School shooting in US

[Rod Paradise]

LOL @ "semi-automatic rifle based on an assault rifle platform" not being an 'assault rifle'.

I get your points and the view you're trying to put forward, but they're actually not relevant to overall argument of increased gun-control.  Guns don't have to be used in 'massacres' to have been used in homicides or suicides.  The goal of greater gun-control is to reduce deaths, and restricting the three things I mentioned would help towards this goal.  Saying it's "impractical nonsense" is interesting when referring to the restriction of the sale of high-capacity magazines in supermarkets. 

This is partly why I mentioned that the political debate surrounding gun-control is best had at a distance from a massacre like the one at that school. The large-scale massacres are tragic and very sad, but they don't account for the vast majority of homicides and suicides by firearms in the US.  Gun control needs to be strengthened (imo) to look at the wider picture.  Like you say, those who need guns for hunting, etc., should be allowed to under licensed restrictions, but that doesn't stand in the way of other controls.

LOL at the selective dropping of AUTOMATIC from your definition - you don't understand what you're arguing and are shifting as you realise you were wrong. Face it, you stuck your nose in, started an argument over a point that wasn't being made and are still getting all evangelical about it.

You've somehow managed to change my point from limiting buying ammunition to restricting the sale of high-capacity magazines... You not able to read what has been said?
But they tried the ban on extended magazines. Didn't work - because it was impractical nonsense.

BTW I can't find where you said the debate is best had at a distance. Can find where I made comments to that effect though.

[kinboshi]

. 

This is partly why I mentioned that the political debate surrounding gun-control is best had at a distance from a massacre like the one at that school.

I have to disagree with this.  It is the perfect time to both have the debate and pass the legislation and I dont understand why the politicians always say "now is not the time to have the debate" in the immediate aftermath of things like this.  Action on gun control and ensuring it never happens again is the best possible thing, indeed the only good thing, that can ever come out of these kind of horrific events.

I think they help focus people's attention and certainly evoke a lot of passion and feeling - but that's not always the best way to put forward a case for or against something. Using evidence to support or discredit an argument is far more compelling. Of course, ignoring the issue and not debating it at all is worse.

[kinboshi]

LOL @ "semi-automatic rifle based on an assault rifle platform" not being an 'assault rifle'.

I get your points and the view you're trying to put forward, but they're actually not relevant to overall argument of increased gun-control.  Guns don't have to be used in 'massacres' to have been used in homicides or suicides.  The goal of greater gun-control is to reduce deaths, and restricting the three things I mentioned would help towards this goal.  Saying it's "impractical nonsense" is interesting when referring to the restriction of the sale of high-capacity magazines in supermarkets. 

This is partly why I mentioned that the political debate surrounding gun-control is best had at a distance from a massacre like the one at that school. The large-scale massacres are tragic and very sad, but they don't account for the vast majority of homicides and suicides by firearms in the US.  Gun control needs to be strengthened (imo) to look at the wider picture.  Like you say, those who need guns for hunting, etc., should be allowed to under licensed restrictions, but that doesn't stand in the way of other controls.

LOL at the selective dropping of AUTOMATIC from your definition - you don't understand what you're arguing and are shifting as you realise you were wrong. Face it, you stuck your nose in, started an argument over a point that wasn't being made and are still getting all evangelical about it.

I was talking about assault rifles that are semi-automatic. They have magazines that hold lots of rounds, and the user can shoot the gun (yes, one round at a time) by pulling the trigger, pulling it again, and again and again. Are these needed?

Did I get 'assault weapon' and 'assault rifle' mixed up?  I apologise for the semantic mistake I made.

You've somehow managed to change my point from limiting buying ammunition to restricting the sale of high-capacity magazines... You not able to read what has been said?

I picked on one point you mentioned, the rest was referring to the whole debate on gun control.

But they tried the ban on extended magazines. Didn't work - because it was impractical nonsense.

Just because something is impractical , I don't think it's nonsense or a reason for it to be dropped.

BTW I can't find where you said the debate is best had at a distance. Can find where I made comments to that effect though.

First page of the thread?

[nirvana]

Funny place America, quite a lot of evidence that harsh sentencing, 3 strikes etc & death penalty available in many states makes no real difference to behaviour when society is so fundamentally lazy & corrupt and when lives are often without purpose or meaning. Legislating against ownership is hardly a bigger deterrent than already exists.

Talking about gun control kind of misses the point I think - just something for the petit bourgeoisie to hand wring about without changing anything significant in society

Tend to the view that the US is so culturally different to every other Western 'democracy' that you can't usefully compare solutions there with here.

[Acidmouse]

Funny place America, quite a lot of evidence that harsh sentencing, 3 strikes etc & death penalty available in many states makes no real difference to behaviour when society is so fundamentally lazy & corrupt and when lives are often without purpose or meaning. Legislating against ownership is hardly a bigger deterrent than already exists.

Talking about gun control kind of misses the point I think - just something for the petit bourgeoisie to hand wring about without changing anything significant in society

Tend to the view that the US is so culturally different to every other Western 'democracy' that you can't usefully compare solutions there with here.

good post. Lots of questions to ask, I like the fact if you have mental health problems there what you going to do? without private health care? what are the measures to monitor unstable people and not give them gun permits etc?

[Woodsey]

One of the things that really tilts Americans is being told what to do and having controls put on them (even if they are not as free as they like to think they are), I would say that is as big as an issue as the guns itself.

So its all well and good us clucking away about what is good for them, but they will resist it on that point too.

[titaniumbean]

One of the things that really tilts Americans is being told what to do and having controls put on them (even if they are not as free as they like to think they are), I would say that is as big as an issue as the guns itself.

So its all well and good us clucking away about what is good for them, but they will resist it on that point too.

if they could stop bastardising our language and learn to read English, they could read the first/second amendments, using the first to verbally point out what the second amendment actually says. Hint, it's not just the words 'the right to bear arms'.


Im a big fan of bear4rms though :p


also just many lols at no online poker. but guns. yeh sure.  best all use full metal jacket ammo too just incase dem kids be wearing body armour.

[nirvana]

Funny place America, quite a lot of evidence that harsh sentencing, 3 strikes etc & death penalty available in many states makes no real difference to behaviour when society is so fundamentally lazy & corrupt and when lives are often without purpose or meaning. Legislating against ownership is hardly a bigger deterrent than already exists.

Talking about gun control kind of misses the point I think - just something for the petit bourgeoisie to hand wring about without changing anything significant in society

Tend to the view that the US is so culturally different to every other Western 'democracy' that you can't usefully compare solutions there with here.

good post. Lots of questions to ask, I like the fact if you have mental health problems there what you going to do? without private health care? what are the measures to monitor unstable people and not give them gun permits etc?

This errs towards where I'm thinking really.

Our societies are set up for us to aspire to things in a way that the devil takes the hindmost. Even the most socially conscious of us rarely get beyond hand wringing to a point where we directly act on things that are clearly unfair and where we're often the beneficiaries of an accident of birth.

Poverty is the root of this stuff and it's more extreme in America - it's true that there is a massive amount of gun crime, a huge prison population but the better off are pretty happy to have this status quo as the bulk of it happens among an element that they rarely come into contact with. Now and then it spills over to touch 'everyone' like this kind of shocking event.

We don't have the same level of gun crime but we're the same fundamentally. Many people pretty damn well off ignoring an underclass of mentally ill, under privileged etc. As long as the street crime and harassment is away from us then all is well.

How many of us give up any worthwhile percentage of our wealth or time to help people less well off in a direct way. I certainly know people who do, I know people who don't (like me, I give a bit but never enough to change my construct). On balance I'd say most don't and that's why I think these things happen. It's an eruption that we suddenly see but the lava is flowing all the time. I'm not gonna suddenly act like ' this has to be stopped' when I make no effort to really try and stem the tide the rest of the time

[RioRodent]

I just don't see getting the genie back in the bottle in the USA. One estimate I read had it at 270 million guns in private ownership in the USA. How do you get them back?

Do you need to?

How about Restrict / Ban the supply of ammunition?

[Dino]

Nothing like getting your sales pitch in quick

[redarmi]

That is incredible......"stock up on your mags because that is what they are going to ban".  I can just about accept the argument that people want these things to protect themselves, their homes etc but would would you need more than one lot of ammo?

[david3103]

Today's Telegraph carried a very thought-provoking piece which highlights not just the issue of gunmen running amok but also the high numbers of domestic killings involving guns and the incredibly high suicide rates involving guns. The author makes the point that suicide with a knife or gas or rope is hard and generally slow, whereas if you stick a gun in your mouth...

The NRA are a symptom of much that is wrong in the US. I dare say a lot of Haliburton's senior execs are also NRA members.

Land of the free? You're kidding right?

Recommended reading IMHO

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-politics/9749024/Americas-deadly-obsession-with-guns.html

[Waz1892]

very good article.  A sad sad mess they have, and one that will never change in our lifetimes.

[rfgqqabc]

That is incredible......"stock up on your mags because that is what they are going to ban".  I can just about accept the argument that people want these things to protect themselves, their homes etc but would would you need more than one lot of ammo?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/18/stop-school-shootings-by-letting-teachers-fire-back-say-texas-officials/

"As educators, we don’t have to be police officers and learn about Miranda Rights and related procedures. We just have to be accurate.”

[Royal Flush]

Kin would you say banning cars that do more than 70mph in the uk should be brought in? Or even cars that accelerate quickly?