Gun control

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually there has been no increase in mass killings. What the analyst see is short-term spikes with shootings close together in time.

Known as an increase in mass gun killings. But it is really the total gun killings that tell the story, the US with 30,000 vs. 200 for Canada or 150 for Germany.

The evidence is indisputable. Good gun control as we see in every other developed nation results in many fewer gun deaths. US could go from 30,000 to 500 by implementing any of the working models of good gun control.
 
I can probably guess which one has more freedom.

Let's see how Australia does since the ban:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Those commissioned reports by the American NRA have been widely debunked as misleading and false.

The American National Rifle Association claimed in 2000 that violent crimes had increased in Australia since the introduction of new laws, based on highly unrepresentative statistics from newspaper articles. The federal Attorney General Daryl Williams accused the NRA of falsifying government statistics and urged the NRA to "remove any reference to Australia" from its website.[33]


I for one am very glad I live in a nation with strong Gun Control, I do not know ANYONE who thinks guns should be more widely available here, the very tiny minority who do want more guns, are people for whom I would have serious doubts as to their levels of mental health, and thus who I would not want having guns at all.

One of my brothers school friends was murdered with a semi-automatic weapon along with 3 other girls in a house near ours.. by some deranged stalker of one of the girls... truly shocking, and indicative of why such weapons should NEVER be in the hands of individuals.

Leave Australia out of this, the overwhelming majority of us look at the gun situation in the USA and are frankly appalled and disgusted.
 
GUN CONTROL IS NOT THE F*CKING PROBLEM
And Guns out of control is an acceptable solution ?


I guess we don't need facts anymore DD??
The handguns were the only thing used to kill people yesterday.
Yes, Yes we do.


..... said the weapon that was primarily used by the gunman in the massive shooting was a Bushmaster AR-15. He said that Lanza had two handguns with him as well, a Glock 10 mm and a Sig Sauer 9 mm. A shotgun had also been found in the car Lanza had used to drive to the school. [Read more]
 
As far as facts you show me how it is faster in a 20 by 20 ft room to kill with a gun...you are talking about kids and little to no resistance. A knife for 20 kids might take 20 extra seconds...where are your facts that show it is faster to kill with a gun in all instances.

:eek: Please tell me you are kidding.
 
....... Lots of today's societal ills are at play in this Gun Massacre.

Single mom taking care of mentally ill older child.

Recent Divorce.

An aunt of his said his mother removed him from the Newtown public school system because she was unhappy with the school district's plans for her son.

She was a gun enthusiast who had taught her two sons to shoot and often took them to a local range.

According to her former sister-in-law, Marsha Lanza, Nancy stayed home to take care of Adam.

Marsha Lanza also recalled that Nancy Lanza was a survivalist and that Nancy had turned her home into "a fortress" in which she was stockpiling guns and food to prepare to defend her family in the event of the economy collapsing.
 
Sen. Dianne Feinstein said she plans to introduce an assault weapons ban bill on the first day of the new Congress.
[Huff Po]

The purpose of this bill is to get Weapons of War off the streets.

=-=-=-=-=====-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-
Feinstein called for the ban to be renewed after the mass shooting in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater that killed 12 people and injured 58 others.

"Who needs these military-style assault weapons? Who needs an ammunition feeding device capable of holding 100 rounds?" Feinstein wrote on her campaign website. "These weapons are not for hunting deer -- they’re for hunting people."

On Sunday Feinstein laid out details of the bill.

"It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession, not retroactively, but prospectively," and ban the sale of clips of more than ten bullets, Feinstein said. "The purpose of this bill is to get... weapons of war off the streets."

Feinstein would not comment on whether President Obama had failed to lead on gun control. "He is going to have a bill to lead on," she said.
 
....... Lots of today's societal ills are at play in this Gun Massacre. Single mom taking care of mentally ill older child.

Besides being factually incorrect (she was a divorced mother of three) how is that a "societal ill"? Perhaps you mean that divorced mothers don't get enough societal support or that mentally ill do not get good health care? You could blame the mother for being a self described gun nut and teaching an emotionally disturbed child to shoot guns. Those are choices that can be criticized vs. social status which cannot be blamed.

The gun lobby is always blaming the victims. We heard wacky right wing GOP House member claiming it was teacher's fault for not being armed. Blaming the mentally ill for the gun lobby making guns so easily available to them to hurt themselves and others.

Just get rid of the guns. It works everywhere else. It will work in the US. It would have prevented this massacre if the mother had no guns, the disturbed young man was not trained to use guns and the had no access to guns.
 
Can't you be called a Single parent mom when you are divorced ? Especially when the father isn't involved (which he wasn't) ?

One could but it is inaccurate and you do not know the father's involvement financially or socially. Typically "single parent" is an unmarried mother or a case of deceased parent. In either case, you attribute the guns, the training in guns and the access to guns to social class and not to those specific actions which are the cause and would be no matter what the social status.
 
They reduce gun-related homicide.

Wait. I know what you are going to say next.
Guns don't kill people, people do.

BTW, you never answered my original question !
I think you're making a leap of faith without data to back it up. When Texas passed our CHL law, violent crime went down in the single biggest decrease recorded in a single year and has remained at much lower rates since.

To see the failure in your logic, one need go no further than the UK. The number of homicides by guns is much lower int he UK than the US, but the number of homicides by bladed weapons is much higher than the US. In the UK, there is one knife crime commited for every 374 people. In the US, there is one gun crime committed for every 750 people. That means that, based on these statistics, you are more than twice as likely to be a victim of knife crime in the UK as you are to be a victim of gun crime in the US.
 
When Texas passed our CHL law, violent crime went down in the single biggest decrease recorded in a single year and has remained at much lower rates since.

Except crime rate in all of US went down over same period so Texas Concealed Handgun Law was irrelevant as are all CHL laws as far as crime deterrent. On the other hand the easily availability of those same handguns via "gun shows" and out-of-the-trunk gun dealers, so fiercely defended by the gun lobby, can be attributed to the US 30,000 gun deaths per year.

To see the failure in your logic, one need go no further than the UK. The number of homicides by guns is much lower int he UK than the US, but the number of homicides by bladed weapons is much higher than the US. In the UK, there is one knife crime commited for every 374 people. In the US, there is one gun crime committed for every 750 people. That means that, based on these statistics, you are more than twice as likely to be a victim of knife crime in the UK as you are to be a victim of gun crime in the US.

To see the failure of your argument, one only need to look at homicide rates, US 5.22 and UK 1.52. The fact that guns kill so much more easily than knives or shovels or baseball bats is the reason. We need look no further than the massacre of the school children in Newton. The skinny kid would have had no chance vs. any of the teachers were he armed with a knife, shovel or baseball bat. Only the guns which were kept by the gun nut parent who trained her mentally disturbed son in their use and made them available to him made the difference.
 
Notice that there is never one of the gun carrying advocates at any of the mass shootings? It is the main fantasy of the gun nuts and gun lobby that lives off them but they never show up.

The only person that shows up in the gun nut killer.
Every one or the 49 states that allow concealed or open carry of a handgun prohibit carrying them on school properties. My state, for example:


http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/internetforms/forms/chl-16.pdf said:
PC §46.03. PLACES WEAPONS PROHIBITED. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly possesses or goes with a f irearm, illegal knife, club, or prohibited weapon listed in Section 46.05(a):
(1) on the physical premises of a school or educational institution, any grounds or building on w hich an activity sponsored by a s chool or educational institution is being conducted, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a s chool or educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public or private, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the institution;
 
It will make it very difficult for nut cases to get guns. Remember these people who snap aren't seasoned criminals. It might not prevent every such incidents, but it will prevent many. A single life saved, is worth it...
CHL laws have already saved hundreds of innocent lives as well. So how do you determine which life to save and which to sacrifice?
 
Every one or the 49 states that allow concealed or open carry of a handgun prohibit carrying them on school properties. My state, for example:

Which is meaningless as far guns causing 30,000 deaths and the deaths of many school children in school. Newton is not an isolated case of gun violence in our schools.

In no case has a mass killer been deterred by concealed handgun laws. They don't care while the easy availability of guns due to liberal laws like concealed carry permits makes handguns easy to get legally or illegally. The gun mfg.s like the prescription drug mfg's make way more guns than legal market would justify knowing that the "legal" gun show and out of the trunk gun dealers will sell hundreds of guns for the illegal market.

Society should not let people amass huge arsenals in their homes. Regulations should have caught Mrs. Lanza and her weapons hoard which could be stolen and used against the public which is exactly what happened. Her intent did not matter. Her irrational fears and gun hoard did.

Newton is the perfect example of easily availability of guns causing the problem, the irrational acquisition of many guns and much ammo and the training of a disturbed child so he could "defend himself with guns", the gun lobby sales pitches came together in perfect storm of gun violence.
 
Except Lanza's mother was a self described gun nut who kept a lot of guns in the house, taught her clearly mentally disturbed son to use them...which he did...on her and 26 other people...talk about crazy.
And how does that change the fact the every one everyone of these incidents has been proceeded by an undiagnosed or untreated mental health issue? Or that out mental health system seems to be ill-equipped to deal with violent or potentially violent children?

Here's another good essay on our mental health system:


Madness, Deinstitutionalization & Murder
Engage Volume 13, Issue 1, March 2012
May 17, 2012
Clayton Cramer

For those of us who came of age in the 1970s, one of the most shocking aspects of the last three decades was the rise of mass public shootings: people who went into public places and murdered complete strangers. Such crimes had taken place before, such as the Texas Tower murders by Charles Whitman in 1966,1 but their rarity meant that they were shocking.

Something changed in the 1980s: these senseless mass murders started to happen with increasing frequency. People were shocked when James Huberty killed twenty-one strangers in a McDonald’s in San Ysidro, California in 1984, and Patrick Purdy murdered five children in a Stockton, California schoolyard in 1989. Now, these crimes have become background noise, unless they involve an extraordinarily high body count (such as at Virginia Tech) or a prominent victim (such as Rep. Gabrielle Giffords). Why did these crimes go from extraordinarily rare to commonplace? (Read the rest...)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom