I don't think there is an inherant problem with guns, I think there is a problem with the owners of the guns. Personally I know many people who own guns and have kids and they are all responsable parents who keep their weapons locked up and teach their kids the dangers of screwing around with them. Let me give you a quote on some statistics about gun control: Those figures are figures from the UK after the 1997 ban was enacted in reaction to the Dunblane massacre.
From US DOJ My maths makes the total 928,500, over 250 times the UK figure in a country with under 4 times the population. You Americans have a very much bigger problem than anything in the UK, or the rest of the civilised world. The very obvious problem is that a bullet kills, a punch on the nose doesn't. A UK burglar, faced with a healthy or screaming adult, will usually run away, a friend in the police tells me. Give him easy access to a gun and it seems he'll use it. 2200/10=220, and your population is under 4 times ours. Erm...that's my point. If there were less weapons in the hands of US citizens less people would get shot. "Owning a firearm is a protected right within the Bill of Rights" This always comes up. So what? Slavery was legal long after the Bill of Rights was written. Women didn't have the vote under the Bill of Rights. America was a dangerous country then, Indians, wild animals, possible renewal of hostilities with old enemies like us. This is 2004, just why do you neeeed a gun?
I don't feel like arguing the whole post, but according to your census, there is about 60,000,000 people in the UK and according to the US census, there is about 300,000,000 people in the US. Now, keep in mind that the census does NOT factor in illegals which is estimated at 5,400,000. According to all these figures, the US has 5x the population as the UK.
LOL. If you break into DOD labs and nick it? This is yet another example of the YAAnkie attitude. I like Americans but I think 'America' is the ultimate pleasure seeker nation. As long as all is good then no problem. The second another kid walks into his school with a bunch of his dad's army-grade weapons and kills half his class, I bet policy will change. Not to mention the increase in street gun crime. It's a damn shame it'll take something like this to change the bigwigs minds... Oh and acrew then NRA, they're all a bunch of irresponsible a******s! Scotty
Correction: 250 times the UK figure for victims of gun crime in a country with only 5 times the population. No gun problem at all, I take it all back. [/sarcasm] PS - Why is the NRA giving the Bush campaign $25 million dollars? (according to tonights BBC News) That's a lot of potatoes. Could it be because he didn't support extending the ban on weapons of mass destruction? And Kerry wants one?
this is part of the reason why living in britain feels a lot safer...this is just an observation not an opinion btw, but if you find yourself walking down the street, seeing a bobby (english policeman) with a trunchon and a funny hit it seems far more re-assuring to me then policemen with guns (pistols/shotguns/whatever)...i just dont understand why people have the need for guns...i completly agree, with the fact that its all about responsibility and using it safely, but then again on the other end of the scale, why have them at all....
You have to understand what it's like in the US before you say something like "why have them at all?" Americans EXPECT to be able to own guns. It's part of what makes an American American. I personally think it goes back to the romanticism of cowboys. Or perhaps back to the Civil War, or even the american revolution... That dependancy on a man's weapon for survival. It probably doesn't make any sense, but it's there in american hearts. It's too romantic to leave, we'd rather find ways to demand responsible use, even if it costs more.
Ok, I understand. The reason Americans feel the need to own guns is because Americans feel the need to own guns. Other people have them and some of those people may be dangerous so in order to cancel out that threat you have to make yourself just as dangerous. It kind of mirrors the world's view on nuclear weapons. Countries like America don't need them but the best way to defend itself against anyone that might have a nuclear weapon would be to own a few for itself.
Basically, yes. Either have a gun and know how to use it, wear a vest everywhere, or be completely helpless. Vests aren't very comfortable from what I hear.
My .02 cent are I personaly love guns, I have never owned them or ever bothered to reserch into them in total depth about them. I will one day purchase a legal fire arm that I will store away in the family fire safe and learn how to use it and respect it properly. I belive owning a gun is not a big deal as long as you can control yourself and it properly. The reason allot of people feel insecure about owning a gun is because they dont know what it means to own it in a civilised way. America is not the only country that has legal firearms. Look into Switzerland and Germany just to name two. In Switzerland you can own all kinds of guns that may be ilegal even in the US. Check this article out.
Ahhh - gun control! I went over this in an earlier post in more detail with numbers from the CDC, but essentially - I'm with Dad on this. People who are contemplating a crime that necessitates using a semiautomatic weapon with 20+ round clip is NOT concerned about breaking any laws with owning/buying said clip. This fact alone makes that law pointless. cpemma - criminals in this country use illegally (usually) obtained guns to invade homes...if you think a baseball bat or fist to the nose will make them run away, you are sorely mistaken. And your states are skewed unfairly. The US is the most diversified country in the world regarding culture, religion, social status and ethnicity. I would guess America's crime stats would be many times larger than the UK and most other countries from this fact alone. Owning firearms is not a problem - firearm education is. A stat most gun control advocates like to use is the XX% of gun deaths are from people who were killed with their own gun. What they do not tell you, is that percentage includes suicides and crimes of passion - suicides alone usually account for amost 50% of gun homicides in any given year. Hardly fair to use suicide to call guns unsafe. About the NRA - probably exactly why. Does money not influence politics in the UK? [/sarcasm]
I feel your pain dad. If we can't talk about american football or american gun ownership w/o a screaming bunch of "we're better" from across the pond, I'm just happy to get a peep out. Besides, wasn't this thread over when we all realized the ban lifting didn't do much?
actually a flash supressor redirects the flash so when shot you still have your night vision (instead of the cameras flash going into your eyes it goes somewhere less vital to your vision) shoot a rifle w/ a flash supressor at night and you still can see the flash. the old saying is true: murder is illegal, does that stop criminals from doing it. now take me, a law abiding citizen, (except in the eyes of the music industry ) i won't kill someone in cold blood, (not only because it is illegal, but because it goes against my belief of peace until there aren't any other options left.) think about this, if machine guns were easier to get (which is not what the C.A.W.B. deals with) and some crip and/or blood buys one and uses it. you have his/her name, address, SS#, blood type, favorite color, stool sample, music preference, etc on file. if this loser was going to buy a gun with the intent to do a drive by and kill other poeple and talk about the "man" keeping them down (which is a whole 'nuther thread) they would do it with an illegal gun too. the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban (C.A.W.B.) only outlaws cosmetic features, thats like ticketing a honda because it looks like it could be used in street racing. doesn't actually have to be used in racing, but it could. and thats what america is about: arresting people for what they might have done. :saluting the flag smilie: if anyone has any questions about what the law deal with, don't be afraid to ask, i'd be happy to help out anyone with a question
Depends. As I said before, it's all about Means, Motive and Opportunity. As you say, if someone is Motivated enough, they will find a way. However I'm thinking of the not-so-resourceful nutters who act in a fit of rage, on the spur of the moment. I really wouldn't want to lower the Means treshold for them. As inmate909 says, it's about gun education. People learn how to use a weapon responsibly, you reduce a lot of risk. True. But I feel that another variable is people's maturity, or functionality, or whatever other label we could stick on psychological health. I have no problem if, say, my neighbour owns a gun, and is very proficient in its use. Say, he visits a gun club, practices regularly (at the gun club, would NEVER even THINK of discharging a firearm in his back garden), keeps unloaded weapon and bullets in a safe place. Feels good so far, right? But now imagine said neighbour also has a drinking problem. When he is drunk, his personality changes and he has a tendency to become volatile, argumentative and impulsive, and get involved in fights. Oop. Good feeling gone... Don't get me wrong, if I lived in, say, Texas, I'd probably be owning a gun because everyone else does, and be VERY proficient in its use. I'd have no qualms in shooting an armed burglar if necessary (although the question could be raised: do I have a gun because I expect burglars to come armed, or do burglars come armed because they expect the home owner to have a gun?). But on the whole, given that I know how people work, I'm not at all comfy with the idea of everyone being able to own a gun.
What like a grenade launcher or folding stock ? just trying to think how these are cosmetic ? Device to lob high explosives and something that makes it easyier to conseal ? flash suppressor like you said, to help keep night vision, is hardly cosmetic if you are using the weapon in the dark, all of these are trying to reduce the capibilites of the weapon, yes it still kill, and does it well, but is trying to reduce the ways in which it can happen. anyway, that aside, stop knocking the US, like my people have said, even if guns was banned out right, people will still get hold of them, the US folks should have the right to bare arms, to if not anything else, level the playing field against the ****er's that choose the use them to enter peoples homes, or use them for other wrong's. Even here in the UK, I knew someone that knew people (sounds a bit tard ish, but its how it works) that could get hold of assault gear, AK's and the like, this just came up in random chatting at college, so hell knows what you could get if you really wanted to get hold of some hardware. sorry if that was a little disjointed, just trying to say what i think about the whole deal!
Grenade launchers and grenades themselves are destructive devices heavily regulated by the ATF. What the "CAWB" talks about are attachment points for one. Even with a folding stock, a rifle is STILL pretty big. Nothing to stop you from sawing off the stock either to make it even more compact Right, but the fear of these weapons are from being used in large scale massacre because people think the ban deals with automatic weapons. Kinda of hard to do at night when everyone is asleep and not gathered at work/school etc.
Interesting point. The history of gun ownership in the US suggests that everyone always had guns, so not sure if it can be answered honestly for the US. Most criminals do not use legally obtained weapons, so the onus would be always be on the homeowner to provide the best defense of family and property within the law. Law allows guns - I think they get them and hopefully become trained in its care and use.
Lets see, you beat the **** out of robber with a bat, the police come, he sues you for $100,000 and wins. Or you when he comes in the house you shoot him in the face (or chest...) with 00 Buckshot, he dies, the police come, you say you feared for your life, (just make sure your positioned so that the robber can leave the house without advancing on you, so they can't say he was trapped in the house) and you pay someone $300-$500 to get the bloodstains off the walls and carpet. Which sounds better to you? As for the AWB, it was sheerly cosmetic, when was the last time you heard of someone being robbed at bayonet point? It is just targeted at "mean" looking weapons. As for the need for a semi-auto rifle: varminting. When you have groundhogs, or prarie dogs, that are putting holes in cattle grazing land, or damaging crops, there may be 30-40 that you need to take in a day, and quick follow up shots may be needed if they are on the run. All you complain about the gangsters (self proclaimed "fugs") and what not on drive-bys. Well either they are using a full-auto SMG, which is classIII and requires the special liscense in the first place, so it is allready illegal. Or a pistol. There is no reason for them to use a semi-auto version of the Uzi, just use a pistol same amount of fire, cheaper weapon. Your not going to use a rifle in the car. However, If I take my AR-15, put a 30 rd mag in it, Shoot the engine block a few times, and dump the rest into the passenger compartment. I just saved tax-payers the money of keeping the homeboys in jail. You say there isn't much gun crime in the UK, but if the criminals know that *no one* will be armed, they don't need guns. How are the figures on violent crimes with knives and other weapons? All the more reason to allow teachers to have CCLs and be armed on the job. But you don't need an "army-grade weapon" (I'll assume your being ignorant and calling a semi-auto version of a military weapon "Army-Grade") A person could do a lot of damage to a lot of people with a single shot pistol or rifle. Respect for life is another problem. You have inner city school shootings because some guy looked at a girl the wrong way, and her BF got pissy about it. If people were raised with morals and what not maybe we wouldn't have the problem of stuff like school shootings over being made fun of, or girlfriend. Whats the point of arguing this anyway, you all have been brainwashed by the anti-gun liberals, and we all have been brainwashed by the NRA
This is actualy a very good point... In the state of Texas, if someone breaks into your home, and you shoot and kill them in your home (have to make sure they're IN the home, not climbing into the window or some-such... if they fall out the window, you'll be charged)... no harm done. But if you beat them shitless with a bat, they'll sue you for "emotional distress" The U.S. is a very ****ed up nation. Thus, we have to be prepared for anything. That includes the Hungarian army invading our neighborhood AND martians coming to celebrate our birthday.
