Gun control

[Jimy_Hills_Chin]

But you have also ignored the fact that less gun control works.

Switzerland as I have already pointed out has no gun control, everyone has automatic weapons yet they have less gun crime than UK, USA, in fact any other country you could mention.

Switzerland is a very different country to America, in so so many ways, historically, economically and socially. It is not at all realistic to make the comparison.

Are you suggesting that America should try to emulate Switzerland economically and socially to deal with its gun problem? America is a billion billion miles away from being like Switzerland, you do realise that?

 

[GlastonSpur]

So what are you suggesting? Man control?

I'm suggesting that we recognise and acknowledge the gender divide as being THE core fact when it comes to murder and violence ... instead of ducking the issue and just talking about "people" or specific means of killing such as guns.

What we do about solving the gender violence issue is another question. Feel free to start a thread on it if you wish.

 

[Wibble]

But you have also ignored the fact that less gun control works.

Switzerland as I have already pointed out has no gun control, everyone has automatic weapons yet they have less gun crime than UK, USA, in fact any other country you could mention.

That actually isn't true even though all of these automatic weapons that you speak of are owned by trained army or army reservists. All this training seems to do is put Switzerland slightly below the trend line. The correlation is still strongly present. Or to sum up, you are completely and utterly wrong.

 

[Rams]

Switzerland is a very different country to America, in so so many ways, historically, economically and socially. It is not at all realistic to make the comparison.

Are you suggesting that America should try to emulate Switzerland economically and socially to deal with its gun problem? America is a billion billion miles away from being like Switzerland, you do realise that?

Those remarks of his about Switzerland are factually wrong.

 

[Pimpmofo]

People would act illegally so let's not try. It is that sort of thinking that has got the US to where it is today. Debating who else to arm to prevent armed people killing small children. Utter madness.

That's not how I feel, I'm just saying what I think would probably happen.

I do own a lot of guns and I compete in target shooting and do a little hunting. I don't have a problem with gun control - it works in England from what people on here are saying and I know there is shooting competitions there and people still hunt there. I would miss the ease I have of grabbing some guns from one of my safes and going to the range with them but I would give it up if it meant one person could keep from being shot.

I also have two rifles that would be considered assault rifles and I would give both up without a second thought. I rarely shoot either.

Something has to be done though. Why we can't require classes to get a license to own guns baffles me. A lot of people that shouldn't own guns could be weeded out just by that. Making sure kids don't have access to guns can't be that hard. Every other person running around with a concealed pistol is ridiculous.

 

[DFreshKing]

What tripe, people calling for banning guns are slightly less misguided than the ones asking to arm teachers? Sort it out.

Well done for tarring everyone with the same 'mob' brush btw, really helps your argument.

Don't know what you problem is this evening you seem particularly tort. I will stick to my opinion thanks.

It is misguided if its aim is to solve this terrible issue of rampaging people killing innocents.

 

[Rams]

In Switzerland you need to obtain a firearm permit to be able to purchase a gun, which you can only obtain with a clean bill of mental health and no criminal record.

 

[simonhch]

Gun control wouldn't help. Right.....

 

[GlastonSpur]

Get back to the football forum and stick to being a Bale fanny, it's amusing rather than offensive.

So it's "offensive" to point out that the male of the species commits almost all the murders and other acts of violence?

Get back to the 19th century and/or stick to predicting (yet again) that Arsenal will win the league. The former will better suit your apparently stunted mind-set, whilst the latter is beyond amusing.

 

[Nucks]

Again, I think this is a fruitless conversation. Gun control cannot actually be enforced in the United States at this point. Pandora's box is open.

It is certainly possible that eventually it will be legislated, but it would be about as effective as prohibition.

Europeans and Americans are quite different on a few things. In parts of Europe, things like health care and free education and a strong welfare state are considered fundamental rights.

In America, carrying a gun is one of those fundamental rights for a huge percentage of the country.

 

[Wibble]

Absolute gun bans won't happen in the us but at the very least licensing and regulation needs to be massively changed, concealed weapons banned, public carrying of guns in cars banned, keeping guns in anything other than locked gun cabinets banned, all hand guns and automatic rifles banned.

 

[Elliott]

Of course everyone is going to be against it in light of these horrific events.

This thing does happen in other countries (Like England) so gun control will not eradicate lunatics.

Interestingly, The country with the least strict gun laws, in fact they actually go out and arm all males aged between 22 and 32 with automatic guns and pistols is Switzerland.

A country with such a low rate of gun crime it does not even keep statistics. go figure.

I have said it before in here before the mob get going.

Solving societies ills is the only solution, not a quick fix, but anyone that thinks banning guns in the USA would instantly stop these tragedies is only slightly less misguided than the people who want to arm the teachers.

You're 41 times more likely to be shot in America than in the UK. As for Switzerland, able bodied men of a certain age are indeed given a gun and ordered to serve in the military reserves. However, they are not allowed to carry it around and ammunition is tightly controlled. And the part about their gun crime rates being so low they don't even bother to keep score is nonsense. In fact, it's the highest in Europe.

 

[StuCol]

I simply cannot fathom the counter argument. This 2nd amendment must be protected because its in the constitution? Well, it's wrong. What is the fascination with ownership of a device that is solely designed to kill? Sure, I get shooting for sport but that can easily be done in a controlled environment. There is simply no need for everyone to have to have a gun. I mean, who's going to invade you? At the moment, it seems that the main reason everyone feels the need to have a gun is that everyone else has got a gun.

Then there's the 'people kill people' argument. Of course in black and white that is true, but there is something very disconnected about a firearm. Press a button, target drops. I reckon many of these people would find it much more difficult to go a physically plunge a knife into someone. And when there are those that do cross that line, at least the victim has more of a chance of defending themselves. An incident like today's may have happened without guns if the young mans madness allowed him to physically kill people, but I very much doubt that the body count could have reached anything like as high, as surely the perpetrator would have been overpowered.

No, I just can't see any valid argument as to why civilian human beings should have a 'right' to own deadly firearms.

 

[TheReligion]

Again, I think this is a fruitless conversation. Gun control cannot actually be enforced in the United States at this point. Pandora's box is open.

It is certainly possible that eventually it will be legislated, but it would be about as effective as prohibition.

Europeans and Americans are quite different on a few things. In parts of Europe, things like health care and free education and a strong welfare state are considered fundamental rights.

In America, carrying a gun is one of those fundamental rights for a huge percentage of the country.

It is retarded to say the very least

 

[simonhch]

I simply cannot fathom the counter argument. This 2nd amendment must be protected because its in the constitution? Well, it's wrong. What is the fascination with ownership of a device that is solely designed to kill? Sure, I get shooting for sport but that can easily be done in a controlled environment. There is simply no need for everyone to have to have a gun. I mean, who's going to invade you? At the moment, it seems that the main reason everyone feels the need to have a gun is that everyone else has got a gun.

Then there's the 'people kill people' argument. Of course in black and white that is true, but there is something very disconnected about a firearm. Press a button, target drops. I reckon many of these people would find it much more difficult to go a physically plunge a knife into someone. And when there are those that do cross that line, at least the victim has more of a chance of defending themselves. An incident like today's may have happened without guns if the young mans madness allowed him to physically kill people, but I very much doubt that the body count could have reached anything like as high, as surely the perpetrator would have been overpowered.

No, I just can't see any valid argument as to why civilian human beings should have a 'right' to own deadly firearms.

Agree 100%

 

[peterstorey]

So it's "offensive" to point out that the male of species commits almost all the murders and other acts of violence?

Get back to the 19th century and/or stick to predicting (yet again) that Arsenal will win the league. The former will better suit your apparently stunted mind-set, whilst the latter is beyond amusing.

It's offensive to harp on about male propensity for violence in the context of a debate that aims to reduce the ability to wreak violence. It's about tools.

 

[DFreshKing]

You're 41 times more likely to be shot in America than the UK. As for Switzerland, able bodied men of a certain age are indeed given a gun and ordered to serve in the military reserves. However, they are not allowed to carry it around and ammunition is tightly controlled. And the part about their gun crime rates being so low they don't even bother to keep score is nonsense. In fact, it's the highest in Europe.

Sorry, got my info from a BBC article. If it is wrong fair enough.

It still does not change the fact that gun controls will not solve this problem.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/1566715.stm

Switzerland's approach is interesting when talking about gun control whether or not.

 

[Nucks]

It is retarded to say the very least

I wouldn't disagree, but that is the way they feel about it.

 

[StuCol]

I'm suggesting that we recognise and acknowledge the gender divide as being THE core fact when it comes to murder and violence ... instead of ducking the issue and just talking about "people" or specific means of killing such as guns.

What we do about solving the gender violence issue is another question. Feel free to start a thread on it if you wish.

Surely we are trying to discuss something we can actually do something about? Are you suggesting that we ban men? Or simply let women only own guns?

 

[Skywarden]

But you have also ignored the fact that less gun control works.

Switzerland as I have already pointed out has no gun control, everyone has automatic weapons yet they have less gun crime than UK, USA, in fact any other country you could mention.

Where is this information taken from?

 

[GlastonSpur]

Again, I think this is a fruitless conversation. Gun control cannot actually be enforced in the United States at this point. Pandora's box is open.

It is certainly possible that eventually it will be legislated, but it would be about as effective as prohibition ....

The same thing was probably said about slavery in the USA.

Never is a long time. It may take time, but unless you make a start you can never reach your destination.

The alternative is a descending spiral ... as technology advances and "personal" weapons will inevitably become ever more deadly.

 

[TheReligion]

This American mentality that "we need guns to protect ourselves" is complete and utter bollocks.

America should look at what we do in the UK and in ten years time things like today would be a thing of the past. It is okay moaning and saying "oh it is too late it would never work" but at least try instead of sitting there mindlessly allowing things like this to happen.

It really is a no brainer

 

[Rams]

Again, I think this is a fruitless conversation. Gun control cannot actually be enforced in the United States at this point. Pandora's box is open.

It is certainly possible that eventually it will be legislated, but it would be about as effective as prohibition.

Europeans and Americans are quite different on a few things. In parts of Europe, things like health care and free education and a strong welfare state are considered fundamental rights.

In America, carrying a gun is one of those fundamental rights for a huge percentage of the country.

In that case shootings such as in Connecticut will continue to happen.

 

[VoetbalWizard]

the standard rifle that is in many swiss homes is the sig550 and most are kept after their army service but with automatic fire removed and converted to semi-automatic fire.

There are automatic sig550's in swiss homes grandfathered in, but is inaccurate to say everyone has an automatic rifle in switzerland.

 

[Plechazunga]

Again, I think this is a fruitless conversation. Gun control cannot actually be enforced in the United States at this point. Pandora's box is open.

It is certainly possible that eventually it will be legislated, but it would be about as effective as prohibition.

Europeans and Americans are quite different on a few things. In parts of Europe, things like health care and free education and a strong welfare state are considered fundamental rights.

In America, carrying a gun is one of those fundamental rights for a huge percentage of the country.

This is true. Although here's an interesting set of graphs:

1) Gun ownership per household has fallen quite dramatically since the late 70s.

2) More guns are bought when Democrats get in

3) More guns are being bought generally. Does this mean a dwindling number of nutballs are stockpiling more and more weapons?

Paranoid Delusion as Marketing Strategy

It's about tools.

That much seems clear.

 

[Verminator]

So it's "offensive" to point out that the male of the species commits almost all the murders and other acts of violence?

Get back to the 19th century and/or stick to predicting (yet again) that Arsenal will win the league. The former will better suit your apparently stunted mind-set, whilst the latter is beyond amusing.

Glaston, I don't think you deserve ridicule for your point, but it is not relevant here.
The male propensity to violence is driven by testosterone (we can't sterilise all men), and societal influences(which could and should be tackled by an advanced community)

Taking this as the standard for the World we live in, one of the tools used to commit this violence is the bullet, and removing that, is what this debate is about.

 

[Rams]

Switzerland's approach is interesting when talking about gun control whether or not.

Yes, but Switzerland has gun control.

 

[JulesWinnfield]

Gun control clearly is never going to be achieved in America, even people who are moderate there often end up going crazy about the prospect of any regulation on guns. There's just a complete refusal to see common sense. Anyone who does bring it up will just be shot down with either:

a) Some other atrocity in another country with strict gun laws. Ignoring the fact that nobody claimed that strict gun laws stop all shootings, rather they prevent them happening so often and naturally anyone who does try and get one illegally is far more likely to be caught before the atrocity happens.

b) Mention another country with lax gun laws. Ignoring the fact that these countries still tend to have higher homicide rates, and that they aren't the US, which has appalling gun crime and indeed homicide statistics for a developed country.

c) Probably the worst of all, suggest rather than introduce stricter laws, more people should be armed. Naturally because more people with guns, means logically more people who will end up using them, and homicide rates will increase whatever. Even if by some twisted logic they did end up preventing the odd mass shooting, the amount of people who would die elsewhere as a result of more people carrying guns would probably tower the figure of those "saved".

 

[GlastonSpur]

It's offensive to harp on about male propensity for violence in the context of a debate that aims to reduce the ability to wreak violence. It's about tools.

No - and this is the point - it isn't just about the tools. The capacity to wreak violence is directly and more fundamentally also linked to the issue of gender ... as all the stats show world-wide, overwhelmingly so.

Yes, I'm in favour of the strictest gun controls, but I'm even more in favour of looking deeply into how we might create a society in which the male propensity for violence becomes ancient history. Otherwise the gun "tool", however much controlled, will be just be replaced with another "tool" ... with the same majority of male-wielders.

Your "offensive" comment is just retarded bollox.

 

[Redlambs]

I'm suggesting that we recognise and acknowledge the gender divide as being THE core fact when it comes to murder and violence ... instead of ducking the issue and just talking about "people" or specific means of killing such as guns.

What we do about solving the gender violence issue is another question. Feel free to start a thread on it if you wish.

That men are responsible for far more acts like this than women is beyond doubt, it's a fact.

You brought up 'man control' and then proceed to do what you accuse others of, which is ducking the questions relating to that. That's why people think what you said is rather stupid.

So I'll ask again, since YOU brought it up. What does this 'man control' mean?

Don't know what you problem is this evening you seem particularly tort. I will stick to my opinion thanks.

It is misguided if its aim is to solve this terrible issue of rampaging people killing innocents.

My apologies for being tort mate, it's not intended I just have a problem with people claiming 'mob' mentality, when it isn't as black and white as that.

For my part, I'm not American and I don't own a gun, though I have been hunting. What my question is, and one that people fail to actually give an answer to, it why is it legal to carry guns in the first place? They are designed to kill first and foremost.

You are correct that it won't instantly solve the problems, it's far more deeper and complex as you keep rightly pointing out, but the fact remains that there is no good reason for people having such easy access to guns, and as such surely it can only benefit to restrict that?

 

[DFreshKing]

the standard rifle that is in many swiss homes is the sig550 and most are kept after their army service but with automatic fire removed and converted to semi-automatic fire.

There are automatic sig550's in swiss homes grandfathered in, but is inaccurate to say everyone has an automatic rifle in switzerland.

Yeah, I oversimplified the point, but they have the highest gun ownership yet gun crime is very low in relation.

Even that graph shows it to be very similar to other countries with much less gun ownership.

Leading me to think other issues are important and more worthy of pursuing instead of futile gun restrictions in a place like the USA that has the right to bear arms so entrenched.

 

[nimic]

Again, I think this is a fruitless conversation. Gun control cannot actually be enforced in the United States at this point. Pandora's box is open.

It is certainly possible that eventually it will be legislated, but it would be about as effective as prohibition.

Europeans and Americans are quite different on a few things. In parts of Europe, things like health care and free education and a strong welfare state are considered fundamental rights.

In America, carrying a gun is one of those fundamental rights for a huge percentage of the country.

With such a defeatist attitude, you're damn right you're not going to fix anything. There's a problem in the US with people getting shot. There is always one common denominator, and that is that they had easy access to fairly heavy duty firearms. But suddenly, talking about doing something about it is met by "oh, it's already too late, it can't be fixed".

No one is saying that the US will magically become Sweden, Switzerland or the UK if there are put heavy restrictions on the legality of firearms. No one is saying there won't be any more school shootings. No one is saying that criminals will suddenly not be able to get a hold of guns. But it's a start.

More than that, it can't hurt. It can only help. Not every potential crazed gunman will be stopped before he can even commit the act, but some will be. One thing is for certain. More people will be caught trying to acquire illegal guns than will be caught trying to acquire legal guns, used for the same purpose. And, perhaps, the gun culture of the US will slowly change to become a more healthy one.

The problem of the apologists is that they only assume a short-term perspective. Hell, much stricter gun control might not have any effect for a decade or more. But if nothing at all is done, nothing is going to change, even in the long term. It's such a simple connection to make, yet it seems like so many people aren't making it.

 

[Plechazunga]

I'd be surprised if 'the male propensity to violence' ever 'becomes ancient history'. At least, not without radical genetic modification.

Steven Pinker gives a nice example: the Dalai Lama was brought up to be about as pacifist as you can possibly be. It would be damn hard to bring up all men to anything like the same normative standards of gentleness and compassion.

And yet, he now collects second world war tank memorabilia as a hobby.

 

[SteveJ]

So he's got that goin' for him.

 

[Nucks]

The same thing was probably said about slavery in the USA.

Never is a long time. It may take time, but unless you make a start you can never reach your destination.

The alternative is a descending spiral ... as technology advances and "personal" weapons will inevitably become ever more deadly.

Don't be idiotic. Don't compare slavery to gun ownership.

Additionally, nobody said never, absolutely at some point in the future gun control should be possible in the United States, however I would be extremely shocked if that future was less than 50 years away.

 

[Elliott]

Sorry, got my info from a BBC article. If it is wrong fair enough.

It still does not change the fact that gun controls will not solve this problem.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/1566715.stm

Switzerland's approach is interesting when talking about gun control whether or not.

That article is mental. The part about the gun crime stats is as stupid as it is wrong. The part about non-government provided guns and regulations is also way off. Basically, the kind of article I'd expect from Fox, not the Beeb.

 

[nimic]

Don't be idiotic. Don't compare slavery to gun ownership.

You compared gun ownership to access to alcohol. That is an equally idiotic comparison.

In a couple of hundred years, the American attitude to guns will seem as antiquated as their attitude to slavery in the 19th century. Maybe much sooner. Hopefully much sooner.

 

[TheReligion]

Yeah, I oversimplified the point, but they have the highest gun ownership yet gun crime is very low in relation.

Even that graph shows it to be very similar to other countries with much less gun ownership.

Leading me to think other issues are important and more worthy of pursuing instead of futile gun restrictions in a place like the USA that has the right to bear arms so entrenched.

No, I am not having that.

So what about in the UK where guns are very well regulated? Next to no guncrime.

In Europe the Swiss have a high rate of gun related death. This is due to their laws on guns.

It really is that simple believe me.

 

[Plechazunga]

Even that graph shows it to be very similar to other countries with much less gun ownership.

What, this graph?

 

[Danny Meehan]

Gun conteol could help and to blindly say it wouldn't is ridiclous. A country the size of Japan has had success why can't others. It would take more than just gun control, but at least it would be something.
http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/