http://www.untergeek.com/?p=181 How many accidents were there before gun controll was implemented? Acording to the statistics in this article; out of 28,000 gun related fatalities in 2000, 58% where suicides. Of the remaining 12,000ish fatalities, 755 of them where accidental, the rest would likely have not been prevented by gun controll, because as I said gun laws will not stop people from getting a gun. I think the way of reducing accidents is to teach proper gun use and storage, because it's been shown that gun regulation can increase gun violence which is the second greatest cause of gun fatalities.
That is an incorrect assumption refuted by scientific research, but I really cannot be bothered to dig it out again. Believe what you want to believe.
you make the assumption that most every person that has used a gun to kill someone would get a gun illegally if they were banned. i dont think that's being very realistic. i care more about preventing gun accidents than murders. if someone is wanting to murder someone it's hard to stop them. gun accidents can be preventing by forcing people to learn gun safety before they can buy one.
Training prior to licensing makes sense to me; everyone accepts that driving tests are a good idea so why not something similar with firearms? Nexxo, the "scientific" research is all a bit poor IMO, as many studies are funded by either pro or anti gun control groups, it' hard to get to the actual facts. I do agree with you that in certain cases removing the legal supply of guns stems the illegal flow too, but to take the UK as an example the handgun ban had a negligible effect on gun crime. Edit: The amount of poor practice with firearms I've read about is slightly worrying, you'd be amazed at the sheer number of people who have removed the magazine from an automatic and proceeded to shoot a friend thinking the weapon was safe Training isn't a bad thing IMO.
+1 to Pimonserry Because why would you need an automatic rifle or pistol for any use that isn't going to be either in a legal gray area or overkill?
True, but the one I'm thinking of is neutral (kinda). As for the UK, it is on the decline again, with converted replica guns increasingly being used.
No argument on the restrictions on military level weapons, those are just asking for trouble. However, that is a very sticky debate, as anyone with half a brain can modify the 'limited' ones to fire full auto, so where do you draw the line? As for pistols, banning them has not removed the potential for handguns. Hell, I could probably get my hands on a pistol of some sort within 2 hours, and I'm a relatively good citizen, in that I don't break a fat lot of laws. People already associated with the kind of person who sells illegal arms? Pistols are easy to hide, yes, but it's not beyond the scope of a reasonable governing body to create a strict (More so than the current firearms licenses are) system for owning pistols. It's never going to happen now, with the reletively high profile small arms killings that're probably still fresh in some peoples minds, but hey. That's understandable. Yeah, the UK licensing system is fine, but a lot of it is absolutely insane. IIRC, you can have certain tank cannons on a shotgun license. You might not be able to buy the ammunition, but you can have them active (IE; barrel not filled/drilled/etc, firing mechanisms not disabled etc). The UK gun licensing system is in a weird state of the right ideas, but the entirely wrong execution. There are at least two main boards, the shotgun chaps (I can never remember their acronym. CPS or something?) and the NRA - The two hate each other. One sees the other as a bunch of stuffy old coots with no real idea of what's going on, and the 'stuffy old coots' see the other as irresponsible young people. The two can barely even get along for shooting events in the olympics, which is a pretty piss poor showing. I agree that some people and weapons should never be allowed to mix - It's a terrifying prospect that some people have a license to own a weapon. Which are also 'licensed' in a way, now. All the good retailers are complying with the VCR bill, but I still see cheapshit plastic 'mini' pistol replicas on market stalls (Marked up as toy guns, rather than replica, I assume this makes them a grey area for the VCR bill) - I've had one pulled on me before, after the VCR bill was brough into effect. Fortunately, I know my guns and their replicas, it turned out to be rather amusing (For me). The VCR bill and replica weapons (Primarily airsoft weapons) is a very good thing - Real skirmishers have no problem getting what they want, and the passers by have next to no chance of getting a good one from a good retailer. Hell, even a cheap chinese one, from a good retailer. The VCR bill needs stronger enforcement in the market areas, because they are not complying with the law even remotely. It doesn't help that around here, the police don't even know what the VCR bill is, it seems. I've had to explain it and the UKARA registration to the two officers that saw my airsoft collection (They weren't bothered, but it's my nature to state the legality of things I own), and the lady on the front desk at the station (I wanted a damaged Spas12 destroyed) - It's a pathetic enforcement around here.
Interesting read, I was surprised to see that knives were used to kill only 4 times more people than guns were, I would have thought them to be far more prevalent. Still, pretty low figures overall.
It is not just fully automatic guns that will still shoot a shot after the magazine is removed. Semi-Automatic guns do that as well. They require extra precautions but no way should they be banned (semi autos).
Definatly true. I guess my only worry is that implementing gun regulations could cause other problmems leading to more deaths, but not of the accidental kind. For this there seems to be a lot of evidence in either direction. Thus, I support education rather than restriction. I'll belive what I've read and I've found very little to the contrary.
The sort of people that accidentally shoot thier friend, i'd say are generally reckless. If you were somehow succesfully able to stop them from getting thier hands on a gun, they'd probably just go and accidentally stab thier friends and/or themselves with a knife or fork or whatever possibly dangerous item they have. It's not a case of forcing people to learn how to be safe, but to convince/teach people to want to be safe, which would be damn time consuming and never ending for many people = expensive. Banning guns, swords, concealed weapons, etc, is a much easier & cheaper alternative to reduce the amount of damage that can be made, either accidentally or not. There's more chance for someone to rethink what they are about to do when they can't get hold of a gun in an instant. Allthough easier, banning guns and reducing the amount of guns available in the world would still be a complicated and expensive thing to even try and accomplish We would all prefer our kids go to school where no guns are allowed, everyone goes through a metal detector placed on every entrance, and the same goes for our workplaces, even restautants, nightclubs, etc... right? If your child wants to go out clubbing, which would you prefer? The club with the metal detectors or the bar where you can fire a round into the ceiling to get the barman's attention? And i'm curious to know why you say that semi autos should no way be banned Talladega? Deer run too fast for ya?
Accidentally shooting someone is reckless/careless behaviour. It should be dealt with by immediate removal of the license, and a ban from ever having one again. In the UK, if you lose a gun, then you're slapped on the wrists (And have to report it the instant you think it's gone missing, even if you find it later), lose another one and your license is revoked, and your weapons confiscated. I don't know whether you can reapply, but I sincerely hope not. Safety training is a requirement of the NRA membership in the UK, and that is a requirement for getting a license here. At the very least, the US should demand all gun owners be members of a shooting body (I know not everyone agrees with the NRA) and those should have a safety training course as part of the initiation into the club. If possible, repeated every year or two. It's not licensing as such, but it'd certainly help keep tabs on gun owners, and ensure that they've attended safety training on a regular basis. I've actually felt safer in a rough bar (The only drinks they server were 'cider' 'bitter' and 'lager' - no names) than a nightclub. I guess that's just how I feel about certain types of people. Semi autos make up a large portion of the market, IIRC. Some guns do not lend themselves to being single shot, due to their design. Granted, most of those are assault rifles and their civilian varients, but hey.
Oh god here we go again. Gun control is like the war on drugs. Millions of dollars will be wasted on it and in the end guns will remain on the streets. Guns have been removed from the UK yet there are still gun related crimes. Yes the US has more but if you look at stats, the UK made up for gun violence with assault or non-firearm related violence. CRIMINALS DON'T CARE ABOUT THE LAW and will get a gun no matter what. The US can't even find 12 millions illegal’s let alone 200+million known guns in the US. The 68 NFA restriction of Class 3 firearms is the only gun control I agree with! As for some of the accidental shootings talked about above, those are the people that shouldn't populate the world because they're ****in retards. If you can't secure, operate, clean etc etc a weapon without proper precautions you SHOULDN'T own a firearm. Stats have should even with guns taken away from the equation, other forms of violance take over. People have been killing each other way before the invention of firearms. People kill people not guns, bats, food, booze, STDs etc. You are responsible for your own actions! BAN human emotion problem solved!
Trolling? A perfect summary - post of the week. The last debate (read bunfight) was too recent so I can't be bothered getting involved this time, and I've save myself 30mins by not reading any more posts. Be reassured, I'll join in next when the subject next pops up in a thread on basket weaving for beginners.
The problem is that (again) responsible people feel penalised for the behaviour of retards. Personally I have no problem with gun ownership if the owners are responsible, mature adults. The problem is keeping them out of the hands of criminals and retards. The research I was thinking of did not just point out how restricting the flow of legal guns starved the flow of illegal guns, but how restricting the flow of cheap guns restricted the flow of illegal guns. We are considering mostly the opportunist criminal with a cheap "Saturday Night Special" here --people who do not generally have the means to get their hands on a quality $500,-- firearm that the legal sports shooter would own. The solution is simple: sell only quality firearms that are priced accordingly. Sell them with a lockable, armoured case included in the deal so little Johnnie can't come across it and blow his own head off (although statistically more children drown in the garden pool). Make sure that people have a gun licence like a driver's licence, which demonstrates that they went through a proficiency training and evaluation.
There's a problem with that, too. the cost of guns is a weird one at best. There are cheap nice guns, too. Remingtons, for example. I can get hold of a Remington 700 MTR for $700. I know a guy who bought one a few years back kitted out with everything, for ~$700, and this was when our pound was worth ~$1.80 - I'd call that cheap, but they're certainly not ****. Accuracy International, for a .338 27" fluted, is around £3,300. The cheapest model on offer is a .243 with a 24" or a 26" plain, at £2,800. The .50 is a shade more at £7,600, which would fall more in line with 'restrict the cheap ****' method, but hey. Those are not VAT inclusive, btw. Similarly, A Barrett M82A1 is a mere $8,900, for a .50, which is a really nice rifle, an incredibly dangerous rifle in the wrong hands. Then there's the M99 in .416 (Same properties as a .50, pretty much), with a 32" it's even less at $4,200. It is, admittedly, a bolt action, but still. It's cheap, for what it is, yet it's a very good rifle. Import tax applies, I expect.
That's a point though isn't it, most UK citizens will think only people who need guns should have them (I.E. a farmer with a shotgun or a deerstalker with a bolt action rifle) and they don't believe anyone would ever need a handgun for a legitimate purpose. They just draw the line at a different place, but anyone sensible realises there are limits (nukes?) Basically, gun owners are looked upon in a very different light to those in the US. You should see the reactions I get when people find out I carry a pocket knife That's true, but given an easy to use powerful weapon some people would become killers when without it they might only get a bit aggressive. This does go both ways though, and allows the petite 5"2' lawyer who works late to shoot muggers. Either way shootings go up and people don't like that. As Nexxo says above though (which was indicative of the UK shooting market) high grade only guns sold to people on ticket and you have no real problems, it's a shame that 57,000 people had their collections confiscated because of the actions of one nutter, but that's the UK public for you: hoplophobis.
I agree with you guys really, one day a year to go absolutely nuts with your gun and shoot whoever you want would really help society. Could be in January, not much happens then.
There are too many variables to solving, controlling or improving firearm ownership. Banning all firearms here in the states would be political suicide for whoever signed their name. Also to date the only succesful firearm restriction is the 68 NFA. Why? You don't need fully automatic/sawed off/silenced weapons to protect yourself or hunt. People do take things to the extreme here in the states when it comes to their rights. But these rights were put into place to protect ourselves from the government not the every day citizen. What works in the UK might never work in the US, Chile, [insert random country].
Absolutely - I dare say, though, that we've had a longer history of stringent gun control than most places around the globe. I doubt our system, which is backlogged as it is, would ever work anywhere else in the world. It's a miracle that it even works here.
