School shooting Florida

[Nessie]

50 meter pistol, 25 metre pistol, 25 metre rapid fire pistol, 25 meter center-fire pistol, 25 meter standard pistol.

All the weapons for these events are banned in the UK. If any British team wants to compete they have to keep their pistols and do their training abroad.

the only pistol discipline that can be practiced in the UK is the 10 meter air pistol.

Link please. I am getting conflicting information, such as

http://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php/com...ncategorised/106-british-pistol-championships

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/shooting/4724962.stm

https://www.thecgf.com/sports/spotlight/shooting/shooting-events.asp

"There are three main categories of shooting events you’ll see over the five days of shooting competition at Glasgow 2014’s Barry Buddon venue in Angus, on Scotland’s East coast.....
10m Air Rifle
10m Pistol
50m Rifle 3 Positions (shots fired in kneeling, prone (lying flat on front) and standing positions
50m Rifle Prone
25m Pistol
50m Pistol (Men’s event only)
Full Bore Rifle (athlete stands up to 1000 yards from the target)"

 

[jimbob]

Jesus H..... I was kidding!!!

I thought you were, and had missed the original story, but I remember making such a comment about it at the time last year. Several of my colleagues have similar views to me as well as a similar sense of sarcasm.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Do you often make judgements on character and ancestry based on physiognomy?

Phrenology my dear chap! It's the social science of the future!

 

[IanS]

The reality is that school killings are done with more than guns. I never suggested that guns didn't make it easier to do. Not sure why people insist that I am.

Well in this thread, following the mass shooting in Florida, it is specifically the use of guns that we are talking about. We are focusing specifically on what can be done to prevent or reduce gun crime of this sort.

You should not need to ask why we are focusing on guns, and especially not after what just happened again in Florida. But just to make it super clear - there are far, FAR, too many people being injured and killed in the USA by people shooting off guns all over the place.

 

[BobTheCoward]

How about reducing the amount that any individual, corporation or any other organisation can donate to any political party to $100,000, and making it illegal to donate to an individual politician. The power of big business and special interest groups to influence decisions would be severely curtailed, and the NRA would no longer be able to buy politicians. Politicians then, heaven forefend, might have to represent their constituents rather than lobby groups.

The money is small and not the driving force of their power. If it were, Soros and Bloomberg have way more money to donate than the NRA.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vo...tics/2017/10/5/16430684/nra-congress-money-no

One of the most prominent critics of Democrats’ gun control measure was Texas Sen. John Cornyn, a Republican and reliable NRA ally since before his 2002 election. The NRA has given Cornyn about $30,000 over the past decade. In 2014, the NRA gave him $9,900 — more than it gave to any other Republican senator that election cycle.

But it was a drop in his much bigger ocean of donations. In 2014 he raised $14 million, including $57,000 from Exxon alone. The NRA was nowhere near his top 15 biggest donor contributors.

All of the money the NRA has given Cornyn for more than a decade might pay for about 1 percent of his fundraising for one election cycle — and Cornyn is one of the biggest recipients of NRA cash in Congress. Overall, though the NRA does help pump money into outside spending groups, Republican lawmakers could fund their campaigns just fine if the NRA bowed out.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the NRA gave close to $1 million to Republican senators’ PACs in 2014 — or about 1 percent of the $67 million they raised that year.

 

[BobTheCoward]

It won't be. Speaker Ryan will as always be "collecting the facts" to "avoid trampling the rights of law-abiding citizens". Thoughts and prayers and then defer to the next shooting occurs. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

Nothing at all will be done.

Well, trampling the rights of citizens is a bad thing. I don't want to give up my right to remain silent because it would make people safer. Protecting rights is a pretty good policy goal.

 

[Nessie]

In this Guardian article;

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ool-shooting-columbine-generation-gun-control

there are various appeals from parents;

"During a funeral Friday for 18-year-old Meadow Pollack, her father looked at his daughter’s coffin and screamed as Florida’s governor Rick Scott and 1,000 others looked on. “Our kids should be safe,” Andrew Pollack said."

and pupils;

"Cameron Kasky, a 17-year-old Stoneman Douglas high student, created a “Never Again” Facebook page for his peers and the community to press for action."

for action. The reason why this will result in nothing is because those people did not care one iota about mass shootings, till it happened to them. Their appeal will fall on deaf ears as the vast majority of Americans have not had any connection to a mass shooting. Just as the parents and kids at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School said nothing about past mass shootings, because they did not involve them, those they appeal to will do the same.

There is no sense of society in the USA as there is the UK, where, after one mass shooting of children in a school, the entire country reacted as if it was their children in their school who had been shot.

 

[BobTheCoward]

In this Guardian article;

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ool-shooting-columbine-generation-gun-control

there are various appeals from parents;

"During a funeral Friday for 18-year-old Meadow Pollack, her father looked at his daughter’s coffin and screamed as Florida’s governor Rick Scott and 1,000 others looked on. “Our kids should be safe,” Andrew Pollack said."

and pupils;

"Cameron Kasky, a 17-year-old Stoneman Douglas high student, created a “Never Again” Facebook page for his peers and the community to press for action."

for action. The reason why this will result in nothing is because those people did not care one iota about mass shootings, till it happened to them. Their appeal will fall on deaf ears as the vast majority of Americans have not had any connection to a mass shooting. Just as the parents and kids at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School said nothing about past mass shootings, because they did not involve them, those they appeal to will do the same.

There is no sense of society in the USA as there is the UK, where, after one mass shooting of children in a school, the entire country reacted as if it was their children in their school who had been shot.

Every man is an island.

 

[MikeG]

The money is small........

How much has the NRA given to Trump? Think carefully before you answer.

 

[BobTheCoward]

How much has the NRA given to Trump? Think carefully before you answer.

Depends on how you count it. The 30 million number includes pro Trump and anti Clinton

..also it takes 280 to tango in federal government. It would be cheaper for the anti gun crowd to buy a veto proof majority if it is about money.

 

[Nessie]

Every man is an island.

Far more so in the USA than anywhere else in the western world and that self centred attitude and fractured society is a prime reason why the USA will never be able control guns.

Plus having so many guns already in the hands of the wrong people and out of control.

 

[Meadmaker]

Maybe this time it really is different.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/17/...onor-issues-ultimatum-on-assault-weapons.html

(Article is about a rich donor who says he won't write checks to any candidate if they don't support an assault weapons ban.)

 

[Ranb]

The tight controls the US federal government has over civilian ownership of fully automatic weapons should be looked upon as a success story and a way forward.

Are you certain you know what these controls are? $200 tax, a ban on registration of new MG's for civilians, photos, prints etc.

Getting your hands on a working machine gun is next to impossible, even for law-abiding citizens, the 'shall not be infringed' portion of the Second Amendment notwithstanding.

100% false. Here is one place where the law-abiding can go to get their legal MG. https://www.machineguncentral.com/Default.aspx There are others.

It's a place to start.

So let's say the NFA of 1934 is extended to all semi-auto firearms. How many are there in civilian hands now? 300 million? If only 10% are semi-auto and would fall under the NFA1934 if enacted by Congress, then there is still an ample supply of guns for nearly anyone to use and will be for decades to come.

 

[Nessie]

Maybe this time it really is different.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/17/...onor-issues-ultimatum-on-assault-weapons.html

(Article is about a rich donor who says he won't write checks to any candidate if they don't support an assault weapons ban.)

It also states;

"Mr. Hoffman acknowledged it was “not likely” that he would succeed in making the party more open to an assault weapons ban, and said Republicans were too beholden to the National Rifle Association.
He has urged Republicans in the past to support certain firearms restrictions, without effect, but has not previously issued such a blunt threat."

It also states;

"Senator Marco Rubio of Florida voiced resistance to discussing gun control in a speech after the massacre, arguing in the Senate that a person determined to carry out an attack would find the weaponry to do it regardless of government regulations."

The USA is too fractured even if only a few influential people do not want gun control, nothing of note will happen. This is just tinkering as part of the coping strategy.

 

[Ranb]

Do you see how you are moving goal posts here?
From 'it won't do any good because 'they' will just find other weapons' to 'you can't get the legislation passed or updated'?
From 'the legislation is impossible to write' to 'if you write it it will somehow interfere with military weapons development'?

I'm not the one moving goalposts when I'm just responding to individual posts on the forum.

It ignores the impulse killer who might not kill if it is harder or might kill fewer people if he doesn't have 30 bullet clips or a bumpstock device.

How many is this? Have you any evidence at all that suggests a person would be less likely to kill people if they had to settle for bump firing without a slide fire stock or with a 20 round magazine? I can't imagine any deranged killer allowing minor details like that to hinder their progress. No one makes a 30 round clip by the way.

The NRA leadership is the problem. Most of the members are in favor of regulations. And the leadership is bought and paid for by the gun manufacturers.

So we have 5 million NRA members, big deal. What about the gun owners who think that the NRA is a "bunch of pissy compromising, pinko, racist, bastards" who are too wiling to throw away America's right to own the guns they want? I think you misunderstand what many gun owners think of the NRA.

Like it or not many gun owners vote. In 2011 I was able to talk to a person handling communications with the public on various bills people were calling about in WA. In 2011 the bill that got the second highest number of calls to legislative offices in Olympia was one for certain firearm use (allowing it). First was a bill on minors driver's licensing. The NRA had exactly zero involvement with the gun bill. I couldn't even get their regional rep to take an interest.

 

[Ranb]

Did you really say that? Really? I mean, given the chance to take this back, would you?

Because it reads like you're complaining that a massacre of kids in a school shouldn't be treated as such a big deal by the press. You'd like it normalised, maybe like a road traffic accident or something, would you?

Yes I really said it as it is a simple fact. I don't think shooting up a school is normal and I resent that you are saying I do feel that way.

 

[Lurch]

America must recognize the state of an evolving society.

Do male Christians assiduously refuse to sit upon the same seat just vacated by a menstruating woman? Or observe any of the legion of similarly outmoded edicts enumerated in the Old testament?

Then why adhere to a parsiminiously worded, open-to-interpretation, 18th century Amendment (and only the second) to the Nation's Constitution? What might have been relevant during the age of the musket, in the formative years of a still-abuilding country, just might be less applicable today. Or at least be recognized as deserving an update to accommodate modernity.

Canada is a younger Nation than is the US, but we have at least made greater strides in recognizing the benefits to the greater good by limiting some "freedoms." Any collection of citizens possessing of halfway good sense realizes that the "right" to bear arms is really more a privilege, to be regulated with due diligence demanded by import upon safety.

Americans as a society have not yet evolved sufficiently to recognize fully that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one. Indeed, their collective mindset would seem to be that the *wants* of the one outweigh the *needs* of the many. Hence the kneejerk recoiling in horror at the prospect of any measure that smacks of "socialism", however beneficial to the individual it might be.

Grow up, America.

 

[IanS]

How many is this? Have you any evidence at all that suggests a person would be less likely to kill people if they had to settle for bump firing without a slide fire stock or with a 20 round magazine? I can't imagine any deranged killer allowing minor details like that to hinder their progress. No one makes a 30 round clip by the way.

Well they would certainly be less likely to kill people by shooting them with guns if the law made it almost impossible for them to keep loaded guns in their homes.

And it's a pretty obvious attempt to avoid the issue when US gun enthusiasts/supporters start claiming that shooters would find some other offensive weapon with which to kill people ...

... in all the major mass-shooting cases, such as this Florida shooting, it is complete and very wild conjecture to claim the killer would have found some other method to easily kill so many people. Claims like that are just pure self-interested guesswork (or more accurately; it's just a dishonest excuse to carry on using guns).

Bottom line is - the US could prevent almost all of these murders if it really wanted to. All it has to do is pass laws similar to the UK and the rest of Europe. But apparently there are too many US politicians who think that would cost them votes (and hence put them out of a job), and too many US gun enthusiasts who have threatened mass violence on the streets if anyone tries to take away their loaded guns ...

... it's a pretty obvious, and actually quite simple choice. But so far the choice of the US seems to be that peoples lives are a price worth paying for continuing to have fun playing with guns.

 

[MikeG]

Yes I really said it as it is a simple fact. I don't think shooting up a school is normal and I resent that you are saying I do feel that way.

I didn't say anything about how you were feeling. I asked questions because of the way you framed your post. Appearing to whinge about the press coverage given to a massacre is likely to mislead people, if that isn't what you actually intended to say. Which is why I asked.

 

[sadhatter]

In this Guardian article;

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ool-shooting-columbine-generation-gun-control

there are various appeals from parents;

"During a funeral Friday for 18-year-old Meadow Pollack, her father looked at his daughter’s coffin and screamed as Florida’s governor Rick Scott and 1,000 others looked on. “Our kids should be safe,” Andrew Pollack said."

and pupils;

"Cameron Kasky, a 17-year-old Stoneman Douglas high student, created a “Never Again” Facebook page for his peers and the community to press for action."

for action. The reason why this will result in nothing is because those people did not care one iota about mass shootings, till it happened to them. Their appeal will fall on deaf ears as the vast majority of Americans have not had any connection to a mass shooting. Just as the parents and kids at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School said nothing about past mass shootings, because they did not involve them, those they appeal to will do the same.

There is no sense of society in the USA as there is the UK, where, after one mass shooting of children in a school, the entire country reacted as if it was their children in their school who had been shot.

Does that perfect sense of community not extend to knife crime?

Seems odd you can magically puff away gun crime but not knife crime. Almost as if culturally one was simply easier to deal with.