Discussion on:
Top
Rated
Rated
Gun Ban
Posted by richardbuchman@...
23rd Jul
Just
In
In
Buy fake Passport ,Visa,Driving License,ID CARDS,marriage certificates,dip
Posted by document10
12th Nov
Show:
-6
A fundamental Gun ban in the USA is decades overdue
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
| Below your threshold
+8
Votes
CCP
I wish a concealed carry permit holder was in Aurora, Colorado a few nights ago. We would have never heard of the incident on the national news. Neil, I hope you are never in a situation where you need a weapon to defend yourself. There are no atheists in foxholes. Oh, BTW the wild west you spoke of. It's moved to Chicago. check it out.
Posted by Marcus Of Arrington
23rd Jul
-6
Gun Control solves the issue
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
| Below your threshold
+8
Votes
What part of this being dumb do you not get ?
I, and most of the people who live in the real world, understand that nothing could have been done to prevent this. He broke no laws in his preparations. Purchasing ammunition in bulk is done by most shooters because it is cost effective. No weapons were purchased off the internet and background checks were done(he passed). What "new" laws would you pass(other than depriving me the right to carry or own a weapon) to prevent something like this happening again??
Posted by msglaigaie
23rd Jul
-2
Votes
Only in gun control lax countries
Well you can;t buy 6,000 rounds of ammo in the UK, without arousing suspicion. Indeed most ammunition is on the prohibitive list, as the weapons are unlawful to own. Period.
Who needs 6,000 rounds of ammo, unless you have a minigun.
Who needs 6,000 rounds of ammo, unless you have a minigun.
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
23rd Jul
+4
Votes
Competitive Sport Shooters
Competitive sport shooters can easily blow through 5 to 6 thousand rounds of ammo a month. I'm not competitive but my standard range routine consumes about 1,000 round a month; so I often buy 5,000 rounds at a whack. Its not cheap either.
Just for you Neil. The US has millions of recreational sport shooters that enjoy the sport of shooting. You do know that there is such a sport don't you? Check it out at the Olympics. All those shooters need ammo and to the extent that it is somewhat less regulated than guns, all those shooters engage in the legal acquisition of their ammo. You are obviously an anti-gun person and will never change your mind about guns, so thanks for your opinion.
Just for you Neil. The US has millions of recreational sport shooters that enjoy the sport of shooting. You do know that there is such a sport don't you? Check it out at the Olympics. All those shooters need ammo and to the extent that it is somewhat less regulated than guns, all those shooters engage in the legal acquisition of their ammo. You are obviously an anti-gun person and will never change your mind about guns, so thanks for your opinion.
Posted by dcr100@...
Updated - 24th Jul
-6
So that's probably 0.1% of gun owners, and that's being generous.
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
| Below your threshold
+3
Votes
In response to Neil
Neil-
You have an almost childlike reverence to authority. "Properly licensed gun club" My gun club is run by regular people, not omniscient elders trained in psychology able to determine who will use their ammo for evil.
You have an almost childlike reverence to authority. "Properly licensed gun club" My gun club is run by regular people, not omniscient elders trained in psychology able to determine who will use their ammo for evil.
Posted by jtdavies
27th Jul
+5
Votes
You CAN'T OWN A GUN in the UK
Not without lots of paperwork and tons of evidence you really really need it.
Has it stopped crime? Absolutely not. Illegal guns exist. Knives and other blades, and blunt instruments became the easier weapon to obtain, and they're doing MORE crime because of it... you see, the police aren't physically two feet away from everybody so it takes time for them to get there, Time in which you could be dead or severely injured.
Do your research, discover the statistics that prove where guns are not outlawed, crime, especially violent crime is less than areas where nobody can legally own a gun.
Has it stopped crime? Absolutely not. Illegal guns exist. Knives and other blades, and blunt instruments became the easier weapon to obtain, and they're doing MORE crime because of it... you see, the police aren't physically two feet away from everybody so it takes time for them to get there, Time in which you could be dead or severely injured.
Do your research, discover the statistics that prove where guns are not outlawed, crime, especially violent crime is less than areas where nobody can legally own a gun.
Posted by DaemonSlayer
23rd Jul
-4
Votes
Unlikely
As seen from the Gun related death stats, the UK and many other guns outlawed countries are much less likely in thie respect. Guns being readily available, leads to there use.
Going out I feel safe in the UK in general. There are a number of area's I would choose to avoid, but I don't think I need to 'go out packing a piece' with the feeling I need it to be safe in my own country when I go to the cinema or down the Supermarket shopping. It's a desperately sad statement on American society if you don't feel safe without a gun.
By you argument, you would have less crime is you made Heroin legal - Is that a good idea.
Going out I feel safe in the UK in general. There are a number of area's I would choose to avoid, but I don't think I need to 'go out packing a piece' with the feeling I need it to be safe in my own country when I go to the cinema or down the Supermarket shopping. It's a desperately sad statement on American society if you don't feel safe without a gun.
By you argument, you would have less crime is you made Heroin legal - Is that a good idea.
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
Updated - 24th Jul
-2
Votes
no gun
When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.
Posted by MagnetBoy
25th Jul
+3
Votes
needs?
who are you to question someone else's needs? Or even to imply that a need is required in order to enjoy a right? I'm sorry someone told you some or all guns are prohibited, but think (rationally)for yourself.
Posted by MagnetBoy
25th Jul
+7
Votes
Gun Control solves the issue?
Too bad wikipedia doesn't have a list of countries by firearm related death rate where the countries are compared in the same year. Then we can compare meaningful data. It is interesting to note that the countries with the highest homicide rates are the countries where the drug gangs are involved in intergang warfare. How many of the homicides you quote are the result of intergang warfare and how many are the result of the slaughter of innocent civilians? I would compare the Colorado shooting with the Norway massacre, if comparisons are made. The fact that we are a nation with numerous well armed criminals is not an arguement for gun control. Actually the opposite is true. When was the last time the police were known for stopping violent crime as opposed to investigating violent crimes after the fact? The police do their best, but they are greatly outnumbered especially in this economic environment when the public's safety is on the budgetary chopping block. What you are advocating is a nation of crime victims. I would prefer a nation of people who are willing and able to defend themselves.
Posted by levinsa@...
23rd Jul
-4
Votes
Society Issue
If you can only feel safe in your society, by having a gun under your pillow, I think you need to get some perspective.
It's pretty sad.
At lease you ave some effective law enforcement, or it would be like Afghanistan or Iraq otherwise.
It's pretty sad.
At lease you ave some effective law enforcement, or it would be like Afghanistan or Iraq otherwise.
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
23rd Jul
+6
Votes
Go ahead and feel safe without any guns in sight
but, be prepared for the day when the criminal, knowing you can't fight back takes everything from you. By the time the cops arrive, they'll be gone, and you could have already lost your life, or the life of a loved one at their hands.
Posted by DaemonSlayer
23rd Jul
-3
Votes
or n ot
or not. Stop peddling fear to support your Gun habit.
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
24th Jul
+6
Votes
Really?
Take a good look at Chicago... a very anti-gun city. Take a good look at the crime stats there. Compare those stats to say, Utah, Arkansas, ARizona, or any other state that doesn't make law-abiding citizens unable to defend themselves.
All these regulations do is make it easier for the criminals, who will get guns anyway, to perpetrate their crimes on innocent people. Fear of someone fighting back, with lethal ability, will deter more crime than cause it.
All these regulations do is make it easier for the criminals, who will get guns anyway, to perpetrate their crimes on innocent people. Fear of someone fighting back, with lethal ability, will deter more crime than cause it.
Posted by DaemonSlayer
23rd Jul
-6
Gun = Jail
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
| Below your threshold
0
Votes
Not that simple
There is a reason why we don't have the death penalty for every crime.
That reason is, it effectively backs the rat into the corner and they have
nothing left to lose, so they kill even more people.
Also, people with the authority to have weapons can decide to commit
crimes with them. Look at the situation at Fort Hood when a Muslim
major decided to start shooting unarmed soldiers. He claimed to be
doing it in the name of his religion, so it IS relevant.
Countries that want to control their people first take away as much
power as they can from them. One of the reason why the "Arab spring"
did not fully hit in Iran is that the regular citizen do not have access to
weapons. The reason why the Afghan central government has never
been able to take over its people (most who don't want it to exist) is
that they happen to be armed and are quite willing to kill those who
attempt to disarm them. And, since they ones that are sent to do the
disarming know this, it is rarely attempted.
That reason is, it effectively backs the rat into the corner and they have
nothing left to lose, so they kill even more people.
Also, people with the authority to have weapons can decide to commit
crimes with them. Look at the situation at Fort Hood when a Muslim
major decided to start shooting unarmed soldiers. He claimed to be
doing it in the name of his religion, so it IS relevant.
Countries that want to control their people first take away as much
power as they can from them. One of the reason why the "Arab spring"
did not fully hit in Iran is that the regular citizen do not have access to
weapons. The reason why the Afghan central government has never
been able to take over its people (most who don't want it to exist) is
that they happen to be armed and are quite willing to kill those who
attempt to disarm them. And, since they ones that are sent to do the
disarming know this, it is rarely attempted.
Posted by richard233
27th Jul
+11
Votes
Right to carry, but where?
Colorado is a right to conceal and carry state, but as I understand it, the cinema multiplex exercised its right to not allow weapons inside. So, as often happens, even the legally-armed citizens wouldn't have had their weapons on them because they were following the rules. "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" applies perfectly to this situation. Ogre Holmes was operating entirely outside the law in all instances.
Posted by justajo
23rd Jul
0
Votes
Correct.
I can imagine that if there had been armed individuals that there is a good
chance that they would accidentally shoot a "good guy". We are talking a
dark confusing place and it would be easy to mistake a "good guy" trying
to take out the "bad guy" not to mention that you might miss and take out
an unarmed person.
What they really needed was a proper alarm system so that when the
fire door was opened that an alarm would have gone off and the lights
gone on.
chance that they would accidentally shoot a "good guy". We are talking a
dark confusing place and it would be easy to mistake a "good guy" trying
to take out the "bad guy" not to mention that you might miss and take out
an unarmed person.
What they really needed was a proper alarm system so that when the
fire door was opened that an alarm would have gone off and the lights
gone on.
Posted by richard233
27th Jul
-3
Votes
Shoot out in Theater
This is a recipe for more deaths and mayhem. If there was a person with a legal permit and was carrying a weapon, the environment would add to the confusion and increase the probability that the counter shots would injure or kill bystanders. A trained police would not shoot back unless the gunman was clear of other bystanders.
Posted by sboverie
23rd Jul
+5
Votes
Post Columbine things changed.
One of the biggest questions that came up after Columbine is how come the police did not go after the shooter.
Police later caught hell, justifiably, for taking a non-confrontational approach while people were being shot and killed.
So to refut your statement, yes at least a trained police officer would have fired back. I know a dozen shooters I would trust to respond in such a situation.
If a person is already indiscriminately shooting dozens of people, a few stray rounds from someone firing back is of no concern.
Odds are pretty good the shooter will flee from a few very unexpected shots being fired back at them. The hesitation caused by a few rounds fired at him could have bought the seconds people needed to escape to safety.
Maybe a few people might have been hit in the cross fire, but I highly doubt the bottom line totals of killed and wounded would have been anything but lower if someone was firing back at him.
Police later caught hell, justifiably, for taking a non-confrontational approach while people were being shot and killed.
So to refut your statement, yes at least a trained police officer would have fired back. I know a dozen shooters I would trust to respond in such a situation.
If a person is already indiscriminately shooting dozens of people, a few stray rounds from someone firing back is of no concern.
Odds are pretty good the shooter will flee from a few very unexpected shots being fired back at them. The hesitation caused by a few rounds fired at him could have bought the seconds people needed to escape to safety.
Maybe a few people might have been hit in the cross fire, but I highly doubt the bottom line totals of killed and wounded would have been anything but lower if someone was firing back at him.
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 23rd Jul
+7
Votes
Shooting Golden Rules
Every CCW holder learns the 4 golden rules for shooting; one of which addresses the issue you bring up. It is clear from your comment that you are not familiar with how responsible shooters are trained.
Posted by dcr100@...
23rd Jul
-3
Votes
Responsible Shooters
Nice to know they exist, but, how can you tell? The problem with guns in the US is that the responses are emotional and not rational. I was replying to the poster who made a comment that it would have been helpful if someone in the theater was able to shoot back at the gunman. The idea that having a gun is an effective counter, it can be but it must be handled right to reduce risk to bystanders. I think that throwing heavy objects like shoes would work better in this situation.
My father was a gun nut and my family was almost a news item where the topic is about a murder/suicide. I have had other gun nuts tell me that I could have handled the situation if I was armed. I managed to stop him from committing suicide in a moment of anger and I did not need a gun to do it.
There is a way to let those who are responsible to keep and use their guns and there is a way to slow down those who are irresponsible from causing this much grief. The extremes do disservice to their own positions while shutting down all dialog.
My father was a gun nut and my family was almost a news item where the topic is about a murder/suicide. I have had other gun nuts tell me that I could have handled the situation if I was armed. I managed to stop him from committing suicide in a moment of anger and I did not need a gun to do it.
There is a way to let those who are responsible to keep and use their guns and there is a way to slow down those who are irresponsible from causing this much grief. The extremes do disservice to their own positions while shutting down all dialog.
Posted by sboverie
23rd Jul