U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-10-2019, 10:30 AM
 
36,893 posts, read 16,093,653 times
Reputation: 8384

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
People can still own guns in countries with restrictions, the only thing that has changed is some restrictions on more powerful weapons. Traditional shotguns and rifles are still available and used by farmers, gamekeepers, hunters, target shooters etc.

Australia restrictedl self-loading centrefire rifles, pump-action or self-loading shotguns that have a magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, semi-automatic rimfire rifles over 10 rounds, are restricted to government agencies, occupational shooters and primary producers

Restricted hand to target shooters and certain security guards whose job requires possession of a firearm.

Whilst all military grade weapons are illegal in Australia.



Australia passed new laws and just limited the power of certain weapons, and in terms of mass killings by beating and stabbing, it's a lot harder to kill a lot of people through these means when compared for a high powered device designed to kill.

As for fires, most public buildngs have sprinkler systems and I don't see a lot of children being set on fire in Australian schools.

Three charts on: Australia's declining homicide rates - The Conversation

"Australia restrictedl self-loading centrefire rifles, pump-action or self-loading shotguns....."


"For the first time since the Port Arthur massacre, Australia’s national arsenal of private guns is larger than before the subsequent introduction of strict gun control laws, writes Associate Professor Philip Alpers.

The proud claim that Australia may have “solved the gun problem” might only be a temporary illusion. In recent years, arms dealers have imported more guns than ever before. And last year we crossed a symbolic threshold: for the first time in 20 years, Australia’s national arsenal of private guns is larger than it was before the Port Arthur massacre"

https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/n...ers-climb.html


So, why do you think MORE Australians are buying MORE guns?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-10-2019, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
11,620 posts, read 3,978,642 times
Reputation: 7205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"Australia restrictedl self-loading centrefire rifles, pump-action or self-loading shotguns....."


"For the first time since the Port Arthur massacre, Australia’s national arsenal of private guns is larger than before the subsequent introduction of strict gun control laws, writes Associate Professor Philip Alpers.

The proud claim that Australia may have “solved the gun problem” might only be a temporary illusion. In recent years, arms dealers have imported more guns than ever before. And last year we crossed a symbolic threshold: for the first time in 20 years, Australia’s national arsenal of private guns is larger than it was before the Port Arthur massacre"

https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/n...ers-climb.html


So, why do you think MORE Australians are buying MORE guns?
Because guns aren't banned only certain types of guns, it's the same in the UK where lots of people in rural areas own shotguns or legal rifles.

What they don't own are restrictedl self-loading centrefire rifles, pump-action or self-loading shotguns, and they are the guns most societies have problems with.

Sports such as target shooting and clay pigeon shooting are very popular in the UK, as is shooting game, whilst famers, gamekeeps and others have shotguns and rifles.

Nobody has a problem with this, we have had shotguns and traditional rifles for centuries in the UK, and the same will be true in Australia, what we don't want is people having access to weapons such as Type 56 semi-automatic rifles, M1 carbines and Beretta 92FS as were used during the Hungerford Massacre or 9mm Browning HP pistol (x2),Smith & Wesson M19 or .357 Magnum revolver (x2)as were used in the Dunblane Massacre. None of these weapons are traditional hunting or sporting weapons, or indeed weapons used in vermin contro or in traditional rural life.

Number of guns in UK at record high as almost 2million firearms are now licensed - Daily Mirror

Guns have their uses and gun sports can be enjoyable, however we don't need lots of very powerful or semi-automatic weaponry in relation to gun sports, hunting or other activities and have used traditional shotguns and rifles perfectly well in the past. Whilst in terms of large culling or hunting mammals such as deer you can apply for more powerful weapons as explained in my previous post.


Last edited by Brave New World; 05-10-2019 at 11:01 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Marquette, Mich
1,210 posts, read 464,965 times
Reputation: 2575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"I want you to answer ONE question, just one: What is the designed intent of most guns?"

So NOW you are moving the goal posts.

I also note you did NOT respond to all the ACTUAL case I posed about kids who used a gun for protection.

MOST gun crimes are averted just by showing you HAVE gun and NO shots we fired.

I hope it never happens to your family but, IF 2 armed gunmen break into your house, DON'T try to tell them their guns are probably ILLEGAL.

Dude, I feel like you keep trying to make me say I don't want people to have guns for protection. I don't want to say that. I'm not talking about legality or illegality, either. I don't need to respond to the case, because you are missing the point so hard, it's just really weird.



If some kids brandished a gun & it deterred someone from harming them, I'm glad. But why would that work? Is it because guns are great items to collect? Is it because target shooting is fun? Is it because some people go bird hunting? No. It's because person A could shoot person B and hurt or kill them. That's the reason a gun is a deterrent, simply and to the point.



I think gun ownership should be preserved. I don't think everyone should be disarmed. I think people shooting as a hobby is fine, there's a lot of skill involved. I think people who hunt should be able to hunt (although I have opinions on certain types of hunting). I think ONE problem we have is the romance & fetishization of guns. I think groups like the NRA are keeping that alive. I think we CAN turn the tide if we begin to talk about guns in realistic and honest ways. Guns are not the solution to all the problems of our time. So can we please be open & honest about what guns do?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 11:16 AM
 
Location: The Woods
16,955 posts, read 22,265,959 times
Reputation: 9066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post


You are always going to have some violence, however in terms of school shootings and mass shootings limiting certain weapons and ammunition has worked in other countries.

In terms of gang related violence and homicides they are seperate issues, and school shooters tend to be very different to the criminal gangs that have been responsible for many murders in US Cities.
It's also failed in several countries. Mexico, Russia, Venezuela, and others. The countries often cited in these threads as being safe with strict gun laws were relatively safe or even safer before those laws were in place as well (the UK a century ago for example, when it was still normal and legal to carry a pistol for defense there). The UK doesn't have the same social diseases the U.S. has. Adopting the UK's approach to firearms here won't end the same way. We're also so severely politically divided here right now, at perhaps 1850's levels, that there's really no telling what will happen if major changes are attempted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 11:25 AM
 
2,049 posts, read 862,636 times
Reputation: 5057
I think kids had more respect for their parents than to make them the parents of a school shooter. Also there was some empathy with the fact that most of the kids in school were not part of the problem, they were just coping as well. Back then, mass shooters were adults with grudges about the workplace. A popular term was "going postal" referencing postal workers who shot up their workplace. At some point the idea of being a school shooter got into these kids' heads, and the concept of kill them all became acceptable to them. What we are seeing is copycat crimes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FKD19124 View Post
and many are mentally unstable. again what has changed in the last 35 years?

Angry and resentful kids back then didnt do this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 11:26 AM
 
10,162 posts, read 6,272,454 times
Reputation: 5741
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
It's also failed in several countries. Mexico, Russia, Venezuela, and others. The countries often cited in these threads as being safe with strict gun laws were relatively safe or even safer before those laws were in place as well (the UK a century ago for example, when it was still normal and legal to carry a pistol for defense there). The UK doesn't have the same social diseases the U.S. has. Adopting the UK's approach to firearms here won't end the same way. We're also so severely politically divided here right now, at perhaps 1850's levels, that there's really no telling what will happen if major changes are attempted.
Great post and spot on. I do think , unless one actually lives here , or has spent a good amount of time here, they will understand what you are saying. All people around the world see about us is what the media puts out, which in most cases , is very biased.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 11:33 AM
TKO
 
Location: On the Border
2,960 posts, read 3,101,208 times
Reputation: 2448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex New Yorker View Post
That still doesn't prove that those are your guns. Ever hear of Photoshop?
Geez.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 11:53 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
11,620 posts, read 3,978,642 times
Reputation: 7205
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader View Post
It's also failed in several countries. Mexico, Russia, Venezuela, and others. The countries often cited in these threads as being safe with strict gun laws were relatively safe or even safer before those laws were in place as well (the UK a century ago for example, when it was still normal and legal to carry a pistol for defense there). The UK doesn't have the same social diseases the U.S. has. Adopting the UK's approach to firearms here won't end the same way. We're also so severely politically divided here right now, at perhaps 1850's levels, that there's really no telling what will happen if major changes are attempted.
Mexico's crime rate has more to do with drugs and organised crime rather than gun laws, whilst in Venezuela any problems relate to corruption and nad management of the country, as for Ruusia, again organised crime and state corruption are the main problems.

None of which has much to do with limiting centre fire semi automatics, calibre or ammunition in democratic western countries.

Indeed no one is suggesting that guns should be banned, indeed a lot of people in Australia, NZ, UK and many parts of Europe enjoy shooting and have a geniune need to keep a shotgun or rifle in rural areas.

In terms of hunting you must have a more powerful weapon licences to hunt mammals and take them out cleanly. Dear qualifications and licences help make sure that responsible and knowledgable people are given access to such hgher powered weapons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 12:45 PM
 
Location: MS
4,266 posts, read 4,078,954 times
Reputation: 1488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
Mexico's crime rate has more to do with drugs and organised crime rather than gun laws, whilst in Venezuela any problems relate to corruption and nad management of the country, as for Ruusia, again organised crime and state corruption are the main problems.

None of which has much to do with limiting centre fire semi automatics, calibre or ammunition in democratic western countries.

Indeed no one is suggesting that guns should be banned, indeed a lot of people in Australia, NZ, UK and many parts of Europe enjoy shooting and have a geniune need to keep a shotgun or rifle in rural areas.

In terms of hunting you must have a more powerful weapon licences to hunt mammals and take them out cleanly. Dear qualifications and licences help make sure that responsible and knowledgable people are given access to such hgher powered weapons.
Remove those numbers and suicides from the US totals and our gun deaths are not very high compared to other countries that allow firearm ownership similar to ours.


Thank goodness our Constitution defines the rights of the and not the needs. I live in a suburban neighborhood and you can easily guess that I am an gun owner without stepping foot in my house. Others in my neighborhood are the same. Only 2 people are 100% certain and that's my longtime neighbor on one side of my house. He calls me when he hears something interesting on the police scanner like the time a fugitive was chased into an empty house about 100 yards from us. The 2nd person recognized a sticker on my truck. Not a gun but a gun part. He sells target stands and runs the range for the sheriff's office. We haven't compared collections but if needed, we could probably arm everyone in the area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2019, 01:13 PM
Status: "serving a suspended sentence for not being a right winger" (set 23 days ago)
 
Location: Columbia, SC
7,329 posts, read 4,451,264 times
Reputation: 8839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert_J View Post
If you didn't take the time to watch the videos, school shooters are not crazy. They are angry and resentful.
I have not watched the video yet, but your statement actually sounds like what I have heard from other places. It's really easy for folks to sit on their high horse and blame the mentally ill, which is such a vaque label to place on a person. If you have anxiety, even somewhat mild, you have s mental illness. So does someone with schizophrenia. Thing is that even the person with schizophrenia is more likely to be a victim rather than a perpetrator of violence.

Uncontrolled anger is a real issue with most mass shooters. Anger is not considered a mental illness. Maybe it should be, I don't know.

People also use terms they don't really think through like psychopath or insanity. And then they just blame all un shootings on the "mentally ill" and never seek to find out more about mental illness.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top