Gun control

[SchmitzIT]

Actually, you stated:

Gun crimes dont happen in the UK because you cant get a gun - it's that simple.

You can't get guns in Holland either. Yet, the news is full of gun related incidents. I don't live in the UK (nor Holland, actually, but being Dutch, I do read the Dutch news and noticed the majority of the cases as the day progressed).

And to whom is it considered the easiest country in Europe to obtain weapons, exactly? I certainly wouldn't know where, and I lived there for many years. Apparently Breivik also missed that concept, as he traveled to the Chech republic to get weapons. If I were to guess anywhere in Europe, actually, I'd put my money on the Balkans, but apparently you have lists of places in Holland where weapons are openly traded or something.

 

[RickM]

Owning guns are what helped us kick the king's ass and gain our freedom.
We will keep our guns in case we need to do the same to the ever corrupt government and replace them with a system that works.
That is the real reason the government wants gun control.

This is the crazy part.

You own a gun to protect you....from the government. That's not normal.

I could kind of understand the argument that people own guns to protect their family from criminals. Obviously we all want to protect our families, and I'm sure if guns were legal in the UK, I'd own one for that sole purpose. But thats not why you own one. You own one "just incase" the government decides to what? Turn into the Nazi party or something?

What exactly will you and your gun do to fix your country should that happen? I highly doubt you'd get far if it was you vs them.

(also you may want to read up on your own history. Your constitution was written AFTER the evolution.)

 

[Slavik]

This is the crazy part.

You own a gun to protect you....from the government. That's not normal.

You own one "just incase" the government decides to what? Turn into the Nazi party or something?

What exactly will you and your gun do to fix your country should that happen? I highly doubt you'd get far if it was you vs them.

QFT

 

[RickM]

Actually, you stated:



You can't get guns in Holland either. Yet, the news is full of gun related incidents. I don't live in the UK (nor Holland, actually, but being Dutch, I do read the Dutch news and noticed the majority of the cases as the day progressed).

And to whom is it considered the easiest country in Europe to obtain weapons, exactly? I certainly wouldn't know where, and I lived there for many years. Apparently Breivik also missed that concept, as he traveled to the Chech republic to get weapons. If I were to guess anywhere in Europe, actually, I'd put my money on the Balkans, but apparently you have lists of places in Holland where weapons are openly traded or something.

(Still not providing that list then? Ok...got it )

When I say it's the easiest country, I should have been more specific. The licensing. It's a lot more relaxed than other European gun-licensed countries. For example, in the UK you must be part of a verified gun club and remain a member of it. In the Netherlands, you can just claim to be a hunter, and that's good enough for a hunters license (note I cant comment on which weapons are covered under this license however).

They have certainly made it stricter than it once was, however it's still not as strict as it should be. For instance,you can still own a handgun. I believe they still allow semi-automatics too, but suppressors, fully automatic, etc are now banned.

As for the horrible Breivik case I couldnt possibly comment as I dont really know anything about the case other than the actual crime.

Anyway...not sure how/why we got on the subject of the Netherlands but hey ho.

 

[Slavik]

Loaded question incoming.

Do all of you people who support the "right to own a gun" also support the legalisation of drugs (heroin, cocaine, meth etc)? Afterall, it should be your personal freedom to decide what chemicals or substances you put into your body right?

I look forward to reading the replies to this one.

 

[jasetaro]

This is the crazy part.

You own a gun to protect you....from the government. That's not normal.

I could kind of understand the argument that people own guns to protect their family from criminals. Obviously we all want to protect our families, and I'm sure if guns were legal in the UK, I'd own one for that sole purpose. But thats not why you own one. You own one "just incase" the government decides to what? Turn into the Nazi party or something?

What exactly will you and your gun do to fix your country should that happen? I highly doubt you'd get far if it was you vs them.

(also you may want to read up on your own history. Your constitution was written AFTER the evolution.)

I suppose it is from a European perspective... but from an American perspective it isn't. Our founding fathers were firm believers in natural law, they believed -- and enshrined in our founding documents, that we are all born with certain natural or God given rights and that governments are instituted among men and derive their power from the consent of the governed. They also believed that should a government become corrupt or tyrannical that the people had the right to abolish it and create a new one.

Simply put, our founding fathers wanted a government that respected, and feared, the people it serves.

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
—Patrick Henry

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."
-Thomas Jefferson

 

[SchmitzIT]

(Still not providing that list then? Ok...got it )

I have, unlikely as it might sound, other stuff to do as well. I am deeply sorry that besides my full-time job, my part time own company, and spending time with my family, I cannot also double as your personal Google bot.

When I say it's the easiest country, I should have been more specific. The licensing. It's a lot more relaxed than other European gun-licensed countries. For example, in the UK you must be part of a verified gun club and remain a member of it. In the Netherlands, you can just claim to be a hunter, and that's good enough for a hunters license (note I cant comment on which weapons are covered under this license however).

That's a load of bollocks. My father was a hunter and trained hunter wannabes. I've joined him in those trainings when I was younger, and it most certainly required a *lot* more effort than you claim. There's a theoretic part, and a very strict "in-the-field" exam as well.

For instance,you can still own a handgun. I believe they still allow semi-automatics too, but suppressors, fully automatic, etc are now banned.

Only as a member of a shooting club, and not until you have been an upstanding member for a while.It really is not as straight-forward as you claimed. Now go look at the list of today's news articles again, and ask yourself if having strict gun laws (As I assure you Holland does have) actually means there is less risk.

Sure, there's probably less risk than in the US, but in a country where judges are are liberals living in ivory towers, far far away from the actual world, and where they basically send criminals right back to the street, often before the victims get out of the hospital, and where the police force is so utterly incompetent that less than 5% of the reported crimes are actually leading to a sentence, I definitely would like to have the right to arm myself against the criminals who DO have guns.

Anyway. I'm out of this discussion. I'm not going to change anyone's mind, and no amount of hippy talk will make me change my mind.

 

[SchmitzIT]

FYI, my earlier statement about you gun enthusiasts and NRA was posted yesterday, which was 19th, which was after I've read news from multiple news sources regarding NRA broke silent about Sundy Hook shooting and so forth. Maybe you could use a little more research before posting.

I actually could have sworn you initially made it sound as if the NRA immediately commented, which, they did not.

However, the anti-gun lobby instantly saw a new reason to start pushing their argument again, so again, it's not the gun-touting people who abused the dead children to push an agenda. That was the other side.

And on that note, I truly am out of this.

 

[Reeve of Shinra]

Loaded question incoming.

Do all of you people who support the "right to own a gun" also support the legalisation of drugs (heroin, cocaine, meth etc)? Afterall, it should be your personal freedom to decide what chemicals or substances you put into your body right?

I look forward to reading the replies to this one.

I do not support the "war on drugs" for a multitude of reasons, one of which is that I believe its a personal preference as you so noted. It doesn't mean I have to agree with that persons choice, only that I do not believe the government needs to be so heavily involved. Instead, I would rather drug abuse be treated as a medical condition (instead of a criminal offense) and through education and support groups, tackle the problem that way.

 

[EQnoble]

First off to whoever asked...I gave MANY prime examples of why I own firearms and how removing them would drastically change my life...if people were not all about their agenda they would have read the content of my messages...you know...before I got fed up with stupid people in this thread...

I have spent a measurable percentage of my life shooting guns...you are not asking me to just lay down my arms...you are TELLING me it's no big deal ..just change your whole life.

And this is not a political debate to me and I never made it that way...I am responding to the crazy people that think because you remove guns you remove violence...and I take this personally. You know the same ones who wont address any detail that doesn't support their notions.


For whoever thinks I live in fear and that's why I have a gun...well I HAVE been shot less than a quarter mile from my house...it does not change how I view things. I was given a gun at 6 years old and taught respect and restraint from day one. My father moved to this country because of the idea of freedom and things like being able to make the decision to own a firearm or not.

You can say what you want...but you are only lying to yourself...I DO NOT LIVE IN FEAR...I am willing to give my life for anything worthy including any other good citizen of my country. That is not fear...I am making a choice and have since I was a young boy. You people are being terrorists in my point of view because you are trying to drastically change my life because YOU are in fear of guns...because you know nothing about them...and to make a point that sounds equally ridiculous...more than double the people die everyday because of aids than guns...an equal solution would be to take away a mans right to keep his penis...no sex, no spreading aids...in fact more people die every day from diarrhea than guns(that is a fact ..go look it up)...go head and do something about that sh!t. You wont...your interest was to get rid of guns before this event and you should be ashamed to think that those kids died for your purposes.

Whoever said something about the police...and crimes....please don't make me insult you like you are insulting me...if you were actually amongst the people you look down upon everyday rather than stepping on them you would know that more crimes go unreported than those that get reported...people don't talk to cops...doing that can get you killed...because that IS the way it is...argue and I will call you stupid. I got shot and didn't make a police report...because I don't want to hear about a family member of mine being shot in the mouth because I opened mine. And saying the police need to do a better job...HELLO STUPIDS! If someone is at your front door with determination to get in your house and they break in and you are home...do you think the police response time should be .02 seconds? It takes time to respond to a call and dispatch. In the mean time the person can rape and kill you....
here read this....from a couple towns over from me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders

To whoever thinks getting rid of legal guns is going to erase the 200,000-300,000 illegal guns in circulation, or do anything but increase the amount of guns smuggled in because now they are more valuable....I wish my life was as blissful as yours where you sit in your ivory tower.



Seriously...I have lost a lot of respect for a lot of people in this thread...when you say something to me and I tell you to go eff yourself....this is why and don't ask me anymore questions.


You people disgust me.

 

[RickM]

<snip>
To whoever thinks getting rid of legal guns is going to erase the 200,000-300,000 illegal guns in circulation, or do anything but increase the amount of guns smuggled in because now they are more valuable....I wish my life was as blissful as yours where you sit in your ivory tower.<snip>

Ok, I wasnt involved in whatever earlier discussion you have, but could I just ask a couple of quick questions (although in this thread there probably is no such thing ).

Do you, or do you not feel that having some form of license would HELP to stop the likes of the cinema shooting and Newtown?

Before you answer, I'm not talking about preventing everyone having guns here. I'm simply suggesting some form of gun license, that requires you are given, say a character reference. I.E to buy a gun, you must have first provided, say 2 forms of character reference, from someone like a boss/employer and a neighbour.

This way, you still get to own your gun and get whatever pride you feel you need from owning it, plus some random nutter cant buy one.

To put it another way. Do you think it's correct that if there's a complete nutcase living next door to you, he/she should be allowed to own a semi-automatic rifle? If so, why?

 

[jmurrayhead]

Ok, I wasnt involved in whatever earlier discussion you have, but could I just ask a couple of quick questions (although in this thread there probably is no such thing ).

Do you, or do you not feel that having some form of license would HELP to stop the likes of the cinema shooting and Newtown?

Before you answer, I'm not talking about preventing everyone having guns here. I'm simply suggesting some form of gun license, that requires you are given, say a character reference. I.E to buy a gun, you must have first provided, say 2 forms of character reference, from someone like a boss/employer and a neighbour.

This way, you still get to own your gun and get whatever pride you feel you need from owning it, plus some random nutter cant buy one.

To put it another way. Do you think it's correct that if there's a complete nutcase living next door to you, he/she should be allowed to own a semi-automatic rifle? If so, why?

I have no issue with making it difficult for bad people/people with mental illness getting their hands on weapons. I would even go as far as to require psychiatric evaluation for anyone who wants to own a gun, as well as for anyone living in the home of someone who wants to own a gun. I do, however, have an issue with banning guns entirely.

 

[RickM]

I think this is going to be a never ending debate.

From my perspective, we live in a relatively low crime country - much lower than the US. I guess thats why even our police force dont even carry guns (at least outside of London).

I guess if you live in a country that does regularly suffer from violent crime, you're going to want to protect yourself - I respect that, but as I live in a country that doesnt have such a high rate, I cant justify, or forsee then eed for such a drastic way of protecting yourself. For us, things like 'protecting yourself from the government' really sound crazy as we've got a very stable country with the monarchy ultimately being "in charge" (not that they ever have to act on it). I had no idea that the government was really considered to be that unstable in the US.

Interesting stats, a couple of years old (2009), but still very much relevent.


US Population: 311.5 million
There were an estimated 13,756 murders in 2009 in the USA, at a rate of approx 5.0 per 100,000. Of these, 9203 were carried out with a firearm.

UK Population: 56.1 million
There were an estimated 550 murders in 2011-12, a rate of about 1.4 per 100,000. Of these, 39 were carried out with a firearm.

Based on that I can see why you'd want to be protected. But then the argument comes back to full circle - whilst if there were no guns you wouldn't be protected, that 9203 number would be a fraction of that, far outweighing something as simple as owning a firearm for anything other than recreation.

 

[RickM]

I have no issue with making it difficult for bad people/people with mental illness getting their hands on weapons. I would even go as far as to require psychiatric evaluation for anyone who wants to own a gun, as well as for anyone living in the home of someone who wants to own a gun. I do, however, have an issue with banning guns entirely.

Ok, that's fair. Thank you for your reasoned response.

 

[EQnoble]

Ok, I wasnt involved in whatever earlier discussion you have, but could I just ask a couple of quick questions (although in this thread there probably is no such thing ).

Do you, or do you not feel that having some form of license would HELP to stop the likes of the cinema shooting and Newtown?

Before you answer, I'm not talking about preventing everyone having guns here. I'm simply suggesting some form of gun license, that requires you are given, say a character reference. I.E to buy a gun, you must have first provided, say 2 forms of character reference, from someone like a boss/employer and a neighbour.

This way, you still get to own your gun and get whatever pride you feel you need from owning it, plus some random nutter cant buy one.

To put it another way. Do you think it's correct that if there's a complete nutcase living next door to you, he/she should be allowed to own a semi-automatic rifle? If so, why?

I dont think a certified crazy person should have a weapon no....semi auto, single fire, automatic, tie-clip gun flare-gun or slingshot that doesn't matter.


No a license would not have helped...his mother was a good person according to people and she would be granted a firearm under those terms and he could steal it from her....
it goes back to my original point....SHE is a criminal for allowing access to her firearms...guns in inch thick metal safes do not get stolen. She irresponsibly stored her guns.


Besides... on that note...over 60% of crimes committed with firearms are committed by people who posses them illegally and there is hundreds of thousands of firearms stolen every year.


Like I said earlier...people who take the time to register a firearm , take basic pistol classes or hunting courses do not go on killing rampages. It is the guy who steals that gun that does...because he has no respect for the firearm.


Pride has nothing to do with me owning a firearm....it is a way of life. For you to sum it up in a way that says guns are useless shows that you are so anti gun it is ridiculous...it is not a pride thing and it is very close minded to think that is why I own a firearm....before acting like you know and making things up to support your agenda why dont you go look what I, an actual gun owner posted earlier... I will not give you the satisfaction of making me repost it so you can be lazy and skip over facts you don't like....just like you skip over facts that support owning guns.....thanks for taking the time to see the other side of things and research the argument you are involved in.

 

[RickM]

I dont think a certified crazy person should have a weapon no....semi auto, single fire, automatic, tie-clip gun flare-gun or slingshot that doesn't matter.


No a license would not have helped...his mother was a good person according to people and she would be granted a firearm under those terms and he could steal it from her....
it goes back to my original point....SHE is a criminal for allowing access to her firearms...guns in inch thick metal safes do not get stolen. She irresponsibly stored her guns.


Besides... on that note...over 60% of crimes committed with firearms are committed by people who posses them illegally and there is hundreds of thousands of firearms stolen every year.


Like I said earlier...people who take the time to register a firearm , take basic pistol classes or hunting courses do not go on killing rampages. It is the guy who steals that gun that does...because he has no respect for the firearm.


Pride has nothing to do with me owning a firearm....it is a way of life. For you to sum it up in a way that says guns are useless shows that you are so anti gun it is ridiculous...it is not a pride thing and it is very close minded to think that is why I own a firearm....before acting like you know and making things up to support your agenda why dont you go look what I, an actual gun owner posted earlier... I will not give you the satisfaction of making me repost it so you can be lazy and skip over facts you don't like....just like you skip over facts that support owning guns.....thanks for taking the time to see the other side of things and research the argument you are involved in.

You're right - I am close minded about it. I've lived in a country where we have no guns, low crime rates, etc. It's just seen as a very odd situation to us. I'm sure you chaps see it the same way towards us. To you it may come across that we 'outsiders' think it's crazy to need a gun, and I guess to you it comes across as crazy that even our police force dont carry guns.

Just a correction to make though. From the reports (and this is assuming they are correct), the mother was not stable, at least from the sounds of it she wasnt:

The mother of Adam Lanza, the gunman who killed 20 children and six adults in one of America’s worst ever school massacres, was a “survivalist” preparing for economic and social collapse, it has emerged.

According to reports, Nancy Lanza was a so-called 'prepper', a part of the survivalist movement which urges individuals to prepare for the breakdown of society by training with weapons and hoarding food and other supplies.

“She prepared for the worst,” her sister-in-law Marsha Lanza told the Chicago Sun-Times.

“Last time we visited her in person, we talked about prepping – are you ready for what could happen down the line, when the economy collapses?”

Marsha Lanza described Nancy as 'self-reliant' and said she repeatedly talked about her preparations for the economic and social meltdown.

It has also emerged that Mrs Lanza had spoken of her fears about her son Adam's behaviour less than a week before the attack.

(Full Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-and-social-collapse-say-reports-8422298.html)

Now. I'm no expert here...but assuming this is correct, this does not seem like something you'd generally do if you were 'normal'.

 

[EQnoble]

You're right - I am close minded about it. I've lived in a country where we have no guns, low crime rates, etc. It's just seen as a very odd situation to us. I'm sure you chaps see it the same way towards us. To you it may come across that we 'outsiders' think it's crazy to need a gun, and I guess to you it comes across as crazy that even our police force dont carry guns.

Just a correction to make though. From the reports (and this is assuming they are correct), the mother was not stable, at least from the sounds of it she wasnt:



(Full Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-and-social-collapse-say-reports-8422298.html)

Now. I'm no expert here...but assuming this is correct, this does not seem like something you'd generally do if you were 'normal'.

You also live in a country where you can order spotted d!ck and not be kicked out of the restaurant...we live in two completely different cultures and the US is the biggest melting pot of nationalities and lifestyles and that creates tension....what I am getting at is the correlation of guns to violence is not the answer...because you wont have that many less deaths....like I said more people die everyday from diarrhea in this country than a gunshot wound...people who want to kill will use something else...the link above I posted...the guy broke in with a gun and raped two children...he didn't shoot the father...he beat him with a bat and then tried to burn everyone to a crisp...guns do not mean death. They mean, make good choices....when someone makes a bad one...blame the person making the choice not the gun.

If your daughter got pregnant and was on birth control, would you blame the birth control or your daughter for having sex?



Being secure in your mind is healthy....if she believed something true or not and was preparing for the chance of it...I would call her responsible, no matter if she was on the head of the nail with this...or completely out in left field.

 

[jasetaro]

Ok, I wasnt involved in whatever earlier discussion you have, but could I just ask a couple of quick questions (although in this thread there probably is no such thing ).

Do you, or do you not feel that having some form of license would HELP to stop the likes of the cinema shooting and Newtown?

Before you answer, I'm not talking about preventing everyone having guns here. I'm simply suggesting some form of gun license, that requires you are given, say a character reference. I.E to buy a gun, you must have first provided, say 2 forms of character reference, from someone like a boss/employer and a neighbour.

This way, you still get to own your gun and get whatever pride you feel you need from owning it, plus some random nutter cant buy one.

To put it another way. Do you think it's correct that if there's a complete nutcase living next door to you, he/she should be allowed to own a semi-automatic rifle? If so, why?

We've covered this... Connecticut already has already has some of strictest gun control laws in the including a ban on so-called assault weapons.

In order to legally purchase a handgun here you have to be at least 21 years old and have state issued pistol license. A pistol isn't hard to, but it's isn't easy either... you have to go your local issuing authority (usually your local police dept.) and apply. The requirements are pretty straight forward you have to have clean record i.e. never been convicted of a felony or violent misdemeanor, been adjudicated mentally insane or involuntarily committed to metal institution, successfully complete mandatory firearms safety class and state and federal background checks... Once you've met those requirements the issuing authority will, at his or her discretion, issue the license.

Once you have a pistol license you can purchase any handgun legally available in Connecticut after an instant background check and completing the required state and federal paperwork.

The rules aren’t as strict for long guns, you have to be at least 18 years old, have a clean record, complete the required state and federal paperwork and wait 14 days for a background check to be completed.

 

[BlackJacket]

 

[Vicki]

I actually could have sworn you initially made it sound as if the NRA immediately commented, which, they did not.

However, the anti-gun lobby instantly saw a new reason to start pushing their argument again, so again, it's not the gun-touting people who abused the dead children to push an agenda. That was the other side.

And on that note, I truly am out of this.

Right, get a life, would you? So you could make some sense......

I repeat: this is not a political agenda issue, at least not to parents in this country. This is life-saving issue, a national crisis issue!