• Obama praises Australia's, UK's gun laws following mass shooting
    400 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48809570]Let's deregulate grenades and RPGs then. I think America could do with an explosives culture as well as a gun culture, after all people already blow off steam at the range with guns, I think they should be allowed to blow off steam by hurling some grenades and blowing stuff up with rockets as well.[/QUOTE] I mean, you already can if you have the means to somehow pay for regular use of it, but great point, I guess? I can tell you're not responding emotionally at all and definitely have the slightest idea of what you're talking about : - )
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48809570]Let's deregulate grenades and RPGs then. I think America could do with an explosives culture as well as a gun culture, after all people already blow off steam at the range with guns, I think they should be allowed to blow off steam by hurling some grenades and blowing stuff up with rockets as well.[/QUOTE] If people are sane enough, they should be able to buy grenades and rpgs. I mean, they are totally useless in a non combat situation but think of how fun they are.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;48809891]I mean, you already can if you have the means to somehow pay for regular use of it, but great point, I guess? I can tell you're not responding emotionally at all and definitely have the slightest idea of what you're talking about : - )[/QUOTE] But I need a permit to own one, since it's classified as a destructive device. Furthermore I have to pay a $200 tax on each grenade or rocket I buy, I don't want to have to do that. Gun owners don't pay a special tax on their bullets, why should I pay a tax on my rockets?
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;48809987]But I need a permit to own one, since it's classified as a destructive device. Furthermore I have to pay a $200 tax on each grenade or rocket I buy, I don't want to have to do that. Gun owners don't pay a special tax on their bullets, why should I pay a tax on my rockets?[/QUOTE] I get what you're saying and I think you're both right and wrong. Yes, regulation has been an effective means of ensuring that nobody commits crimes with grenades, rockets, and other military-grade high explosives. However, those are very specialized items, and numerous criminals have substituted fertilizer-based explosives instead. So if we were to postulate similar levels of regulation and control of ordinary firearms, would it make them harder to procure by criminals? Probably, but unlike in the case of RPGs and hand grenades, there's already a huge number of guns available illegitimately. Make RPGs hard to get, and criminals have to make do with crude alternatives like fertilizer bombs because they simply can't get RPGs. Make firearms hard to get, and criminals will be able to get the same exact thing elsewhere, limiting the utility of such regulation. In Australia the turn-in and confiscation of firearms coupled with heavy regulation actually made this work. Criminals who can't get guns legitimately are forced to turn to relatively ineffective, homemade firearms. But I can't see that working in the US, there are too many guns and too much resistance to that kind of heavy regulation.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;48809611]Idk if this has been said, but people saying that "It rarely happens in our country so the US should be able to match those statistics" is not taking into account size. [t]http://40.media.tumblr.com/ad9c4648cb7f9624588a3965da236489/tumblr_mq48lk6GzF1rasnq9o1_1280.jpg[/t] [t]http://static.ijreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Screenshot-6_18_2015-9_43_12-PM.jpg[/t] I wonder what would happen if you were to compare the total shootings in europe per year to that of the US.[/QUOTE] The US shootings rate would be much lower without the Southern States.
Obama was decent up until now. Proposing to literally take peoples guns away? I want the US to be like the wild west again, I would feel more comfortable with 100 good guys with guns than 10 bad guys with guns.
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810181]I want the US to be like the wild west again[/QUOTE] So the days of wife-beating, lynching, widespread alcoholism, high murder rates, religious and ethnic intolerance, and Amerindian genocide?
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810181]Obama was decent up until now. Proposing to literally take peoples guns away? I want the US to be like the wild west again, I would feel more comfortable with 100 good guys with guns than 10 bad guys with guns.[/QUOTE] Everybody is a "good guy with a gun", until they aren't. Furthermore, if guns are so good at protecting people from these shooters, how come none of these attacks have been ended by them? Almost every time the police shoot them/arrest them, or the shooter kills themselves.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;48809611]Idk if this has been said, but people saying that "It rarely happens in our country so the US should be able to match those statistics" is not taking into account size. [t]http://40.media.tumblr.com/ad9c4648cb7f9624588a3965da236489/tumblr_mq48lk6GzF1rasnq9o1_1280.jpg[/t] I wonder what would happen if you were to compare the total shootings in europe per year to that of the US.[/QUOTE] You'd probably still get less, because not counting unstable regions like Ukraine at the moment, most countries don't have a very wide distribution of firearms and mass shootings are actually rare. There was literally a total of two mass shootings in France in 50 years, both of which were attributed to terrorism and not just loners going postal.
[QUOTE=Streecer;48810220]Everybody is a "good guy with a gun", until they aren't. Furthermore, if guns are so good at protecting people from these shooters, how come none of these attacks have been ended by them? Almost every time the police shoot them/arrest them, or the shooter kills themselves.[/QUOTE] Because none of the campuses where mass shootings have happened allow their students to carry legal guns.... Even the security guard isn't allowed to be armed at that community college. [editline]2nd October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;48810214]So the days of wife-beating, lynching, widespread alcoholism, high murder rates, religious and ethnic intolerance, and Amerindian genocide?[/QUOTE] Only in respect of everybody being able to carry around a gun for their own self-defense
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810285]Because none of the campuses where mass shootings have happened allow their students to carry legal guns.... Even the security guard isn't allowed to be armed at that community college. [editline]2nd October 2015[/editline] Only in respect of everybody being able to carry around a gun for their own self-defense[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2011/11/oregon_university_system_will_1.html"]Except students are allowed to conceal carry.[/URL]
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810285]Only in respect of everybody being able to carry around a gun for their own self-defense[/QUOTE] Except it wasn't everybody carrying around a gun for self-defense that made the wild west safer - it was the expansion of policing forces and increasing government control that did that. The proliferation of handguns during the 19th century did virtually nothing to dent the astronomically high murder rates of those years, which were high in the wild west and did not diminish due to guns.
P much what I gather from this thread is we have gun problems, unless you own guns then we don't. Once again people think the best option to fix something is to do nothing at all :why:
[QUOTE=Streecer;48810301][URL="http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2011/11/oregon_university_system_will_1.html"]Except students are allowed to conceal carry.[/URL][/QUOTE] The community college at which this happened does not allow campus carry, the president was talking about it right after the shooting. It's their policy, not law [editline]2nd October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;48810304]Except it wasn't everybody carrying around a gun for self-defense that made the wild west safer - it was the expansion of policing forces and increasing government control that did that. The proliferation of handguns during the 19th century did virtually nothing to dent the astronomically high murder rates of those years, which were high in the wild west and did not diminish due to guns.[/QUOTE] Ok but now we have psychos with guns, and the best way to defend ourselves against guns is guns [editline]2nd October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Streecer;48810301][URL="http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2011/11/oregon_university_system_will_1.html"]Except students are allowed to conceal carry.[/URL][/QUOTE] From that article [QUOTE]The state's 17 community colleges, which each has its own governing board, have various positions on guns. Some have no policies while others have barred guns with policies similar to the OUS ban that was struck down by the court.[/QUOTE]
Fighting fire with fire doesn't usually work out well you know.
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810317]The community college at which this happened does not allow campus carry, the president was talking about it right after the shooting. It's their policy, not law[/QUOTE] And the law overrides the college's policy. The court ruling was specifically in response to the policy, stating that they had no right to decide whether it was allowed or not. If somebody did conceal carry on the campus, it would be very likely that they could take the matter to court, and citing this case, win.
[QUOTE=Streecer;48810348]And the law overrides the college's policy. The court ruling was specifically in response to the policy, stating that they had no right to decide whether it was allowed or not. If somebody did conceal carry on the campus, it would be very likely that they could take the matter to court, and citing this case, win.[/QUOTE] I wonder if anybody was conceal carrying that day. I know for sure the security guard wasn't allowed to even carry a firearm in general, what a silly concept
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810359]I wonder if anybody was conceal carrying that day. I know for sure the security guard wasn't allowed to even carry a firearm in general, what a silly concept[/QUOTE] Even so, the number of homicides far outweighs the number of justifiable self defenses. [URL="http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/guns-rarely-used-for-self-defense-in-us-there-are-32-criminal-homicides-for-every-1-justifiable-shooting/"]32 for every 1[/URL]. It would be safer without any guns at all.
[QUOTE=Streecer;48810376]Even so, the number of homicides far outweighs the number of justifiable self defenses. [URL="http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/guns-rarely-used-for-self-defense-in-us-there-are-32-criminal-homicides-for-every-1-justifiable-shooting/"]32 for every 1[/URL]. It would be safer without any guns at all.[/QUOTE] Except that compares homicides to justifiable homicides, not to defensive gun uses, which often don't end with a killing.
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810317]Ok but now we have psychos with guns, and the best way to defend ourselves against guns is guns[/QUOTE] You're focusing on the wrong aspect of the issue. If a psycho picks up a gun and shoots up a crowd, you shouldn't focus on what weapon he's (legally or illegally) carrying, because that's irrelevant - the guy could have bought a gun on the black market, gotten a flamethrower, a machete, made an IED, anything that can kill people. What's important is the fact that a mentally ill and unstable individual managed to remain free of movement and free of thought with no effort from anyone to take care of this person before they decided to commit. The US has a notoriously godawful mental health care system. People don't know what constitutes signs of mental illness, they don't know how to track them, and they don't know who to approach. You can't expect to arm yourself in prevention of unstable people opening fire on you because the fact they are unstable and unpredictable makes your gun completely worthless in that situation.
[QUOTE=Streecer;48810376]Even so, the number of homicides far outweighs the number of justifiable self defenses. [URL="http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/guns-rarely-used-for-self-defense-in-us-there-are-32-criminal-homicides-for-every-1-justifiable-shooting/"]32 for every 1[/URL]. It would be safer without any guns at all.[/QUOTE] Getting rid of all the guns, even most guns, is really unrealistic. I'd rather everybody who passes a psychological evaluation every year gets to have a gun
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810406]Getting rid of all the guns, even most guns, is really unrealistic. I'd rather everybody who passes a psychological evaluation every year gets to have a gun[/QUOTE] I'm not saying it would be realistic to remove every gun in the US, just that as a self defense method they cause more deaths than they prevent.
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810181]Obama was decent up until now. Proposing to literally take peoples guns away? I want the US to be like the wild west again, I would feel more comfortable with 100 good guys with guns than 10 bad guys with guns.[/QUOTE] I wonder what the mortality rate was back in the good old days?
[QUOTE=Streecer;48810419]I'm not saying it would be realistic to remove every gun in the US, just that as a self defense method they cause more deaths than they prevent.[/QUOTE] If we allowed campus carry on every campus across America, there would be some accidental shootings but in the long run these psychos are only gonna get off a few shots before vigilante justice to the head
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810406]Getting rid of all the guns, even most guns, is really unrealistic. I'd rather everybody who passes a psychological evaluation every year gets to have a gun[/QUOTE] nobody is even proposing getting rid of all guns if a system were adopted that made collecting information on gun ownership rates and other states much easier and the data freely available we'd be able to determine what do to
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810434]If we allowed campus carry on every campus across America, there would be some accidental shootings but in the long run these psychos are only gonna get off a few shots before vigilante justice to the head[/QUOTE] And how can you say that for sure? How do we know that an untrained civilian will just so happen to manage this while under intense pressure? What if they end up causing even more casualties in the process? Do you know how rare it is for something like that to happen? In most cases the victim ends up worse off for escalating the situation. There is no way in hell that introducing MORE guns onto campuses will make things any better. What happens when our mythical "good guy with a gun" snaps and becomes a mass shooter himself? Suddenly there's a lot of regret, but not a lot of change.
[QUOTE=Streecer;48810481]And how can you say that for sure? How do we know that an untrained civilian will just so happen to manage this while under intense pressure? What if they end up causing even more casualties in the process? Do you know how rare it is for something like that to happen? In most cases the victim ends up worse off for escalating the situation. There is no way in hell that introducing MORE guns onto campuses will make things any better. What happens when our mythical "good guy with a gun" snaps and becomes a mass shooter himself? Suddenly there's a lot of regret, but not a lot of change.[/QUOTE] Please explain where you're getting the "most cases of self-defense end bad for the victim" statistic from. You're also making the rather insulting assumption that everyone carrying a gun is just a ticking time bomb waiting to become a mass shooter.
[QUOTE=cody8295;48810434]If we allowed campus carry on every campus across America, there would be some accidental shootings but in the long run these psychos are only gonna get off a few shots before vigilante justice to the head[/QUOTE] After the Charlie Hebdo shootings, some American pro-gun advocates decided to recreate the office shooting while giving each journalist a gun. The reenacted event still ended with every single journalist getting shot lethally by the terrorists - and there were far more journalists than terrorists. If you have the element of surprise, and your weapon is a series of projectiles sent at supersonic speed at the pull of a trigger, you're always going to win a gunfight.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;48810508]Please explain where you're getting the "most cases of self-defense end bad for the victim" statistic from.[/QUOTE] Here is a [URL="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091743515001188"]study[/URL]. And [URL="http://econweb.tamu.edu/mhoekstra/castle_doctrine.pdf"]another [/URL] which shows that stand your ground laws (i.e. firearms) led to a rise in homicides. [QUOTE]You're also making the rather insulting assumption that everyone carrying a gun is just a ticking time bomb waiting to become a mass shooter.[/QUOTE] And how are we meant to tell the difference? The argument isn't that every gun owner is a ticking time bomb, but that some of them are. Ultimately it is impossible to tell on the surface of an individuals intentions when in possession of a weapon.
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1488001[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.