Guns...

Il'l open the can of worms :!:

It seems like there is a slight movement after the last shooting in Oregon to get some form of gun control in the US, is it going to peter out like all other movements or will there be any changes made :?:

Anyone really think your own governement is out to "get you" by restricting gun ownership, especially with assault weapons and handguns?

Did Australia do the right thing by banning all restricted weapons and really reducing the number of guns in circulation?

Jim Jeffries had a bit on this very subject, he makes very good points http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2vkgx8

As a Canadian, I am appaled by the number of shootings in the US, I'm not saying it NEVER happens outside the US, but if the odds of winning the lottery were as good as the odds of getting shot, I would bet on US lotteries compared to Canadian ones.

Jean

As an Australian I can only say that the restrictions put on law abiding citizens by our govt was and remains an ineffective disgrace.
We could all agree that for a new firearm owner, a cooling off period before purchasing a firearm is probably a good idea. But here that cooling off period also relates the purchase of a 2nd or even a 10th firearm. Of course the only purpose that serves is to inconvenience a firearm owner.
And the attack on lawful firearm owners saw the banning of all semi automatic weapons as well as pump action shot guns. So that 3 shot H and K was deemed too dangerous for Oz. It was just as dangerous as an SKS with its 30 shot magazine.
And the last change to NSW legislation means I not only have to show my shooters licence to purchase ammunition, I also have to bring the paperwork that shows that I own a firearm that is registered to me in that calibre. And after my paper registration papers got a little tatty they were rejected and I had to get them renewed. That took 6 months, which was much longer than the initial firearm registration took. My son has a shooters licence but no firearms. He used to borrow mine but now no longer can. So he is deemed to be a fit and proper person to be licenced to own both rimfire and centrefire rifles but cannot purchase ammunition because he does not have any firearm registered in his name. Go figure.
I think back to the 1960s when I was a child going to school. Virtually all my class mates had either a daisy air gun or an air rifle. We even took them to school, and on such occasions had to stand them in the corner of the class room. I attended Sutherland Primary school which is a southern Sydney suburb. I still remember a couple of lessons by the teachers on firearm safety after daisy air guns had been brought to school, and the question asked was “which gun kills the most people” and the answer was “the unloaded gun”. The emphasis of course being never to point a firearm at another human being and treat each firearm as if it is loaded. Of course now the sight of a child with a daisy air gun would result in the deployment of 100 plus SWAT police, massive media coverage and the child and his friends would probably be rushed off for psychiatric analysis and counselling.
Firearm ownership was extremely high here in the 1960s. Military rifle clubs were promoted and supported by the govt and yet there was no such thing as mass shootings. But then there was also no such thing as violent movies that graphically portray shooting and the graphic violent acts and the total disrespect for human life and dignity, which even extends to the graphic portrayal of butchering humans on the autopsy table.
So is Australia a safer place today now that legal firearm ownership has been greatly reduced. Well only yesterday a 15 year old managed to get hold of an illegal pistol, go to Police headquarters, and shoot an innocent unknown civilian, who was a police force employee, before himself being shot by police. It has been said that it is much easier here to buy an illegal firearm than it is to buy a legal one. And of course a few years ago the NSW police managed to lose a shipping container full of glock pistols, something that they like to pretend never happened.
In Switzerland every male does compulsory military service, and remains subject to call up to protect his country. He is given a large capacity semi-automatic firearm that he keeps for life, and after his national service can use the rifle for hunting or competition events. If he wears that firearm out it is replaced at no charge. Switzerland has the highest per capita firearm ownership (100% of males) in the world. Is Switzerland a dangerous place?
ando.

It is a cliche, but it is very true:
If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

Jaydee

I must have the lazyist guns in the world. I can talk, yell and scream at them and all they do is lay there. guns are a tool and like any other tool can be used for good or bad. we have had drivers run there cars into large crowd's and kill and maim people but where is the car control people? people are cut and stabbed where is the knife control people ? the muslem extremists want to stone people to death so we need rock control also. if some one is he$$ bent on killing they will find a way.and by the way there is some gun control here and it is a back ground check and in some states a waiting period even with a carry permit. in place's like Chicago, Detroit and Washington DC where guns are all but outlawed they have some of the highest murder rates. If you think the police are here to protect YOU than you are sadly mistaken. you can keep your control and I will keep my guns.

ando said:

Switzerland has the highest per capita firearm ownership (100% of males) in the world. Is Switzerland a dangerous place?
ando.

Click to expand...

According to thgese figures http://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9443917/un ... ath-europe yes

This chart https://img.njdc.com/media/media/2015/0 ... echart.png is also very interesting

Times have changed, I used to have a 22 rifle in my house, when the law changed so guns had to be registered, I gave it to my friend who is a hunter. I used it mainly for target practice, but not often and with kids in the house, I wasn't sure it was a good idea to have a firearm. It was hidden, the bolt was taken out and the bullets were hidden in a different location, still did not feel safe, so the law gave me this little push to get rid of it. I admit I'm not a gun lover, I'd rather buy cameras, tools or computers than guns. If there were not so many deaths by firearms, I wouldn't mind anyone having guns, but something changed and it is not like it used to be.

Jean

IMO, it's not guns that kill people, it's the ammunition they discharge. I think the FDA or some similar safety-related government body should declare ammunition to be a dangerous substance and tax it significantly, maybe $30 a bullet. If loading your Baretta 9-shot magazine cost $270 every time, there might be less gun violence.

If you weren't sure it was a good idea to have one in the house than I am fine with your decision BUT don't take away my right to own one.In the us there are more deaths from auto accidents and or doctors than guns but it is not news worthy because it does not stir the emotions like gun violence.

Jeandr said:

I wasn't sure it was a good idea to have a firearm. It was hidden, the bolt was taken out and the bullets were hidden in a different location, still did not feel safe, I admit I'm not a gun lover, I'd rather buy cameras, tools or computers than guns. If there were not so many deaths by firearms,

Jean

Click to expand...

bill said:

If you weren't sure it was a good idea to have one in the house than I am fine with your decision BUT don't take away my right to own one.In the us there are more deaths from auto accidents and or doctors than guns but it is not news worthy because it does not stir the emotions like gun violence.

Click to expand...

What is wrong with a gun registry then? Do you think it is OK to own ANY type of gun? any quantity? I'm OK with people who store them safely, I'm OK with people who use them for target practice or hunting, I'm lees OK with open carry or concealed weapons anywhere, especially where drinks are served. I think a gun license should be mandatory with a gun handling certificate. Some form of waiting period be in effect before a gun can be bought. Buying ammunition should be reserved for licensed gun owners...

As for deaths in vehicules, you may have seen a change in the safety of vehicules trough the years, safety glass, seat belts, air bags, crush zones, telescoping steering collumns... every car driver must have a license, every car driver must obey trafic laws, I know not everyone does, but most do. The number of deaths per 100K of population in the US is about the same as deaths by guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... S._by_year notice the peak in the late sixties and early seventies which coincides with the muscle car period, while better cars made for less deaths, a lot the reduction came after insurance companies charged more and more to get these cars insured and thus drove them to extinction. I'm not saying some drivers could drive them correctly, it is that the majority could not. Guns are a bit like that, some people can handle them correctly, but most can't and THEY are the ones giving guns a bad name.

If you love guns, then you should be in favor of restrictions to keep them out of the hands of idiots, just like you don't want idiots on the roads.

Jean

That makes good sense Jean. One problem is agreeing on who gets to set the rules and what the rules will be.

Another statistic that is rather amazing is that crime over all in the USA is at such a low that you have to go back to pre '70s to find numbers as low as they are now. The present government should be bragging all over the place about their accomplishments but they would rather have gun control than credit for record low crime rates.

Gun violence is mostly limited to cities in the US and all of those have strict gun laws. If you take out the top 6 gun violence cities we are fine when compared across the board with other countries. The gun violence statistics for the USA also include gun suicides which make up over two thirds of all gun deaths.

Total school shootings since Columbine on April 20 1999 are 227 including this last one in Oregon. (and unfortunately this number also includes the death of the shooter as well.) That is something like .0000757% of the population. Just the one shooting they had of 77 people in Norway back in 2011 is .00154% of their population.

I get the feeling that this thing is getting some traction but I think that when more laws do get passed the numbers will show it to be an over reaction. I also agree with Bill. I don't have to have a gun but if I take away some one else's right to self defense then I would be morally obligated to guarantee their safety.
Dan.

Jean - when you ask:

"Anyone really think your own government is out to "get you" by restricting gun ownership, especially with assault weapons and handguns?"

thou doth protest too much, methinks.

Obviously, the threat of state tyranny is omnipresent
That, obviously, is why the people, under the 2nd Amendment, retain the right to keep and bear arms.

Obviously, mass killings are not unique to the United States. Nor, per capita, is the United States the worst:

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/06/348197- ... him-wrong/

As you can see, the worst 5 are Norway, Finland, Slovakia, Israel, and Switzerland. Then there are the less developed countries, often defacto dictatorships, that fail to collect data or, if they do, refuse to report it. My money says that the worst nations, per capita, are these - police states where gun possession is a threat to the state and therefore actually illegal, or, if not illegal, then good cause for the government to shoot you dead.

Further, the "progressives" who control the anti gun US media over report it, as compared to other domestic killings. Then, they under report other countries' mass killings, particularly the religicide of the "states" of the Islamic Middle East and Africa.

In my opinion, "gun free zone" Umpqua Community College should be sued and pay BIG for disarming and then failing to protect its students. That is exactly what happened, Oregon is a concealed carry state, except, by discretion, on campuses and the like.

Obviously, if an anti-religious nut wants to shoot a lot of people, he will go to a gun free zone.

you make my point more obvious, you don't see mass shootings at police stations do you? also as I stated IF you think the police are here to protect YOU than you are sadly mistaken. the courts have ruled that the police cannot guaranty anyone's protection. if you look at what the school cop was armed with he had NO chance either. my gun beats your pepper spray and he was supposed to be the first line of defense?

xbacksideslider said:

In my opinion, "gun free zone" Umpqua Community College should be sued and pay BIG for disarming and then failing to protect its students. That is exactly what happened, Oregon is a concealed carry state, except, by discretion, on campuses and the like.

Obviously, if an anti-religious nut wants to shoot a lot of people, he will go to a gun free zone.

Click to expand...

Law and order will always be the government's excuse to disarm the populace. I think it was Socrates who first said that. The government wants a compliant, docile, subservient, non-thinking populace whose only function is to pay their taxes and obey their governmental masters.

Firearms have always been in the American society with no heinous mass murders until recent times. No one asks "What is different, what has changed?"

What has changed or what was not in the American society 1/2 century ago:

TV and cinema that feature an act of violence every 30 seconds (I once timed and counted them)
Video games that glorify and reward "killing"
Fostering of an entitlement expectant society whereby anger and resentment results from unfulfilled expectations
Broken homes, no family values ...

Couple easy access to illegal and legal mind altering drugs (in the US it is easier to get anti-depressants than a firearm) with the above and the human becomes an animal. It would be more effective to have "drug control" but there is way too much money involved, and too many profiting (both legal an illegal) for that to happen. Besides, the government, wanting docile citizens, is happy to have as many on Prozac and Vallium as possible .... and more profits to big pharma who reward those governmental masters.

Slick

xbacksideslider said:

Jean - when you ask:

"Anyone really think your own government is out to "get you" by restricting gun ownership, especially with assault weapons and handguns?"

thou doth protest too much, methinks.

Obviously, the threat of state tyranny is omnipresent
That, obviously, is why the people, under the 2nd Amendment, retain the right to keep and bear arms.

Obviously, mass killings are not unique to the United States. Nor, per capita, is the United States the worst:

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/06/348197- ... him-wrong/

As you can see, the worst 5 are Norway, Finland, Slovakia, Israel, and Switzerland. Then there are the less developed countries, often defacto dictatorships, that fail to collect data or, if they do, refuse to report it. My money says that the worst nations, per capita, are these - police states where gun possession is a threat to the state and therefore actually illegal, or, if not illegal, then good cause for the government to shoot you dead.

Further, the "progressives" who control the anti gun US media over report it, as compared to other domestic killings. Then, they under report other countries' mass killings, particularly the religicide of the "states" of the Islamic Middle East and Africa.

In my opinion, "gun free zone" Umpqua Community College should be sued and pay BIG for disarming and then failing to protect its students. That is exactly what happened, Oregon is a concealed carry state, except, by discretion, on campuses and the like.

Obviously, if an anti-religious nut wants to shoot a lot of people, he will go to a gun free zone.

Click to expand...

I don't know if it is true, but one guy was there with a concealed weapon and he said after the killer was shot that he did not "whip out" his pistol because he was afraid of being identified as one of the killers when the SWAT teams arrived. He did say he had a gun and would use it to protect his fellow students *IF* the killer openend the door of the classroom he was in. Unlike the movies, bullets do kill good people as well as bad people. If this was true, then having a gun concealed or not is NOT a deterrent to loose nuts.

Saying the US is not alone with mass shootings is not altogether true, they do happen, but they happen less often everywhere else. Putting Norway #1 based on ONE (very very bloody incident) is a travesty of statistics and choosing the period when things happened in other countries is also manipulating data. In Canada, our news comes from all over the world and we hear about shootings when they are above average (if any shooting can be called "average") I was shocked to find out that there are about one "mass" shooting per day in the US, not all of them are fatal and not all of them are in schools, but enough are commited that *to me* it looks like it is a problem, you as an American may think I'm overreacting, but to call the situation normal, never.

Instead of ownership of guns, all Americans should DEMAND free education, that would be much more devastating to your leaders than any gun could!

Jean

texasSlick said:

Law and order will always be the government's excuse to disarm the populace. I think it was Socrates who first said that. The government wants a compliant, docile, subservient, non-thinking populace whose only function is to pay their taxes and obey their governmental masters.

Firearms have always been in the American society with no heinous mass murders until recent times. No one asks "What is different, what has changed?"

What has changed or what was not in the American society 1/2 century ago:

TV and cinema that feature an act of violence every 30 seconds (I once timed and counted them)
Video games that glorify and reward "killing"
Fostering of an entitlement expectant society whereby anger and resentment results from unfulfilled expectations
Broken homes, no family values ...

Couple easy access to illegal and legal mind altering drugs (in the US it is easier to get anti-depressants than a firearm) with the above and the human becomes an animal. It would be more effective to have "drug control" but there is way too much money involved, and too many profiting (both legal an illegal) for that to happen.

Slick

Click to expand...

I don't know if TV and movies can be credited with the increase in violence in the US, but it is true that in American culture, the gun is often a solution. We get TV shows from the UK (in translation) and we produce our own, and guns are rarely if ever used. I watch many American TV shows, but I don't get the urge to buy a gun and shoot people, it is just not MY reality, sometimes, I find the writers to be lazy and opt for the easy solution to any problem which is bumping off whatever is in the way.

I watched the whole SOA series and the level of violence was through the roof. I found it amusing that the bikers were made more sympathetic by being gun runners while everyone knows that the real outlaws make money by running drugs, prostitution and protection.

As Yoda would say, "opened a can of worms, I did" (we are in the PUB, so it's OK to have a point of view)

Jean

you have a good point as our education system has gone to he%%. we no longer teach them to think and learn instead we teach them a test, there has been schools that the little ones were shown to almost worship Obama by making up and singing a song about him. than the collage's have been turned in to liberal indoctrination centers . don't you dare to question what they teach or think on your own. this is the result of free government controlled so called free education <more like indoctrination> in the 1 - 12 levels. as to it being free some one has to pay the freight for free stuff and our so called free education has cost the tax payers a small fortune with poor results.

Jeandr said:

, all Americans should DEMAND free education, that would be much more devastating to your leaders than any gun could!

Jean

Click to expand...

As I alluded to above, it is all too easy to get anti-depressants. Physicians are too willing to provide scrips. My wife had to adamantly refuse anti-depressants when one of her anti-cancer drugs was making her "edgy".

My wife and I watched, and subsequently counseled her friend, who upon losing her job, and with no insurance, was put on anti-depressants. This friend became suicidal, a common effect of the wrong drug, in the wrong dosages, with little or no follow up by the medical professionals.

When a person develops suicidal tendencies, it is also common for them to dwell upon perceived injustices, and to conclude that persons who mistreated them, or were unjust, should be "taken out" before they do the act upon themselves. Most of these rampant mass murders, ended with the perpetrator (on drugs) killing himself .... these acts in a classroom, church, or theater are certainly a suicide mission ... it is only a matter of time until the law closes in ... the perpetrators do not allow the police the satisfaction of ending it, and take their own lives.

The medical community and the US health administering structure must share responsibility for this new drug culture. So called "free" health care for un-insured people pays the medical provider a $45 fee for a visit. Think about it .... an independent business person, having to pay rent or mortgage on a place to see patients, with a support staff of receptionists, book keepers, paramedical personnel, malpractice insurance, and utility bills, must apportion $45 to that, and make a living as well. So how much time can the practitioner give the patient? Five minutes! Is there any wonder that the wrong drugs, in the wrong dosages for the wrong reasons are prevalent?

So you might conclude, the indigents with no insurance might best be referred to public supported institutions where salaried professionals can take all the time required to manage the case. WRONG! Such public institutions are staffed by near-incompetents. I know .... I spent 10 years in the academic medical environment, and I often visited such public institutions (like the VA) to give lectures, or seek potential candidates for research studies.
One's health is better served by avoiding such places, than getting free govt supported care at one.

Banning, or restricting guns is the easy panacea .... a feel good, but ineffective solution. No one wants to investigate the root cause. An effective solution would be a shameful expose of the profit driven drug delivery and medical management system.

Slick

Here in the UK we had our own massacre, the second one below prompted the government to ban handguns completely –there is now a 5 year prison sentence for anyone who owns or is carrying an active handgun , I feel this legislation will eventually come into force in other parts of the world ;
Hungerford massacre;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_massacre

http://www.bing.com/images/search?

q=Hungerford+Massacre&view=detailv2&&id=8507C76058A11A479D5456D78C446FEC29EF77CF&selectedIndex=7&ccid=VArqcbTY&simid=608031537212687695&thid=OIP.M540aea71b4d88e5fb57a1ea90ce18cbaH0&ajaxhist=

Dunblane School Massacre;

. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=dun ... ORM=IQFRBA

Me and my mates all had our fun with guns in our younger days, but who needs them, after the last 35 years I haven't had the need to own one, I know some crazy poeple who own guns that are a danger to themselfs and other that should never own a gun, some just have them to say "hey look at what I got" it does nothing for me and some just scare the living shit out of their wifes and kids because they have one, here in Australia crime isn't that bad that you need a gun to protect yourself, yes there are shootings here usualy bad guy vs bad guy, drug deals gone wrong, owing money or dets who knows, I have gotten in some bad positions before but I have never needed a gun to protect myself never, I'm not a tuff rooster but if I need to protect my house and family I don't need a gun to do it, my 2 cattle dogs do a great job for that.
What gets up my noise is the poeple that say its our rights to bare arms, what a load of B/S, what about the rights to live life without the fear of being shoot from some idot that shouldn't have a gun in the first place, I don't care what others think, its my opinion, you live by the gun, you proberly will die by the gun.
When I was a kid a friend of mine, his brother and him got a 22 rife for a Christmas day present just after 1pm that day the older brother was dead from that gun, somehow a bullet was put in it in the backyard and accidently got shot, that family was never the same after that and my mate had to live with that day till the day he died.

No thanks I rather live without them, there enough danger in our world without guns.

Ashley

We don't have a gun problem in the US as much as we have a serious gun and violence laden culture. Everything within mainstream media seems to revolve around killing, murder, bad guys, cop shows, war machines the list is non-stop. I don't know what the obsession is over the taboo of killing here. I grew up in the late 70's and 80's and saw an interesting turn in pop culture as far as television and the early video game movement.

I don't like to preach blame it on the media but our progressive lifestyles with more single parent homes and an economy that now is more demanding of a dual income (I blame the me generation of my parents here frankly) left many kids my age (I'm 43 now) left as what many called latch key kids. We stayed at home, watched too much boob tube and had less and less contact with our parents. A kids left to his or her devices learns from their surrounding environment.

So nature and nurture comes to play here maybe. While I grew up around Andy Griffith, Speed Racer and Bugs Bunny, the stimuli of a youth in the late 80's and 90's had 120 channels of uncensored violence and video gaming that glorified high scores for "killing zombies" or steeling cars and beating people up. We are all indoctrinated with death and mayhem here. Every damn show on Major networks is a cop show or some sort or has a violence component.

So sex and violence sells and we just keep on buying it; why is everyone so damn surprised when this stuff happens? It very sad to see so many innocent lives touched by gun violence here, We have only ourselves to blame for this bull$%^t. I don't see a gun problem but an enormous mental health epidemic fueled with many other cultural dis functions stemming from poor parenting, economics etc etc. I do not blame the guns, the gun owners and manufacturers.

America has a titanic problem with accepting responsibility whether it's personal accountability at work, at home raising a family or as a society demanding higher standards for entertainment and enlightenment.

I must also admit to being a gun owner of numerous types of firearms for sporting clay, upland game and various other medium to large game. I was involved in shooting sports for competitive shootings small bore rifles and pistols and later a short stint in bench rest long range shooting up to 1000 yards. It is a great hobby and had been demonized by a few nut bags and these End of Days apocalyptic wackos.

Oddly enough the only people who prosper from these gun scares after shootings and during pre-election panics are the gun manufacturers and the stores selling them. I find it strange that the ultra right here in the country never explain that the most invasive and strongest gun control or gun ban came about after Ronald Reagan and Senator Brady were shot in the early 80's. The Brady Bill was not a bill pushed by The Democrats as much as Brady and with an overwhelming endorsement by none other than that Great Actor Ronald Reagan : :roll:

Jeandr said:

bill said:

If you weren't sure it was a good idea to have one in the house than I am fine with your decision BUT don't take away my right to own one.In the us there are more deaths from auto accidents and or doctors than guns but it is not news worthy because it does not stir the emotions like gun violence.

Click to expand...

What is wrong with a gun registry then? Do you think it is OK to own ANY type of gun? any quantity? I'm OK with people who store them safely, I'm OK with people who use them for target practice or hunting, I'm lees OK with open carry or concealed weapons anywhere, especially where drinks are served. I think a gun license should be mandatory with a gun handling certificate. Some form of waiting period be in effect before a gun can be bought. Buying ammunition should be reserved for licensed gun owners...

As for deaths in vehicules, you may have seen a change in the safety of vehicules trough the years, safety glass, seat belts, air bags, crush zones, telescoping steering collumns... every car driver must have a license, every car driver must obey trafic laws, I know not everyone does, but most do. The number of deaths per 100K of population in the US is about the same as deaths by guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... S._by_year notice the peak in the late sixties and early seventies which coincides with the muscle car period, while better cars made for less deaths, a lot the reduction came after insurance companies charged more and more to get these cars insured and thus drove them to extinction. I'm not saying some drivers could drive them correctly, it is that the majority could not. Guns are a bit like that, some people can handle them correctly, but most can't and THEY are the ones giving guns a bad name.

If you love guns, then you should be in favor of restrictions to keep them out of the hands of idiots, just like you don't want idiots on the roads.

Jean

Click to expand...

My major complaint with a gun registration program is security of the data, who is privy to it and how safe that data is. I think most people would agree if they had valuables in their home they would not care to have them registered. The only time my house was ever broken into was 6 months after I added a rider policy for some items of high value, they broke in and went right for the safe, and the police? Worthless... In fact he only person of interest was me!! The first time my Grand parents house was broken into was when they asked the local police to "keep an eye out" on their property while out of town.

What you or anyone else has in their house is their own damn business. I'll destroy my firearms before I register them. I'm sick and tired of worthless people trying to steal what little ai have worked so hard for, at the end of the day I'm furious over the violation of my property much less than the fact I don't feel I can trust my own fellow man any further than I can toss him. I don't need a firearm for protection, and I refuse to carry one in public but it's damn better than a baseball or cricket bat when someone breaks in to steal something.

I'm happy so many folks in Canada and Australia feel much safer at home without guns. That's nice and God love you all for brooding good folks around ya, but here in many states in the US the people are nothing short of worthless and will rob you blind and kill you before taking the chance of going to the pokey. So knit your sweater in the summer and stay cozy in the winter and I'm be happy and content to keep my shotgun and 357 rather handy at night. I promise not to mess with your sheep if you promise not to mess with my guns please.
Cheers KC