Over here getting a shotgun license is hard work whereas getting a firearms license (for rifles/pistols) is as near as dammit impossible. You need a good reason to justify owning a firearm and this reason is checked on a regular basis. The police want a record of what ammunition you've bought, where you've shot the missing bullets and if you've not shot enough they again ask you to justify why you need a firearm! Lots of people will simply fire bullets in to the ground to get around these questions. In America I think the main justification is "do you have a head?" Yes, ok here's a sub-machine gun and off you go! Bloody crazy !! "

It is absolutely crazy. I have a friend who is a farmer and he had to answer a million questions on his rifle. He even had someone come out to inspect the locked metal cupboard, and that had to pass too. And questions about his usage and even where the keys would be kept.

Just boils my blood that poor innocent babies are the targets. Wtf is wrong with these people!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is zero need for people to own guns. They all just get a hard on about a line written hundreds of years ago. They conveniently ignore the other ‘outdated’ parts.

But if they HAVE to own a gun, there is no reason to sell automatic weapons. Just limit it to handguns. And as Chris Rock once said, charge £10,000 per bullet. If you want one for protection you’ll fork out for some. But you’ll think twice before shooting someone if it costs that much "

Agreed

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yeah I worded that badly. There are no reasons for MOST people to own a gun unless their job or situation expressly calls for it. But still even they don’t need a machine gun!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I thought it was guns don’t kill people, rappers do? "

You saw it on a documentary on BBC 2?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"Yeah I worded that badly. There are no reasons for MOST people to own a gun unless their job or situation expressly calls for it. But still even they don’t need a machine gun!"

Agreed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *igjonny090Man
over a year ago

blackpool and Manchester

I like the Chris rock way of dealing with gun crime, keep guns legal just make bullets ridiculously expensive ie 300k per bullet if nothing it will cut down on innocent by standers

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *tephTV67TV/TS
over a year ago

Cheshire

They suggest arming teachers as a ‘good guy with a gun’ philosophy. However when you look into it in more detail the issues arise.

1. You may ask the teacher to kill a current or former student. They’ll be psychological issues during and after that action. Teachers go in to the profession because they want to educate and have an impact on the younger generation. To kill someone they may have had a relationship with, would be difficult and also the hesitation before firing would put them at a greater risk.

2. Accidentally killing the wrong person. What if during the siege they accidentally shoot the wrong student, staff member or even police officer ? Manslaughter charges brought ?

Also rounds can go through walls so you may accidentally kill someone you can’t see.

Remember this would be a very scary situation and unless it’s something you’re used to, you will be more likely to act rashly than calmly.

3. Due to the above, you’d need to be insured. I imagine those costs would be astronomical.

4. Emergency responders. As a Teacher with a gun and possibly walking around the corridors, what stops the Police from thinking you’re the active shooter ?

5. Teachers shooting each other, as above nervous teacher walking or running down corridors sees someone with a gun.

6. Training obviously, how often, who pays for it, pays for the weapons, where to keep the weapon(s), student access (if the Teacher is incapacitated) ?

Those are from the top of my head over the ‘good guy with a gun’ or arm the Teacher argument. But republican supporters will continuously bring up stupid solutions to very complex realities if they brought them in.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aptain Caveman41Man
over a year ago

Home

If that yoke hadn't a gun no one would have died so guns kill

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"They suggest arming teachers as a ‘good guy with a gun’ philosophy. However when you look into it in more detail the issues arise.

1. You may ask the teacher to kill a current or former student. They’ll be psychological issues during and after that action. Teachers go in to the profession because they want to educate and have an impact on the younger generation. To kill someone they may have had a relationship with, would be difficult and also the hesitation before firing would put them at a greater risk.

2. Accidentally killing the wrong person. What if during the siege they accidentally shoot the wrong student, staff member or even police officer ? Manslaughter charges brought ?

Also rounds can go through walls so you may accidentally kill someone you can’t see.

Remember this would be a very scary situation and unless it’s something you’re used to, you will be more likely to act rashly than calmly.

3. Due to the above, you’d need to be insured. I imagine those costs would be astronomical.

4. Emergency responders. As a Teacher with a gun and possibly walking around the corridors, what stops the Police from thinking you’re the active shooter ?

5. Teachers shooting each other, as above nervous teacher walking or running down corridors sees someone with a gun.

6. Training obviously, how often, who pays for it, pays for the weapons, where to keep the weapon(s), student access (if the Teacher is incapacitated) ?

Those are from the top of my head over the ‘good guy with a gun’ or arm the Teacher argument. But republican supporters will continuously bring up stupid solutions to very complex realities if they brought them in. "

The trauma that American teachers must be dealing with, as a matter of course, must be phenomenal.

I was also struck in the reporting after January 6 - Congress members commented that it was the interns who were calmest and most able to take decisive, safe action in hiding and evacuating. The interns credited their school shooter training. Which is a good thing but also desperately sad.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rucker andyMan
over a year ago

Birmingham

It’s the person that uses a weapon be it a gun knife bottle baseball bat that consciously kills a human being !!

It takes thinking and effort to pull a trigger and aim

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"No body needs a gun in today's society its just a tool for evil! "

So, what are people meant to use against criminals? Let’s say that the US is the perfect case for far too many firearms, fair enough, but then look at the UK where the general public are almost entirely defenceless against criminals? There needs to be some sort of balance? Maybe somewhere in between?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *tephTV67TV/TS
over a year ago

Cheshire


"They suggest arming teachers as a ‘good guy with a gun’ philosophy. However when you look into it in more detail the issues arise.

1. You may ask the teacher to kill a current or former student. They’ll be psychological issues during and after that action. Teachers go in to the profession because they want to educate and have an impact on the younger generation. To kill someone they may have had a relationship with, would be difficult and also the hesitation before firing would put them at a greater risk.

2. Accidentally killing the wrong person. What if during the siege they accidentally shoot the wrong student, staff member or even police officer ? Manslaughter charges brought ?

Also rounds can go through walls so you may accidentally kill someone you can’t see.

Remember this would be a very scary situation and unless it’s something you’re used to, you will be more likely to act rashly than calmly.

3. Due to the above, you’d need to be insured. I imagine those costs would be astronomical.

4. Emergency responders. As a Teacher with a gun and possibly walking around the corridors, what stops the Police from thinking you’re the active shooter ?

5. Teachers shooting each other, as above nervous teacher walking or running down corridors sees someone with a gun.

6. Training obviously, how often, who pays for it, pays for the weapons, where to keep the weapon(s), student access (if the Teacher is incapacitated) ?

Those are from the top of my head over the ‘good guy with a gun’ or arm the Teacher argument. But republican supporters will continuously bring up stupid solutions to very complex realities if they brought them in.

The trauma that American teachers must be dealing with, as a matter of course, must be phenomenal.

I was also struck in the reporting after January 6 - Congress members commented that it was the interns who were calmest and most able to take decisive, safe action in hiding and evacuating. The interns credited their school shooter training. Which is a good thing but also desperately sad."

One guy on Fox News was suggesting retired Police or ex Military personal guarding schools. Older guys walking around armed and shouting out instructions who’s training could be years out of date.

But who pays for the insurance or compensation if they accidentally kill somebody ? And we know eventually they will.

Also one shooting a few years ago had an armed guard was at the School, the guy didn’t engage because of either cowardice or realised he didn’t have the correct weapon to take down the shooter. No guarantee that having armed personnel will help that much.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is zero need for people to own guns. They all just get a hard on about a line written hundreds of years ago. They conveniently ignore the other ‘outdated’ parts.

But if they HAVE to own a gun, there is no reason to sell automatic weapons. Just limit it to handguns. And as Chris Rock once said, charge £10,000 per bullet. If you want one for protection you’ll fork out for some. But you’ll think twice before shooting someone if it costs that much "

Handguns are the weapon used in these shootings the most. There are no automatic weapons on sale to the public (at least not legally).

The Chris Rock point is extremely valid though! A limit on ammunition allowed to be held at any one time would work far better and probably would be accepted more than any of the other measures which involve taking guns away or banning certain guns.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Yeah I worded that badly. There are no reasons for MOST people to own a gun unless their job or situation expressly calls for it. But still even they don’t need a machine gun!"

Nobody owns a legal machine gun, that doesn’t exist. The only people that do are people who didn’t purchase their gun from a shop.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Yeah I worded that badly. There are no reasons for MOST people to own a gun unless their job or situation expressly calls for it. But still even they don’t need a machine gun!

Nobody owns a legal machine gun, that doesn’t exist. The only people that do are people who didn’t purchase their gun from a shop."

They do, in the US you would need a federal licence and pay a tax stamp on each machine gun, so they are not common. One that can be legally sold and transfered to someone elses licence is a very very expensive thing.

Semi automatic clones are what you see most of the time in the states.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bi HaiveMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Cheeseville, Somerset


"No body needs a gun in today's society its just a tool for evil!

So, what are people meant to use against criminals? Let’s say that the US is the perfect case for far too many firearms, fair enough, but then look at the UK where the general public are almost entirely defenceless against criminals? There needs to be some sort of balance? Maybe somewhere in between? "

How many times have you been wandering around Yeovil or anywhere in Somerset and found yourself in a situation where you felt the need to be carrying a gun?

Because I suspect its as often as I have.

Never.

A

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ean counterMan
over a year ago

Market Harborough / Kettering


"No body needs a gun in today's society its just a tool for evil!

So, what are people meant to use against criminals? Let’s say that the US is the perfect case for far too many firearms, fair enough, but then look at the UK where the general public are almost entirely defenceless against criminals? There needs to be some sort of balance? Maybe somewhere in between?

How many times have you been wandering around Yeovil or anywhere in Somerset and found yourself in a situation where you felt the need to be carrying a gun?

Because I suspect its as often as I have.

Never.

A"

You want to try living in Bedford !!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I agree with you shag guns don’t kill people do that’s why I think the law has to change for people not to just walk in a shop & buy them like you’d buy a bag of sweets

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"No body needs a gun in today's society its just a tool for evil!

So, what are people meant to use against criminals? Let’s say that the US is the perfect case for far too many firearms, fair enough, but then look at the UK where the general public are almost entirely defenceless against criminals? There needs to be some sort of balance? Maybe somewhere in between?

How many times have you been wandering around Yeovil or anywhere in Somerset and found yourself in a situation where you felt the need to be carrying a gun?

Because I suspect its as often as I have.

Never.

A"

With the influx of county lines gangs around here, you’d actually be surprised. I’m not making the point that it necessarily has to be a gun, but as it stands if some little muppet comes at you with a knife (which is constantly an increasing likelihood) our self defence laws leave you to their mercy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ools and the brainCouple
over a year ago

couple, us we him her.

Isn't the answer more police visible on the streets walking the beat.

With better training for tactical response to any situation.

Btw I mean here not in USA.

When was the last time you saw a police walking the beat?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Isn't the answer more police visible on the streets walking the beat.

With better training for tactical response to any situation.

Btw I mean here not in USA.

When was the last time you saw a police walking the beat?"

Many many years ago, the police are a joke now, they’ve been so throttled by training to be considerate about offending people and proper procedure that they’re all scared to do their job.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *agerMorganMan
over a year ago

Canvey Island

18 year olds don’t need guns.

Grown adults don’t need guns unless for specific reasons, “self-defence” is a crap argument as has just been shown.

If people want a gun, give a valid reason or go serve in the military.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bi HaiveMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Cheeseville, Somerset


"No body needs a gun in today's society its just a tool for evil!

So, what are people meant to use against criminals? Let’s say that the US is the perfect case for far too many firearms, fair enough, but then look at the UK where the general public are almost entirely defenceless against criminals? There needs to be some sort of balance? Maybe somewhere in between?

How many times have you been wandering around Yeovil or anywhere in Somerset and found yourself in a situation where you felt the need to be carrying a gun?

Because I suspect its as often as I have.

Never.

A

With the influx of county lines gangs around here, you’d actually be surprised. I’m not making the point that it necessarily has to be a gun, but as it stands if some little muppet comes at you with a knife (which is constantly an increasing likelihood) our self defence laws leave you to their mercy."

I've lived in London. I've lived in Bristol. I've lived in Northampton, Gloucester and many other cities and towns. I've walked the streets at night and not once in my life havebi felt the need to carry a gun or a knife.

I've been mugged at knifepoint and do you know what I did? I gave them my wallet. It had about £20 and some plastic in it.

It's not worth dying for 'stuff'. Things can be replaced. It's been statistically shown that you're more likely to die in a confrontation if you're carrying a weapon yourself.

And our self defence laws work fine. There's been plenty of reported cases where muggers and burglars have been battered and occasionally died at the hands of their victims. And prosecutions haven't followed.

A

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ools and the brainCouple
over a year ago

couple, us we him her.

Here's a suggestion.

Dear USA,

Re gun's why don't you make it compulsory for everyone who owns or purchasing a gun has to attend the local A&E department and witness first hand gun related injuries and deaths to understand the damage a gun can inflict and realise that owning a gun is a huge responsibility.

Regards

Rest of the world.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's too late to ban guns, they fucked themselves. One survey suggests that there are 393 million guns in the country. Stopping sales of new guns won't stop these old ones from existing and making ownership illegal would be impossible at this point.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *partharmonyCouple
over a year ago

Ruislip

Guns don't kill people. People do. But people with guns tend to kill more people than those just with knives or baseball bats.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *elvet RopeMan
over a year ago

by the big field

Let them have all the guns they want- just make owning any sort of ammunition a heavily punishable offence

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"No body needs a gun in today's society its just a tool for evil!

So, what are people meant to use against criminals? Let’s say that the US is the perfect case for far too many firearms, fair enough, but then look at the UK where the general public are almost entirely defenceless against criminals? There needs to be some sort of balance? Maybe somewhere in between?

How many times have you been wandering around Yeovil or anywhere in Somerset and found yourself in a situation where you felt the need to be carrying a gun?

Because I suspect its as often as I have.

Never.

A

With the influx of county lines gangs around here, you’d actually be surprised. I’m not making the point that it necessarily has to be a gun, but as it stands if some little muppet comes at you with a knife (which is constantly an increasing likelihood) our self defence laws leave you to their mercy.

I've lived in London. I've lived in Bristol. I've lived in Northampton, Gloucester and many other cities and towns. I've walked the streets at night and not once in my life havebi felt the need to carry a gun or a knife.

I've been mugged at knifepoint and do you know what I did? I gave them my wallet. It had about £20 and some plastic in it.

It's not worth dying for 'stuff'. Things can be replaced. It's been statistically shown that you're more likely to die in a confrontation if you're carrying a weapon yourself.

And our self defence laws work fine. There's been plenty of reported cases where muggers and burglars have been battered and occasionally died at the hands of their victims. And prosecutions haven't followed.

A"

Well maybe our experience of London was very different, I grew up there, I have seen people stabbed, shot, splashed with acid, attacked for amusement, mistaken identity or just that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time with a nutter… tell me why you think that London has such a high knife crime rate? I can tell you that most of it is reactionary to being victimised.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The big difference between the UK and US is that here we say it's ok to have a gun as long as you have a good reason for it, use it responsibly and store it safely. In the US you can have one just because, and it is also an accepted form of self defence. Being responsible about storage varies by state.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bi HaiveMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Cheeseville, Somerset


"It's too late to ban guns, they fucked themselves. One survey suggests that there are 393 million guns in the country. Stopping sales of new guns won't stop these old ones from existing and making ownership illegal would be impossible at this point. "

But why?

Don't make any more. Supply stops.

Hold amnesties and buy backs as done in the UK and Australia.

Change ownership laws to require licensing, registration, annual health check, random spot checks on secure storage, ban open/concealed carry in public. Make insurance (public liability etc.) compulsory for owners. Allow for removal of licences at any time for breaches of rules. All of these happen for drivers so why not gun owners?

Then increase mandatory minimum sentences for unlicensed gun possession to 5 years. No time off or early parole.

Yes it would take time. But eventually gun numbers would reduce. As happened in the UK and Australia.

No doubt someone will say 'yeah, but criminals don't follow the rules'.

So why have any laws at all? Why not make every crime legal just because some people choose to break the law? Think of the money that would be saved not having to worry about funding the police or investigating crimes. People could just hold vigilante courts and dish out their own sentences. Hey - no need for lawyers too!

Just because the start point is much larger than it would be anywhere else doesn't make it impossible. All it needs is the will of the people.

But that still seems to be lacking.

A

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *sagent81Man
over a year ago

Leeds

They’re in too deep. Stricter gun laws probably wouldn’t do much because the country is already flooded with them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *bi HaiveMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Cheeseville, Somerset


"No body needs a gun in today's society its just a tool for evil!

So, what are people meant to use against criminals? Let’s say that the US is the perfect case for far too many firearms, fair enough, but then look at the UK where the general public are almost entirely defenceless against criminals? There needs to be some sort of balance? Maybe somewhere in between?

How many times have you been wandering around Yeovil or anywhere in Somerset and found yourself in a situation where you felt the need to be carrying a gun?

Because I suspect its as often as I have.

Never.

A

With the influx of county lines gangs around here, you’d actually be surprised. I’m not making the point that it necessarily has to be a gun, but as it stands if some little muppet comes at you with a knife (which is constantly an increasing likelihood) our self defence laws leave you to their mercy.

I've lived in London. I've lived in Bristol. I've lived in Northampton, Gloucester and many other cities and towns. I've walked the streets at night and not once in my life havebi felt the need to carry a gun or a knife.

I've been mugged at knifepoint and do you know what I did? I gave them my wallet. It had about £20 and some plastic in it.

It's not worth dying for 'stuff'. Things can be replaced. It's been statistically shown that you're more likely to die in a confrontation if you're carrying a weapon yourself.

And our self defence laws work fine. There's been plenty of reported cases where muggers and burglars have been battered and occasionally died at the hands of their victims. And prosecutions haven't followed.

A

Well maybe our experience of London was very different, I grew up there, I have seen people stabbed, shot, splashed with acid, attacked for amusement, mistaken identity or just that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time with a nutter… tell me why you think that London has such a high knife crime rate? I can tell you that most of it is reactionary to being victimised."

Why does London have a high crime rate?

Not hard at all to answer. The bulk of all crime is gang related, particluarly gang on gang. Crimes against the general public are significantly rarer. The data is all out there to find easily enough.

So unless you're involved in gang culture the risk of you being shot, stabbed or attacked with acid - there were 123 acid attacks in 2020 in a city of 9 million - is far smaller than the media would have you believe.

A

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach


"It's too late to ban guns ... "


"But why?"

Because a sizeable proportion of the populace don't want guns banned. In fact they believe that any attempt to limit gun ownership would destroy all that's good about their country.

A government can't go around forcing people to do what it wants, just because "it's for your own good". Especially not when those people are armed to the teeth.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"No body needs a gun in today's society its just a tool for evil!

So, what are people meant to use against criminals? Let’s say that the US is the perfect case for far too many firearms, fair enough, but then look at the UK where the general public are almost entirely defenceless against criminals? There needs to be some sort of balance? Maybe somewhere in between?

How many times have you been wandering around Yeovil or anywhere in Somerset and found yourself in a situation where you felt the need to be carrying a gun?

Because I suspect its as often as I have.

Never.

A

With the influx of county lines gangs around here, you’d actually be surprised. I’m not making the point that it necessarily has to be a gun, but as it stands if some little muppet comes at you with a knife (which is constantly an increasing likelihood) our self defence laws leave you to their mercy.

I've lived in London. I've lived in Bristol. I've lived in Northampton, Gloucester and many other cities and towns. I've walked the streets at night and not once in my life havebi felt the need to carry a gun or a knife.

I've been mugged at knifepoint and do you know what I did? I gave them my wallet. It had about £20 and some plastic in it.

It's not worth dying for 'stuff'. Things can be replaced. It's been statistically shown that you're more likely to die in a confrontation if you're carrying a weapon yourself.

And our self defence laws work fine. There's been plenty of reported cases where muggers and burglars have been battered and occasionally died at the hands of their victims. And prosecutions haven't followed.

A

Well maybe our experience of London was very different, I grew up there, I have seen people stabbed, shot, splashed with acid, attacked for amusement, mistaken identity or just that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time with a nutter… tell me why you think that London has such a high knife crime rate? I can tell you that most of it is reactionary to being victimised.

Why does London have a high crime rate?

Not hard at all to answer. The bulk of all crime is gang related, particluarly gang on gang. Crimes against the general public are significantly rarer. The data is all out there to find easily enough.

So unless you're involved in gang culture the risk of you being shot, stabbed or attacked with acid - there were 123 acid attacks in 2020 in a city of 9 million - is far smaller than the media would have you believe.

A"

You are correct, gang culture does account for most. But I have witnessed it happen many many many times to people nowhere near gang culture. Crime against non criminal people is rising constantly, especially in recent years, because in the UK criminals have weapons and the general public has nothing. Soft targets, no deterrent, not from the police, not from the people they are committing crimes on.

Anyway, you and i have debated for a good while on a couple of different threads now, and I like that even though we see things differently we did it civilly

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hagTonight OP   Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.


"If that yoke hadn't a gun no one would have died so guns kill "
That is right, it was his state of mind, he choose to use it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

..and in other news, yesterday in Charleston, USA, following an argument over his aggressive driving, a man opened up on a birthday party with a semi automatic rifle and was stopped/killed by a woman at the party who was lawfully carrying a handgun.

'murica..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hagTonight OP   Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.


"People with guns kill people and are only stopped by other people with guns.

Unfortunately this is the primary defence of why Americans won't give up their right to bear arms. I can almost guarantee sales of pistols have gone up as a result of this atrocity as people "protect themselves".

Guns can be defeated by non-lethal action if used correctly. Tasers, CS sprays, ruber bullets, sound, hell there's even technology out there that fires targeted microwaves to incapacitate a target. More education and research into these areas could be a way forward, but there's just no appetite for it as the gun market is just too lucrative."
Yes, so basically they can give it up, but with their defense they want to have them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rispyDuckMan
over a year ago

Chinese Takeaway near you

It's makes no sense that an 18yr old in America can buy military style assault rifles yet can't buy a six pack of beer

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oberts_onMan
over a year ago

King's Lynn


"It's makes no sense that an 18yr old in America can buy military style assault rifles yet can't buy a six pack of beer "

Just shows how stupid American laws are!?

Not that they can change it now, too many Americans seem to have the "if in doubt shoot it" attitude to give thier guns up now!!?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irthandgirthMan
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster


"I'm not an American but the second amendment calls for "a well regulated militia" so it seems reasonable to make people apply for a gun license...

It comes from their history. The country successfully rebelled against British rule some time ago, and did it by way of the people standing up to the authorities.

That mindset is still part of America and a sizeable proportion of the populace still believe that the government is out to get them. Those people feel that the 2nd amendment guarantees their right to hold arms to protect themselves from the government. They see themselves as the "well regulated militia", who hold their weapons to ensure "the security of a free State".

These people see even a small step like licensing, as the first step to taking away everyone's ability to protect themselves from an evil over-reaching government."

They have been sold paranoia as "freedom". The government don't need to come for their guns. They know where (almost) everyone is and can achieve with taxes what they can't with direct force. Murica is kept in a state of perpetual fear.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *r SproutMan
over a year ago

the middle


"If that yoke hadn't a gun no one would have died so guns kill That is right, it was his state of mind, he choose to use it."

Like knife crime (no knife laws)

Like the man who drove an suv through a crowd of people last year (no suv laws)

In my eyes it’s not the weapon. It’s the person. If they want to do harm to others they will always find a way

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Not really

A hollow metal pole fire extinguisher and a steal small steal ball and you have your self a musket

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hagTonight OP   Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.


"If that yoke hadn't a gun no one would have died so guns kill That is right, it was his state of mind, he choose to use it.

Like knife crime (no knife laws)

Like the man who drove an suv through a crowd of people last year (no suv laws)

In my eyes it’s not the weapon. It’s the person. If they want to do harm to others they will always find a way "
That is right and that is what I think as well, it is the person, not the weapon.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

In my eyes it’s not the weapon. It’s the person. If they want to do harm to others they will always find a way That is right and that is what I think as well, it is the person, not the weapon."

But a lot of these little creeps would still be home jerking off into their own hatred.

"If god made men, Samuel Colt made them equal"

I'd much rather the pathetic little nonces could be slapped across the playground than start shooting from the other side of it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hagTonight OP   Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.


"Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun. "
Yes. I also wonder the same of why they have to have it there

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

if he did not have a gun he would not have been able to Murder 19 children,

And they talk about the right to carry a gun what about the child's right to a life

And the Argument about arming teachers when would they be allowed to use there gun and they would probably be the first to be shot,

And to have a fire fight in a school ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun. Yes. I also wonder the same of why they have to have it there "

Aparently he bought 2 guns a couple of days apart, because in that part of the states they report multiple sales because of gun running south into mexico being a thing.

Also the shooter was taken out by the border patrol, the guy who got him took damage to his head.

Aparently the border patrols swat got there before the police depts.

And the local police were not following FBI advice on these active shooter things.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If that yoke hadn't a gun no one would have died so guns kill That is right, it was his state of mind, he choose to use it.

Like knife crime (no knife laws)

Like the man who drove an suv through a crowd of people last year (no suv laws)

In my eyes it’s not the weapon. It’s the person. If they want to do harm to others they will always find a way "

Clearly the UK does have knife laws

(You get up to 4 years in jail)

Clearly the UK does have driving laws

(Death by dangerous driving is up to 14 years in jail)

What am I missing ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"It's makes no sense that an 18yr old in America can buy military style assault rifles yet can't buy a six pack of beer "

Imagine the consequences if they could buy both…

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icolerobbieCouple
over a year ago

walsall


"If that yoke hadn't a gun no one would have died so guns kill That is right, it was his state of mind, he choose to use it.

Like knife crime (no knife laws)

Like the man who drove an suv through a crowd of people last year (no suv laws)

In my eyes it’s not the weapon. It’s the person. If they want to do harm to others they will always find a way

Clearly the UK does have knife laws

(You get up to 4 years in jail)

Clearly the UK does have driving laws

(Death by dangerous driving is up to 14 years in jail)

What am I missing ?

"

Bad people break laws.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If that yoke hadn't a gun no one would have died so guns kill That is right, it was his state of mind, he choose to use it.

Like knife crime (no knife laws)

Like the man who drove an suv through a crowd of people last year (no suv laws)

In my eyes it’s not the weapon. It’s the person. If they want to do harm to others they will always find a way

Clearly the UK does have knife laws

(You get up to 4 years in jail)

Clearly the UK does have driving laws

(Death by dangerous driving is up to 14 years in jail)

What am I missing ?

"

That kid wasn't allowed to shoot people.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rispyDuckMan
over a year ago

Chinese Takeaway near you


"It's makes no sense that an 18yr old in America can buy military style assault rifles yet can't buy a six pack of beer

Imagine the consequences if they could buy both…"

Oh it would be mayhem lol like a boozy nighout in Magaluf with gun totting d*unk teenagers

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It's too late to ban guns, they fucked themselves. One survey suggests that there are 393 million guns in the country. Stopping sales of new guns won't stop these old ones from existing and making ownership illegal would be impossible at this point.

But why?

Don't make any more. Supply stops.

Hold amnesties and buy backs as done in the UK and Australia.

Change ownership laws to require licensing, registration, annual health check, random spot checks on secure storage, ban open/concealed carry in public. Make insurance (public liability etc.) compulsory for owners. Allow for removal of licences at any time for breaches of rules. All of these happen for drivers so why not gun owners?

Then increase mandatory minimum sentences for unlicensed gun possession to 5 years. No time off or early parole.

Yes it would take time. But eventually gun numbers would reduce. As happened in the UK and Australia.

No doubt someone will say 'yeah, but criminals don't follow the rules'.

So why have any laws at all? Why not make every crime legal just because some people choose to break the law? Think of the money that would be saved not having to worry about funding the police or investigating crimes. People could just hold vigilante courts and dish out their own sentences. Hey - no need for lawyers too!

Just because the start point is much larger than it would be anywhere else doesn't make it impossible. All it needs is the will of the people.

But that still seems to be lacking.

A"

All totally valid points, the problem being there is no will of the people.

There doesn't appear to be a collective sense of responsibility though, quite the opposite. There is more urgency to get more guns incase something else happens and one can be prepared.

I think if they tried to change the law or enact anything there would be military on the streets and large scale violence.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *batMan
over a year ago

Alicante, Spain. (Sometimes in Wales)


"but as it stands if some little muppet comes at you with a knife (which is constantly an increasing likelihood) our self defence laws leave you to their mercy."

What do you think is wrong with the law regarding self defence?

You can currently use as much reasonable force as is necessary to protect yourself or others. That could include killing your attacker or potential attacker.

Like all good laws though, you might need to justify your actions in a court.

Are you saying that people should be authorised to do more than that?

Gbat

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"but as it stands if some little muppet comes at you with a knife (which is constantly an increasing likelihood) our self defence laws leave you to their mercy.

What do you think is wrong with the law regarding self defence?

You can currently use as much reasonable force as is necessary to protect yourself or others. That could include killing your attacker or potential attacker.

Like all good laws though, you might need to justify your actions in a court.

Are you saying that people should be authorised to do more than that?

Gbat "

What I feel is wrong is that if you carry or position something as a preemptive self defence measure, you run the risk of ending up in prison even though you were the victim. That, is a problem when up against people who do not care about the laws and carry all sorts constantly and use those items to get what they want.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

England is a cup of tea,

France, a wheel of ripened brie,

Greece, a short squat olive tree,

America is a gun

Brazil is football on the sand,

Argentina, Maradona’s hand,

Germany, an oompah band,

America is a gun

Holland is a wooden shoe,

Hungary, a goulash stew,

Australia, a kangaroo,

America is a gun

Japan is a thermal spring,

Scotland is a highland fling,

Oh, better to be anything

Than America as a gun

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *imbo59seMan
over a year ago

North Norfolk area


"Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun. Yes. I also wonder the same of why they have to have it there

Aparently he bought 2 guns a couple of days apart, because in that part of the states they report multiple sales because of gun running south into mexico being a thing.

Also the shooter was taken out by the border patrol, the guy who got him took damage to his head.

Aparently the border patrols swat got there before the police depts.

And the local police were not following FBI advice on these active shooter things. "

A bit like Dunblane then (as regards the last paragraph)!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *imbo59seMan
over a year ago

North Norfolk area


"Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun. Yes. I also wonder the same of why they have to have it there

Aparently he bought 2 guns a couple of days apart, because in that part of the states they report multiple sales because of gun running south into mexico being a thing.

Also the shooter was taken out by the border patrol, the guy who got him took damage to his head.

Aparently the border patrols swat got there before the police depts.

And the local police were not following FBI advice on these active shooter things.

A bit like Dunblane then (as regards the last paragraph)! "

Just to clarify, by no means condoning the actions of the guy (Hamilton?) at Dunblane, but if the police had followed procedure, it should not have occurred!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun. Yes. I also wonder the same of why they have to have it there

Aparently he bought 2 guns a couple of days apart, because in that part of the states they report multiple sales because of gun running south into mexico being a thing.

Also the shooter was taken out by the border patrol, the guy who got him took damage to his head.

Aparently the border patrols swat got there before the police depts.

And the local police were not following FBI advice on these active shooter things.

A bit like Dunblane then (as regards the last paragraph)!

Just to clarify, by no means condoning the actions of the guy (Hamilton?) at Dunblane, but if the police had followed procedure, it should not have occurred! "

The police were critisised for being too lax the last time they'd checked the Dunblane shooters safe, ammo and guns. People also forget at least 1 weapon he used was illegal. But that's not the type of advice the FBI offer to police in active shooter incidents.

The FBI advise to get in there after them and kill them. The main priority of the police being to preserve life, killing an active shooter as fast as possible minimises the body count he or she can generate.

They also are advised against bothering with ensuring safe backgrounds to fire and to just get in and drop them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *orraine999Woman
over a year ago

Somewhere


"When I hear the oft trotted out bs that is the thread title (no dig at the op) it boils my piss..

A republican senator on R4 this morning was hiding behind the fact that elementary schools do not have armed guards, and that this latest slaughter of innocence might have been stopped if the there was greater surveillance of social media..

It's too tribal to be resolved, the political entrenchment and the lobbying of the gun industry and money that the NRA have distort any pragmatism..

Listening to the gut wrenching sobs of one of the parents at the school, truly harrowing..

Sadly won't be the last.."

The NRA currently has a $250 million dollar per year budget for advertising, and more importantly, lining the pockets of politicians to insure new legislation regarding gun laws will fail.

The NRA also has 3 million + members which sways the votes towards failure of any new laws.

I don’t own a gun and I don’t plan on owning a gun anytime soon.

Crooked politicians, gun lobbyists, gun manufacturers only care about one thing, and that’s the almighty dollar.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hagTonight OP   Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach


"What I feel is wrong is that if you carry or position something as a preemptive self defence measure, you run the risk of ending up in prison even though you were the victim."

That's the attitude that's got America where it is today, 'I must have a gun, to defend myself against the other guy who might have a gun'.

It seems like a reasonable way to think, but it ends up with lots of guns in the hands of people that have anger problems and that means lots of needless deaths.

The same is happening in the UK with knives. We are seeing a huge increase in knife crime because youngsters are starting to carry them 'for self-defence', and then they find themselves using them when they get angry.

The law in the UK is fine as it is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hagTonight OP   Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.


"Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun. Yes. I also wonder the same of why they have to have it there

Aparently he bought 2 guns a couple of days apart, because in that part of the states they report multiple sales because of gun running south into mexico being a thing.

Also the shooter was taken out by the border patrol, the guy who got him took damage to his head.

Aparently the border patrols swat got there before the police depts.

And the local police were not following FBI advice on these active shooter things.

A bit like Dunblane then (as regards the last paragraph)!

Just to clarify, by no means condoning the actions of the guy (Hamilton?) at Dunblane, but if the police had followed procedure, it should not have occurred!

The police were critisised for being too lax the last time they'd checked the Dunblane shooters safe, ammo and guns. People also forget at least 1 weapon he used was illegal. But that's not the type of advice the FBI offer to police in active shooter incidents.

The FBI advise to get in there after them and kill them. The main priority of the police being to preserve life, killing an active shooter as fast as possible minimises the body count he or she can generate.

They also are advised against bothering with ensuring safe backgrounds to fire and to just get in and drop them.

"
Is it down to culture of why they want weapons there? As one can see through their history of what they have done.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hagTonight OP   Man
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.


"Just don't understand why everyone has to have a gun over there? Is their storage requirements different to ours? I would be highly suspicious if a 18 year old jut walked in and brought a gun. Yes. I also wonder the same of why they have to have it there

Aparently he bought 2 guns a couple of days apart, because in that part of the states they report multiple sales because of gun running south into mexico being a thing.

Also the shooter was taken out by the border patrol, the guy who got him took damage to his head.

Aparently the border patrols swat got there before the police depts.

And the local police were not following FBI advice on these active shooter things.

A bit like Dunblane then (as regards the last paragraph)!

Just to clarify, by no means condoning the actions of the guy (Hamilton?) at Dunblane, but if the police had followed procedure, it should not have occurred!

The police were critisised for being too lax the last time they'd checked the Dunblane shooters safe, ammo and guns. People also forget at least 1 weapon he used was illegal. But that's not the type of advice the FBI offer to police in active shooter incidents.

The FBI advise to get in there after them and kill them. The main priority of the police being to preserve life, killing an active shooter as fast as possible minimises the body count he or she can generate.

They also are advised against bothering with ensuring safe backgrounds to fire and to just get in and drop them.

Is it down to culture of why they want weapons there? As one can see through their history of what they have done."
Like with the natives.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *batMan
over a year ago

Alicante, Spain. (Sometimes in Wales)


"What I feel is wrong is that if you carry or position something as a preemptive self defence measure, you run the risk of ending up in prison even though you were the victim. "

Thinking that through though. If you are carrying a weapon because you worry you might be attacked, and are then found in possession of that weapon without being attacked, then you’re not actually a victim of anything are you? You would be the only wrongdoer in that scenario.

If you think going to a place is so dangerous, maybe don’t carry a weapon but just go to a different place?

The proliferation of weapons won’t keep you safe, it will only increase violence.

Gbat

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the thread title has it. It's people who kill. The question we have to answer is 'why do they kill?' rather than the method. If guns are removed then other means of mass killing would be found - bombs, vehicles, poisoning etc.

There are various potential reasons from mental health issues to grievances. Which brings us to society and how we relate to eachother. Are we a caring or hateful society? One breeds support and the other conflict. A supportive society will aim to help those with illnesses and grievances. It's about being heard. If someone has no voice and is pushed over the edge then violence or self harm is often the result.

Just a few thoughts ...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"What I feel is wrong is that if you carry or position something as a preemptive self defence measure, you run the risk of ending up in prison even though you were the victim.

Thinking that through though. If you are carrying a weapon because you worry you might be attacked, and are then found in possession of that weapon without being attacked, then you’re not actually a victim of anything are you? You would be the only wrongdoer in that scenario.

If you think going to a place is so dangerous, maybe don’t carry a weapon but just go to a different place?

The proliferation of weapons won’t keep you safe, it will only increase violence.

Gbat "

It’s a violent world, there’s no place where criminals won’t go? However, I bet the home invasion rate in the places where home owners are armed is far lower than where they aren’t. Criminals like easy targets, it’s why they target kids (in the States most schools are surrounded by gun free zones) , the elderly (easily overpowered), neighbourhoods where there are no households with weapons.

Violence is very real, can happen anywhere at any time and is very rapid, to not be prepared (and that doesn’t necessarily mean guns and knives) and to be stopped from being prepared by backwards laws where something as non lethal but effective as pepper spray is classed as a firearms just plays into criminals hands. Simple as that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oah VailMan
over a year ago

Dover

From what I’m learning lately, there’s actually a significant majority in favour of increased gun control in the States, more than 90% of those polled. It’s the evangelists in the NRA and the GOP that want to hold on to their power and money, and protect their narrow racist and misogynistic status-quo that are lobbying (and filibustering to prevent any change.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *batMan
over a year ago

Alicante, Spain. (Sometimes in Wales)


"It’s a violent world, there’s no place where criminals won’t go? "

Overall, there are very violent places in the world, but there are many, many places where violence is not an everyday occurrence.


"However, I bet the home invasion rate in the places where home owners are armed is far lower than where they aren’t. Criminals like easy targets, it’s why they target kids (in the States most schools are surrounded by gun free zones) , the elderly (easily overpowered), neighbourhoods where there are no households with weapons."

It seems like your experience is from the more violent places, but be assured, this is not the norm. Have a look at this report …

"However, the data for the United States and England and Wales can be derived for the narrower category of serious violent crime. The chapter shows broadly that the incidence of serious violent crime per capita is between three and seven times as high in the United States as in England and Wales. This parallels the comparative data on homicide; existing comparisons with Canada and New Zealand lend further weight to the claim that levels of serious violence in the United States are distinctively high."

https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190203542.001.0001/oso-9780190203542-chapter-9

The homicide rate in Europe is 3 people in every hundred thousand, whilst in the Americas (not just the US) it’s a lot higher at 17.2 people in 100,000. More data here from the UN.

https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/global-study-on-homicide.html


"Violence is very real, can happen anywhere at any time and is very rapid, to not be prepared (and that doesn’t necessarily mean guns and knives) and to be stopped from being prepared by backwards laws where something as non lethal but effective as pepper spray is classed as a firearms just plays into criminals hands. Simple as that."

Violence can happen anywhere, but usually happens in some places far more than others. For most people, it’s a really rare occurrence and not a part of their everyday experience. Just look at the date from the above links. There are way more firearms in the Americas than Europe, but somehow their homicide rate is 6.5 time higher than ours.

And if violence is so fierce and rapid, how will you use your chosen weapon? Are you a ninja or something? (actually if you were, you probably wouldn’t need to carry a weapon!).

It's a simple fact that US schools have to train their children what to do when an active shooter starts to murder them, whilst in the UK they have a Fire Drill once a year.

Gbat

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The elephant in the room with having guns for self defence.

Violent criminals will target you for your weapons.

Armed police cannot wade into fights and confrontations for fear of their weapons being taken and used agsinst them. (how many American police get shot at domestic disturbances with their own gun).

If you could carry a gun for self defence it's a massive responsibility. Read the yellow card.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The elephant in the room with having guns for self defence.

Violent criminals will target you for your weapons.

Armed police cannot wade into fights and confrontations for fear of their weapons being taken and used agsinst them. (how many American police get shot at domestic disturbances with their own gun).

If you could carry a gun for self defence it's a massive responsibility. Read the yellow card.

"

Well in 17 years as an unarmed officer I periodically got into physical confrontations. In the 13 years I was an overtly armed officer, with lethal and non-lethal, no-one gave me any trouble at all, and I still dealt with violent offenders who generally calm down on the arrival of armed officers. If not, that's what the taser is for.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

Politicians have stopped change, due to the big money they get from the gun lobby. Of course the types and volumes of guns have a substantial effect.

Of course it's people who misuse them. But they are a part of a system that is in thrall to money. People have less value than business there.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'd absolutely love one of our American cousins to weigh into this debate.

If all good having an opinion this side of the pond.

Having worked with many Americans for many years. In my experience. Their opinion is totally different. The feel the need to bare arms for protection. Mostly home defense. Yes in certain states it is probably too easy to buy a gun. But in most states there are certainly background checks that must be carried out before the gun is handed over. 99% of law abiding citizens will most likely agree. The problem is the non law abiding citizens. There are FAR too many guns in circulation in the US to force law abiding people to give them up. We would end up with a scenario that has criminals running free robbing people and homes with no worries of people being able to protect themselves.

We are very quick to judge here when we are lucky enough not to feel the need to have a gun for home protection.

Also not so long ago glasgow was named the murder capital of Europe. More murders per capita from violent crime than the whole of Europe. This is without guns. Do we think this would be the case if we had the right to protect ourselves??

On a side note. We have no right to bare arms in the UK yet we are one of the biggest lethal arms producers on the planet.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top