Gun laws?

[biggles1]

also, stop with the insults or I'll ask a mod to lock the thread. we''re all sensible people and we can act like it, rather than calling each other wankers

[Bantler]

Originally Posted by killshot

Come to my state for a while. This is possibly the most optimistic thing I've ever heard.

One of the reasons I'm saying this is impossible is because many Americans, myself included, don't even believe this is a goal worth accomplishing. Give up a major freedom just because a few people can't handle it? Nope. I understand that less guns will mean fewer tragedies. But that's a chance the US has decided its willing to take. I don't believe that holding up a picture of a dead kid gives anyone the right to take away the liberties of others. Its a damn shame those kids died but you need to look at the real issues here and stop putting the blame on tools.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_1...sault-weapons/
[(CBS) LOS ANGELES -On Wednesday, at Los Angeles' annual gun buyback event, which allows residents to turn in weapons with "no questions asked," two rocket launchers and 75 assault weapons were collected, the Los Angeles Times reports.


"Those are weapons of war, weapons of death," LAPD Chief Charlie Beck said, according to the LA Times. "These are not hunting guns. These are not target guns. These are made to put high-velocity, extremely deadly, long-range rounds downrange as quickly as possible, and they have no place in our great city."

A total of 2,037 weapons were turned in Wednesday, up from last year's total of 1,673, the paper reports. Beck told the paper it was the most success the city's gun buyback program has ever seen.]


Nobody is coming for to pry the shotguns, rifles and legal-pisols out of your cold dead fingers. Specific tools are the main problem.

[biggles1]

bantler just a point. what about those who collect historic weapons? if still original they would likely be full auto and disabling them can take away from historical value
also, look up the Arizona big sandy shoot.

[Bantler]

Originally Posted by biggles1

bantler just a point. what about those who collect historic weapons? if still original they would likely be full auto and disabling them can take away from historical value
also, look up the Arizona big sandy shoot.

You are off track again. Nobody is coming for relics, collectables or desert cactus murderers. Doing nothing because the seal isn’t air-tight is asinine.

We don’t need a Tupperware-solution to veer Left.

[biggles1]

Originally Posted by Bantler

You are off track again. Nobody is coming for relics, collectables or desert cactus murderers. Doing nothing because the seal isn’t air-tight is asinine.

We don’t need a Tupperware-solution to veer Left.

I'm not saying do nothing
I'm saying there is much more to take into account than you think.

[Bantler]

Originally Posted by biggles1

I'm not saying do nothing
I'm saying there is much more to take into account than you think.

It's pretty simple.

Perpetrators will commit their crimes with the most lethal force they have access to. As a Progressive Nation it’s our responsibility to control/limit that access.

[biggles1]

Originally Posted by Bantler

It's pretty simple.

Perpetrators will commit their crimes with the most lethal force they have access to. As a Progressive Nation it’s our responsibility to control/limit that access.

it's far from simple. believing there are simple solutions is fooling yourself.

[Bantler]

Originally Posted by biggles1

it's far from simple. believing there are simple solutions is fooling yourself.

Solution is the wrong word if you believe it’s only defined by a Solved-State.

Try Betterment, Progress or Evolution.

[SailorAthena]

Do banks seriously give out guns???? o.o ? And I agree with Fared and Bantler. There have gotta be rules and laws. Having none, though it would be freedom would also be a horrible disaster. Given the choice and no consequences, a lot of people would do terrible things ._. It may be complicated but other countries have done it and as such have less gun violence. If not gun regulation what do you suggest?

[Bantler]

When banks gave out toasters people just plugged them in to toss into full bathtubs.

Banks are the problem.

[biggles1]

Originally Posted by Bantler

Solution is the wrong word if you believe it’s only defined by a Solved-State.

Try Betterment, Progress or Evolution.

what point is there to change, if not in the pursuit of a true solution further down the road.

[Bantler]

Originally Posted by biggles1

what point is there to change, if not in the pursuit of a true solution further down the road.

This isn’t philosophy class under a tree. We’re just trying to keep bullets out of bodies.

[biggles1]

limitations may be an option, but what limitations? enforced by who? under what rules? with what exceptions?
there is so much to look at with all options for solutions and all need to be looked at carefully before rash and unfavourable decisions are made.

[SailorAthena]

Change is better than doing nothing, instead of waiting for someone to somehow think of a solution everyone is happy with. Progress through trial and error :D If we never did that then we'd still be cavemen o.o

[biggles1]

Originally Posted by SailorAthena

Change is better than doing nothing, instead of waiting for someone to somehow think of a solution everyone is happy with. Progress through trial and error :D If we never did that then we'd still be cavemen o.o

progress through trial and error also lead to the holocaust.

an extreme example yes, but the point is that if you make decisions based on knee jerk fears and prejudices rather than facts and reality things are not likely to improve in the long run.

[Bantler]

Originally Posted by biggles1

progress through trial and error also lead to the holocaust.

an extreme example yes, but the point is that if you make decisions based on knee jerk fears and prejudices rather than facts and reality things are not likely to improve in the long run.

Another platitude. Gun violence has decades of facts and reality.

[biggles1]

Originally Posted by Bantler

Another platitude. Gun violence has decades of facts and reality.

most information presented is biased, badly represented or incomplete.
there is much work that needs to be done if we expect to create realistic solutions, and few are willing to put the work in

[SailorAthena]

The outcome of doing nothing isn't biased though :o And I'm not that biased myself. But if it's worked in several different countries it shouldn't be ignored just because it's America

[Fat1Fared]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics Shows the laws of all countries in brief, wiki so as useful as you take it.

British Home Office Overview of UK gun legislation.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publica...df?view=Binary

The Cullen inquiry: A full review into regulation of guns.

http://www.archive.official-document...e/duncntnt.htm

Gun Policy.Org on German statistics (This has other countries as well.)

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/germany

AJPM Review of gun regulation. (This is about as unbaised and indepth as you can get and while its conclusions are not very helpful due to the conservative nature of the researchers, it is a fair one.

http://www.thecommunityguide.org/vio...rearms-law.pdf

Look at the table and notice the insane correlation between Liberal Gun laws and Gun related deaths.

This one is also good because it looks at states like Washington and highlights how their stronger gun laws lead to decrease in gun related crime and death and compares them to states with less regulation.

In fact it is amazing, every time stricter gun laws have been implemented we see crimes related to them decrease.

There are many others. Gun regulation is well studied, just people choose to ignore those studies.

So read these and draw your own conclusions.

[biggles1]

"those who would give up a little liberty to gain a little security, will deserve neither and lose both" - Ben Franklin

don't go round thinking there are easy answers. if there was an easy solution, don't you think it would have been thought of already? matters like this must be dealt with extremely carefully, and will certainly be very messy to deal with.

be careful what you ask for, the old saying goes.

I urge caution to all sides, not inaction or anything else, but caution.

[SailorAthena]

Aka do nothing ._. There have already been good ideas though of, but people saying stuff like wait is just going to mean nothing changes. I think it's obvious there isn't going to be an idea both sides are equally happy with. I don't agree with that quote

[biggles1]

Athena you imply words that I have not spoken.
patience is of utmost importance, as making the wrong decisions quickly can often have worse effects than delaying and making a better choice.
especially in such delicate situations.like this.

[SailorAthena]

And how long do you think we should wait? And waiting for what exactly? I still don't see why you have problems with regulations, it's not banning. And even you admitted that guy who shot those firefighters shouldn't have had a gun (or something like that anyway) Even if it just starts off small it's a step in the right direction

[grimfang999]

Originally Posted by biggles1

"those who would give up a little liberty to gain a little security, will deserve neither and lose both" - Ben Franklin

don't go round thinking there are easy answers. if there was an easy solution, don't you think it would have been thought of already? matters like this must be dealt with extremely carefully, and will certainly be very messy to deal with.

be careful what you ask for, the old saying goes.

I urge caution to all sides, not inaction or anything else, but caution.

Biggles I thought better of you. You are unable to support your points so you go to quoting longdead politicians around when guns were inefficient and there was still threat to the USA by the British. He was a classical liberal, and we have all seen what horrid impacts classical liberalism has had on humanity (Living conditions and inequallity in the industrial revolution, the current state of capitalism and America)

The fact is, there needs to be regulations for security, so people ban be more liberated from the fear of on mass gun violence.

For it being dealt earier, fared explained that, and remember the American government is both extremely corrupt and has immense pressure from both sides. Whatever it does, it will lose support, so has to always take the moderate stance.

It is not a solution, a solution implies an absolute fix, it is a long term measure. Long term measures seek resolution, but it does not solve it by any duration of time. It happens when it happens.

[SailorAthena]

I do think that the idea of people shooting people to protect their guns is worrying and that those people should have not been allowed guns in the first place o.o I don't want someone taking away my guns so now I'm going to go shoot people o.o

[biggles1]

you all seem to misinterpret my posts.

I am not saying what I think should and should not be done, nor am I saying we should wait for.something else to happen.

I am saying, that whatever we do decide on, we had better be careful wE don't set ourselves on the best intentioned paved road to he'll, rather than the stairway to heaven.

it's easy to do, in cases as sensitive as this.

[Bantler]

The Government should have Free-Bullets Day. Just bring in your guns so they can ensure they give you the correct cartridges. Then they take your guns and throw them in a deep hole.

[Ishikawa Oshro]

What most are failing to realize is that gun owners are not really at fault for most of these crimes.

I believe in the last week two more cases of gun violence were reported.
One such man siezed the gun from an officer and opened fire on three of them.
http://www.nj.com/gloucester-county/...ookie_cop.html

I still believe the problem is not the gun but how easy to take from others these are becoming.

In my hometown a sick and grueling rape went down. And here's the kicker. The assaulters were teenagers. Teenagers cannot legally buy a gun in my state. So how did they get them?
They held the woman at gun point and the rest is history.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20..._arrested.html

In the shooting of the children a gun was siezed from the parent.
Simply put gun owners need to be put in check.
they need to be charged with assisted murder or assualt in certain cases. Make them know that they WILL be held liable for their gun going M.I.A

Here's ANOTHER recent case where a gun wa sillegally obtained by having a neighbor purchase the gun for him. This case was quite sick. He set a trap for the firefighters and then opened fire upon them as they battled the fire he started.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/28/justic...ush/index.html

Clearly guns are not to blame. Most of these shooters can not buy one on their own so they resort to stealing or having others obtain it for them.

[killshot]

Originally Posted by Bantler

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_1...sault-weapons/
[(CBS) LOS ANGELES -On Wednesday, at Los Angeles' annual gun buyback event, which allows residents to turn in weapons with "no questions asked," two rocket launchers and 75 assault weapons were collected, the Los Angeles Times reports.


"Those are weapons of war, weapons of death," LAPD Chief Charlie Beck said, according to the LA Times. "These are not hunting guns. These are not target guns. These are made to put high-velocity, extremely deadly, long-range rounds downrange as quickly as possible, and they have no place in our great city."

A total of 2,037 weapons were turned in Wednesday, up from last year's total of 1,673, the paper reports. Beck told the paper it was the most success the city's gun buyback program has ever seen.]


Nobody is coming for to pry the shotguns, rifles and legal-pisols out of your cold dead fingers. Specific tools are the main problem.

That sounds odd considering someone went through the trouble of acquiring those weapons in the first place. Oh well, I guess its not as crazy as I thought.

Anyway, I let Fared pull me off message. My point is, there is no agreed upon definition of "assault weapon." What exactly is being restricted with these new regulations? What about our old regulations is inadequate? As Ishikawa and others have pointed out, its usually not the owner of the gun committing these crimes so what is adding new restrictions to them going to do? Gun control sounds like a good idea on paper, but it doesn't seem well thought out.

[grimfang999]

We already covered the "they didn't legally own the gun" claims. But is is still easy for others to get hold of them. Some dont even collect guns out of collectiveness or sport. The use for self-defence in your own home has alternatives and people almost never cary guns around in public. People then stop caring about their weapons and just let others borrow it as if i were a toy or video game they never use.

Really harder access to guns, reduced ability to borrow or steal from legal owners, greater respect of the powerful weapon they possess due to the difficulty of getting hold of it. The main issue then becomes illegal weaponry, but thats a matter of law enforcement.