Gun Control

[lumos2000]

i dont think anyone in denmark thinks that made it OK :? gun laws were changed in the uk after dunblane as we dident want it to happen again

 

[FairfaxPat]

There was a guy named Derrick Byrd, in Cumbria, UK, in 2010 who killed 12 people with guns in just 4 hours-- A couple more from good old, safe, gun controlled Europe in the last 10 years...

 

[B77]

Well, I guess we'll never be seeing you over here, then B77 And probably not in Denmark either...

On the contrary i'd love to visit, my wife keeps getting asked to do guest artist spots up and down the west coast and it looks like we'll be there around the end of 2013, if we can find someone to take over the animal shelter for 4-6 months. She lived and worked in LA & SF for a couple of years and loved it.
Anders Brevik ? Denmark ? It was Norway,this is what make americans look ill informed, Norway and Denmark are two completely different countries. Lived in Norway, fantastic place, Denmark is pretty cool too.
The shootings in Toulouse ? Yep they happened carried out by a muslim guy over a 10 day period in protest at the Isreali atrocities in Palestine, he also killed 4 soldiers but there was no outcry to ban pistols because this was an exremely rare kind of once every fifty years event in France, which, I might add is the 12th highest in world for private firearms. Just a couple of figures because Sylus likes them so much....

Source UNODC Small Arms Survey 2011
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... yTnc#gid=0

Percentage of homicides by firearm...

France 9.6%
USA 60%
Turkmenistan 2.4%



Homicides by Firearm

France 35
USA 9146
Turkmenistan 5

So looks like Turkmenistan is pretty safe, who'd have thought it ?


Dunblane UK, yep we banned pretty much all private firearms with a few exceptions, bizzarely no massacres have happened since but gun crime is still with us in the UK. Also anyone remember Hungerford ?
Of course these things happen, murder with one weapon or another has always been with us but it does seem like that in the US protecting ones right to own insanely capable weaponry is put above the right that children have to grow up.

I am not at all against the the banning of all guns, I have no problem with hunting rifles, shotguns being used to hunt for food or clay pigeon (skeet) shooting but to make high velocity large capacity military arms a god given right for every US citizen is madness.

Sylus,
The guy was NRA Executive Vice President, pretty high up wouldn't you say ?
The US interferring in brit business ? nooo I said the rest of the world, the US has a history of going into countries where it's not wanted and ******* things up, don't forget it was the US the got Saddam Hussein into power in the first place and that british, french, us, german, nowegian troops are currently being killed in Afghanistan by munitions given to the the Taliban by the US in the 70s to fight the russians. Tell me again why are NATO soldiers in Afghanistan at the bequest of the USA ?
Being in France and studied the Algerian conflict ? Yep my father in law was in service over there and the french government have just passed legislation to allow the french army command to be tried for war crimes, the british have done some pretty damnable things too, India, Malaya, South Africa etc, you can't have an empire that spans a third of the world without blood on your hands but we as a nation do not have a long history of shooting schoolchildren. 1902 is the first example of a shooting at an american school that I can find (Associated Press archive)
Fun Fact 1567: It was only made illegal for austrailian aborigines to be hunted for sport in 1932 and to be shot for trespass in 1964.
The point is that the US leads the way in many many areas yet does not seem to have evolved, constantly bleating on about the right to this and the right to that and has consistently acted in a way that goes against eveything it preaches.
No I am not speaking from direct experience as you are because you happen to live there (and constantly remind us of the fact) but I do deal with the states on a daily basis and have visited canada a couple of times, why do you think canadians get so pissed off when they are mistaken for americans ? We also employ two american girls one from Flint, Michigan who actually seems proud that her home town is one of the most dangerous places to live in the US and a lovely Californian girl who has stated that the sun is a sun and not a star and that 'we are living in the end days' still she's got a great rack so it's all good.
I gave you the links for where I got the other info (you're welcome) but why should I do all the work I'm sure you'll find it more satisfying if you do it yourself.

The gun/car comparison ? something thrown up by idiots to evade the real point. Not even going to dignify that with an answer.

The cats, two died the other will be ok. We usually get a few brought in at this time of the year because of the hunters that get new guns for xmas and want to try them out, given that the french have shot pretty much all the wildlife in france if they see a cat they shoot it. I could even live with people shooting cats if they actually ate them.

 

[JeRkY]

Its this die hard attitude against the obvious that we struggle to understand Pat, take away the easy access to guns, and you reduce the likelihood of violence using them dramatically.

For reference the Dunblane massacre that you quote led to tightening of the already tight UK gun laws, and outlawed the ownership of pistols completely. (with few exceptions such as a very limited number of target models- nothing over .22, and historic muzzle loaders- which are restricted further by requiring a license for black powder- classed as an explosive here)

Derek Byrd had access to firearms as a tool, a 22 rifle and a shotgun if I recall correctly. These are types still legal here, however an owner must still pass strict checks and present a reasonable explanation for requiring a license to own one. (both back ground and I believe on going, in terms of how a firearm is stored and used)

As for digging out every shooting in the UK or the rest of europe and quoting it up... I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve. Can you imagine how bad it would be if every unhinged disgruntled individual (or just a drunk!?!) had easy access to such weapons? Oh wait, of course you can imagine it...you live it, yet you don't see it?!?. As you have shown we have had more than enough nutcases with access to guns as it is. In the UK we also have plenty of trouble with alcohol related violence without giving WMD's out to every pissed punter ejected from a bar or club.

Back ground checks are all well and good, I could *probably* walk into wallmart and order a pistol or two and without any problem pass the back ground checks. Tomorrow or some other day down the line I could suffer a mental breakdown that sends me off the rails, with a pair of point and shoot pistols. It can and does happen, its part of the fun of mental health most people will suffer some form of mental health problem in their life, it could happen to me, it could happen to you.

For a country otherwise so libel based and risk averse, it is simply so starkly contradictory when looking at gun ownership laws.(The med-tec available to the end user in hospitals in the US, can be a good few years behind the rest of the world due to the strictness of the FDA's regulatory pathways- Despite many of the key global players in the industry being American, it is a common trend for them to seek regulatory approval and testing in Europe/elsewhere first as they can hit the market faster, then use that data support market approval applications in the USA.)

 

[tintin40]

As long as we're heaping abuse on gun crimes in America-What about Breivik over in Denmark on the European Continent, gunning down 75 mostly teenagers and blowing up a bomb or two, I guess they have a good handle on gun control there, too...

Norway. Not Denmark. The local police didn't do much either while he was on the island shooting up. The local police have guns. But they waited for the 'riot' police to arrive.
They should have jumped in a boat and started to arrest him. But no.

When you look in the details of this type of shooting crime many mistakes were made which would have taken the guns away. just by reporting them to the police for a starter.

The law worked in the USA as he couldn't buy a gun. So took his mothers.

 

[B77]

The law worked in the USA as he couldn't buy a gun. So took his mothers.

Ummm no, the law states a mandatory 48hr wait for a background check before buying certain types of weapon, which he would hava almost certainly passed. He was able to purchase shptguns, hunting rifles and pistols immediately but wanted an assault rifle. How did the law 'work' in this case ? Even if he had waited, obtained the arms legally and carried out the killings would that have made it any easier to swallow ?

 

[dbmtb]

To be fair to those confusing Denmark and Norway, the Kingdom of Denmark did actually include Norway and half of Sweden. But this was some centuries ago.... :twisted:

 

[alanf]

As long as we're heaping abuse on gun crimes in America-What about Breivik over in Denmark on the European Continent, gunning down 75 mostly teenagers and blowing up a bomb or two, I guess they have a good handle on gun control there, too...

a 30hr course, written exams, then applying for a permit to own a gun which has to have documented proof of why you want/need a gun and then when this has been granted you can only the gun you stated on your application after you have got a license for said gun
then you need proper secure storage for it and the ammo of which you can only hold so much of and you get inspected yearly along with having to renew your license... remind us again of the American system oh, and there is a very strict limit of the number of weapons and calibre you can own, where as in America.......

 

[sylus]

No I am not speaking from direct experience as you are because you happen to live there (and constantly remind us of the fact).

Not quite, you quoted in one section that because you had lived in india and some of the nordic states that you had experience of a kind and you thought that offered you an informed perspective but when others have tried to correct your incorrect information on the states it seems to have put your back up that others who actually live there have an informed view by living there. You simply can't have it both ways no mater how hard you try

If I may add, there has been no "you don't live in the usa so you know nothing" what there has been is when a general sweeping statement that has been stated as correct but both myself and pat have informed of the correct information and tried to give state relative information because the rules vary state by state

I asked for the links as I had on others because many of the links are selective and do not offer the best selection of information. as to you doing all the work, then simply no but it does help when you put forward facts as accurate for them to be so

The gun/car comparison ? something thrown up by idiots to evade the real point. Not even going to dignify that with an answer.

I'm sorry you feel you need to call members idiots but that maybe your personal input level. The car/alcohol level is very relevant as it shows no matter what side of the pond you are on, there is always death at an acceptable level for non essential to life consequences no matter what the tool of choice is

I understand your anti american and there are many, but on this one discussion falling back into non correct stereotypes does not help serve the discussion

The law worked in the USA as he couldn't buy a gun. So took his mothers.

Ummm no, the law states a mandatory 48hr wait for a background check before buying certain types of weapon, which he would hava almost certainly passed. He was able to purchase shptguns, hunting rifles and pistols immediately but wanted an assault rifle. How did the law 'work' in this case ? Even if he had waited, obtained the arms legally and carried out the killings would that have made it any easier to swallow ?

Erm actually yes, the gun shop he went to to obtain the weapons for this insisted that he wait the legally required in that state 48 hours so he left to then beat up his own mother, gain access to her guns then start the rampage

so in this pat and the gun shop were correct and you were not

The law states...see this is why both myself and pat have tried to show you that ill informed, incorrect and sweeping statements fail and generally have tried to make the discussion more relevant with on hand rules and legislation

The law varies state by state, in mine it's 48 hours but only on items bought through a business such as a gun shop, pawn brokers, sports shop etc here in S/D there is no 48 hours for private firearms

how would this have stopped him? in this young mans case, like those at dunblane, hungerford, toulouse, norway etc..these laws never will stop those determined to do such things, no matter what country they are in

The 48 hour rule is generally in place top stop someone in a rage after a confrontation rushing out to a gun shop getting a gun and seeking revenge and this mostly works for those in this situation..but again..when someone is determined to carry out such acts..NO LAW will stop them if they are determined no matter where they live

I hope that update clears a few points and we can continue an informed discussion if possible

 

[retrocomeback]

Well I've learnt something today, I had naively assumed the 48hr wait for firearms was for criminal record checks etc, not merely to stop someone in a fit of rage seeking instantaneous revenge! Thanks Sylus