thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2001
- Messages
- 34,596
If the shooter didn't have access to guns, he would have simply pushed the Y button and switched to shuriken and killing just as many people........
School shooting Florida
- Thread starter Darat
- Start date
- Status
If the shooter didn't have access to guns, he would have simply pushed the Y button and switched to shuriken and killing just as many people........
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2016
- Messages
- 29,972
Why are mass shootings not committed with full-auto weapons?
Because most are banned and the ones who have been grandfathered in are horrendously expensive.
The same thing would work for semi-automatics.
Because most are banned and the ones who have been grandfathered in are horrendously expensive.
The same thing would work for semi-automatics.
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 23,431
This. The shooting events took place on Ministry of Defence land, not at a civilian firing range.
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2009
- Messages
- 2,675
Yeah there is plenty of scope for improving the gun regulations in the US so that mass shooters find it lots harder to tool up, while at the same time keeping the "right to bear arms" that is enshrined in the constitution.
There's the argument that's trotted out that goes that as the constitution says "right to bear arms" then any restriction of what those arms are is unconstitutional and must be stopped. Which is obviously hogwash because the US already restricts some arms from private ownership. You can't buy full automatics everywhere for example.
That line could be extended to cover semi-automatics too, restrictions on magazine size could be added restrictions on calibre etc etc.
While there isn't going to be big change in the US until there's enough political will to change the 2nd amendment such that owning guns is a privilege and not a right, there is plenty of scope to introduce limits on some of the guns or at the very least have proper debate and discussion on the topic.
Gun control is like lots of politics in the US (at least from the outside looking in) hyper partisan. Moderates get drowned out by extremists on both sides. Hyperbole is the stock in trade and who can shout the loudest, call their opponents the worst names, dredge up irrelevant scandal about the opponents, spend the most money and generate the most media coverage tends to win.
When politicians care more about getting elected than they do about serving the people that elected them, when the people donating lots of money to their coffers so they can fund all of the hyper partisan rabid ******** that passes for political discourse these days get much more preferential treatment than Joe the plumber, then something is broken somewhere.
All this kind of politics serves to do is maintain the status quo. That's not healthy.
I'm not an American. It looks like a great place for the most part. Lots of things about America fascinate me and boggle my mind at the same time.
I really hope that this time is different. Mass shootings are avoidable, they ought to be shocking headline news because they happen so rarely. Whichever way you slice it, easy access to guns is one of the major contributing reasons for the frequency and severity of mass shootings in the US. As well as one of the simpler things to fix.
"Truck killing was popularised lately"? Are you talking about Islamic terrorists who used trucks (i.e. a "Lorry") to drive that into crowds of people in a busy street in Germany, France, UK...? Is that what you are talking about? Because that has not one iota to do with spree shootings in the USA, does it!
So far, with all the various mass shooting incidents in US Schools, in US workplaces, or in other public places in the USA where there have been multiple people shot, and indeed all the thousands of other shooting incidents where lesser numbers of individuals have been killed or injured, I do not recall any of those attackers or would-be attackers trying to use a truck instead?
How many ex-students with a grudge against their schools, or ex-employees with a grudge against their employers company, have tried to attack the school or company or other organisation in the USA with a "truck"?
If it comes to that - how many of those US cases involved the attacker trying to attack all those people with a knife, or a baseball bat, or some other improvised weapon? How many tried to blow-up the school, college, company buildings, peoples homes etc. with a bomb?
No, all of that is just a dishonest attempt by gun enthusiasts to move the conversation off guns. The plain fact of the matter is that guns are a major lethal problem in the USA. And specifically the problem is that US laws allow ordinary members of the public to keep numerous high-power guns and masses of bullets in their private homes ... and some states even allow those people to openly carry those loaded guns around the shops and bars etc. That's just asking for vast numbers of people to be shot dead.
No. The US needs to change it's gun laws to stop people owning loaded guns in their home. That's the problem. If that had been done years ago then those kids in the Florida school would all still be happily enjoying their lives now. But instead they are now all dead ... and they are not coming back to life, you cannot change that now ... it's not a video game, people really are being shot dead on US streets by people who have a hobby interest in playing with loaded guns.
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,222
Still no evidence, but at least you have dropped the suggestion the entire British Olympic team has to train abroad.
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,222
If something similar to the Texan LTC permit requirement was rolled out across the entire country, that would work. It would mean there is a high chance only suitable people can have a gun (non criminals, no mental health issues etc).
But, all those not suitable would need to have their guns removed from them and supply restricted so they would really struggle to get a gun.
Only then would the USA be in the same position as the rest of the western world, which has proved keeping guns only to suitable people works.
The chances of that happening are nil.
Ian Osborne
JREF Kid
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2001
- Messages
- 8,957
13th June 2012 was a Wednesday, which shows the level of research which goes into gun control advocates' arguments, and thereby invalidates any and every other argument raised by them.
Don't miss this special offer folks.
There is a Presidents’ Day sale on bump stocks, the device the Las Vegas shooter put on his rifles. Slide Fire Solutions, a bump stocks manufacturer, is offering 10% off with the coupon code MAGA.
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 23,431
It doesn't seem to be particularly easy to find details on how pistol shooting events are dealt with but I did find this NYT article: www.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/sports/o...hampers-british-olympian-georgina-geikie.html
Special exemptions had to be given for international events like the Commonwealth games and Olympics. In the Manchester 2002 Commonwealth games the competitors had to be locked in at the shooting range and return their pistols to officials before the venue was unlocked. In the run up to London 2012 it seems the sense of national prestige was sufficient for political will to go further and issue exemptions for British competitors to practice at specified locations. So it does appear that British Olympic pistol shooters do usually have to train overseas.
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
You see ? And some say nobody wants to ban guns completely. Well there is one guy right here.
Both crowds have to achieve compromise. This is not the right path to it. Like putting all gun owner into bag labeled 'people who have a hobby interest in playing with loaded guns'.
Something should be done for sure. But so far only I see is two crowds who just wont listen.
But IanS merely suggested
The US needs to change it's gun laws to stop people owning loaded guns in their home. That's the problem.
How is that a no compromise complete ban on guns?Steve
Penultimate Amazing
I am going to give Dr.Sid a legitimate target. I would like to ban guns completely! All guns! Everywhere! Including military and police guns of all sizes. And Bombs. And landmines. And missiles, nuclear and otherwise. Any weapon that is initialized by, or results in, an explosion. The world would be a much better and safer place.
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
AR-15 went on sale in the mid 1960's.
Patent expired in 1977 and other mfgs began copying and selling.
Early AR's are now Curio & Relic eligible...about 10,000 AR-15 serial numbers are now C&R eligible.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/what-firearms-are-considered-be-curio-and-relic-firearms
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/the...ollector-acquire-firearms-interstate-commerce
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/are...nsed-collectors-subject-nics-background-check
Last edited:
DragonLady
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2003
- Messages
- 4,615
Right. Good luck. If you are serious about wanting to ban guns, those are the people -along with various security forces- you have to start with, and that will never happen.
Those who perceive a genuine need to protect themselves or others will always believe the laws against such items shouldn't apply to them, and that crack in the sidewalk will inevitably allow a steady stream of weapons of one kind or another to boil out into the world.
I sincerely believe the world would be safer today if more people had simply had to endure my father's gun safety tutoring. Sadly, his audience was very limited, and I often see people who should know better mishandling guns in ways that were drilled out of me on the very first day.
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
Right. Good luck. If you are serious about wanting to ban guns, those are the people -along with various security forces- you have to start with, and that will never happen.
Those who perceive a genuine need to protect themselves or others will always believe the laws against such items shouldn't apply to them, and that crack in the sidewalk will inevitably allow a steady stream of weapons of one kind or another to boil out into the world.
I sincerely believe the world would be safer today if more people had simply had to endure my father's gun safety tutoring. Sadly, his audience was very limited, and I often see people who should know better mishandling guns in ways that were drilled out of me on the very first day.
I am dead serious about about wanting to ban all guns. The fact that it will never happen, regardless of who it is started with, does not change that.
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
Let's have a test case.
Let's remove all the guns from all the residents of Chicago.
Ban firearms in Chicago, with serious jail time for possession, have a one year amnesty, and then start confiscating.
See how it goes.
I would think at least one city, or even state, will be willing to be the test case.
DragonLady
Illuminator
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2003
- Messages
- 4,615
Sure. I understand. But...banning all guns won't stop people from making them, and as long as that happens someone will genuinely believe they need to arm themselves to protect themselves or high value targets.
I once had a friend who could make "zip guns" from old lamps or discarded pieces of pipe. It's one thing to ban them -make them illegal- it's another to actually prevent their manufacture.
Even if we accomplish the first, the second will always be a looming threat, and that thread will keep us wanting to make exceptions to the bans...while we're busy chasing our tails, stories of murder by guns will still be in the news.
But I do agree there would be fewer such tales, and that might give us more room to fix the problems with society that are the underlying cause of these events in the first place.
The guns are a symptom; the desire to murder each other is the cause. How do we fix that?
Further, how we do we prevent those who want to murder us in our sleep from doing that while we fix it?
"Live and let live" only works if everyone agrees -otherwise, one nut who disagrees can take out a whole population.
Just about everything possible is wrong with the thinking/"logic" of the above post. Firstly - the sort of mass murder school shooting that just occurred in Florida, and which has happened so many times previously in the US, is afaik rarely if even "a hot headed action" ... on the contrary, afaik in such cases the killers typically planned their attacks for months before they carried it out ... quite often it seems they had told other people (inc. making posts on the net) months before the killing itself. So these are not normally just a spur of the moment piece of what you just called "hot headed action".
Second - in other countries like the UK (which is what you were just replying about), we are not confident that more spree killing like Hungerford or Dunblane could never again happen in the future ... it could happen, and we all know that. But since the UK gun laws (and also EU gun laws?) are now so much more robust, it is least very much harder for anyone who intends to do anything like that … it's now very much more of a deterrent.
Third – guns are not “just tools”, they are specifically designed and now highly developed to be lethal weapons for the purpose of killing as many people as quickly as possible. That's a very big difference between an AR15 or a high-power advanced-tech handgun compared to things like a kitchen knife!
It would not take decades. The effect would be almost immediate if the US introduced laws like we have in the UK or the rest of Europe (afaik) with a ban on private citizens keeping loaded guns in their homes. But even if it did take some years before it resulted in a big reduction in the number of public shooting cases, that would be a fantastic change for the better for the lives of everyone in the US.
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
Well gun you can't load is kinda useless.
- Status