American gun laws

[ordnance]

States must impose some kinds of restrictions to reduce the likelihood of this happening again.

 

I Know what you are saying. I was watching the politics show today they had the previous labour party home Secretary jack straw on. He give similar reasons as above for the decision to ban hand guns.

 

I don't think you can stop these type of incidents happening. I don't thin tighter gun controls in America will make any difference there are to many firearms in circulation. You could have airport type security at schools i can't see that happening either. If they made the schools secure then the shooter would go somewhere else shopping mall cinema school bus etc.

 

Tighter gun controls in the UK did not prevent the cumbria shootings. The firearms he used even with the controls here obviously deadly.

Edited December 16, 2012 by ordnance

[Will Poon]

Ok I started this topic but I've been busy at work so a great deal has been spoken here, question is so what will Obama do??

[artschool]

has this been posted yet?

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b8b_1355643365

[BerettaEELL]

I Know what you are saying.

 

Thank you Ordnance, all I am saying is respect your right to hold firearms, look after the keys to your safe and remember that the people out there who hate guns may have a very real reason to do so.

 

Oh yes, HDAV go and have a long think about your comment regarding how i feel about the law, personally I think the UK laws are too strict but that is my opinion, the same however cannot be said for the US. Finally my son will never get his hands on the keys to my safe, can you say the same? By the way what restrictions, we are talking about the US.

[BerettaEELL]

Did you read the Connecticut restriction allowing a handgun to be carried openly in public with a permit. Whoopee do some restriction, Connecticut you can teach the UK a thing or two.

 

I won't post on this one again, members just read selectively and don't grasp the moral of what is being said.

 

Cheers all

[Lock Stock & Barrel]

Interesting development:

Some Are Turning In Their Guns Following Connecticut Shooting

[Dr_Scholl]

Ok I started this topic but I've been busy at work so a great deal has been spoken here, question is so what will Obama do??

 

There isn't much he can do.

 

For starters, the Republicans control the House of Representatives, and they'll never vote for any gun restrictions. Even among Democrats (who control the Senate) gun control isn't exactly popular, especially the ones from rural areas known as Blue Dog Democrats.

[Lock Stock & Barrel]

A couple more:

 

 

 

 

For starters' date=' the Republicans control the House of Representatives, and they'll never vote for any gun restrictions.[/quote']

 

Not whilst they're on the NRA payroll they won't: How Many US Politicians take NRA Money - whilst there is the odd Democrat in the list, it's overwhelmingly Republican

Edited December 17, 2012 by Lock Stock & Barrel

[dogone]

A thought from Canada

 

I live just 90 miles north of Montana, one of the gun toting cowboy states. I have been there perhaps 100 times in my 60 years. I also spent a winter in Texas some time back. In all those days I saw only one person with a pistol(and we shot at rocks) I know guns were everywhere but they are in western Canada also. Myself and the millions of other Canadians who spend winters in Arizona

are not afraid for our lives.

I do not think any laws will have a substantial effect on shootings in the states. Here in Canada we are probably mid way between the UK and US regarding gun laws. One of our salvations is that even the most ardent gun controller knows that with all the guns in the US it will always be easy for some to leak accross the border this way.

[Bloke]

Interesting development:

Some Are Turning In Their Guns Following Connecticut Shooting

A couple more:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not whilst they're on the NRA payroll they won't: How Many US Politicians take NRA Money - whilst there is the odd Democrat in the list, it's overwhelmingly Republican

 

Fair enough - for the first point- this would not be seen in the same percentages here, I would guess that many of the people cited had owned guns for some time/years and never used them. In the uk, if you have Pistols/LBP LBR or rifles for target use, if you do not attend the range at least once a year, (many clubs insisting on once every 6 months) the club secretary could cancel your membership and inform the police, for follow-up by the FEO.

 

On your second point- the NRA have plenty of political savvy, they will not comment at this point out of respect for the dead, they will wait until something other than rhetoric is posed by the politicians, or until they are attacked. What they want, if possible, is tempers and emotions to cool before they get involved with any debate.

 

We can discuss gun laws and regulations all we want, I suspect that there are some areas of the US where there is NO record of ownership kept, or at least many guns so old they are not covered by current records. If you compare statistics, as many on here do, the much larger population will logically contain a similarly larger number of people with dangerous mental illness. These people are often not identified UNTIL they do something, if it was possible to predict what a person would do with any legal accuracy, they would. Or do we go back to the Victorian regime of locking away anyone who has any mental illness- anxiety, depression, psychosis, dementia, OCD, etc, etc- we wouldn't be able to build enough hospitals, and I guarantee you would not detect all of the people you wanted. As has been said, gun legislation and regulation around the world seems to have little effect on whether gun crime will exist, it seems to be more of a societal thing that makes a person in one country/society more likely to grab a gun and kill many, or another person from another society more likely to grab a knife/club/poison etc and kill just one or two people. Those are the questions being asked, whether we like the answers is another thing.

[Vince Green]

The silence on the American websites is amazing, weird even. Having read all the stuff on here, last night I thought I would go on one of the US websites that I use regularly to see what they were saying on there. Nothing! thats what, not a mention. Incredible. that says it all to me.

Edited December 17, 2012 by Vince Green

[Lock Stock & Barrel]

I think Bloke makes a very lucid and even-handed reply there. Good reply.

[Lock Stock & Barrel]

Seeing as the topic of 'gun control' was raised in this thread, I though this article from The Economist, 15th Dec 2012, might be of interest:

 

The gun control that works: no guns

[HDAV]

Oh yes, HDAV go and have a long think about your comment regarding how i feel about the law, personally I think the UK laws are too strict but that is my opinion, the same however cannot be said for the US. Finally my son will never get his hands on the keys to my safe, can you say the same? By the way what restrictions, we are talking about the US.

I can guarantee it.

Did you read the Connecticut restriction allowing a handgun to be carried openly in public with a permit. Whoopee do some restriction, Connecticut you can teach the UK a thing or two.

 

So you think they shouldn't be able to get a permit to carry a hand gun? Exactly how would this have made any impact on the recent tragedy?

 

I don't see how anything but a UK style ban (Derrick Bird) could possibly have prevented the tragedy using "Gun control" Legislation. Better mental health services would also benefit the whole country as well as preventing this and more atrocities. PErhaps a "gun tax" is answer? With the proceeds going to aid mental health services?

 

Why should law abiding citizens not have access to firearms?

 

Why should the state control the availability of guns?

 

This is a much much bigger issue and for the US a deeply held and routed one. We gave up our right to bear arms almost 100 years ago does that make our streets safer?

 

Also the "fear of crime" is what drives opinion not the reality.

[JonathanL]

From the news reports today, the Americans are about to royally screw things up, yet again. Introducing a ban (which actually won't ban anything) on 'Assault Weapons' (which will just just arbitrarily defined as they were in the last 'ban') will achieve absolutely nothing. They look as though they are going to pander to the 'something must be done' mentality at the expense of actually doing something which might, possibly, work.

 

J.

[BerettaEELL]

 

I can guarantee it.

 

 

So you think they shouldn't be able to get a permit to carry a hand gun? Exactly how would this have made any impact on the recent tragedy?

 

I don't see how anything but a UK style ban (Derrick Bird) could possibly have prevented the tragedy using "Gun control" Legislation. Better mental health services would also benefit the whole country as well as preventing this and more atrocities. PErhaps a "gun tax" is answer? With the proceeds going to aid mental health services?

 

Why should law abiding citizens not have access to firearms?

 

Why should the state control the availability of guns?

 

This is a much much bigger issue and for the US a deeply held and routed one. We gave up our right to bear arms almost 100 years ago does that make our streets safer?

 

Also the "fear of crime" is what drives opinion not the reality.

 

I agree with you, there is a much bigger issue! All I was saying about the law in the states was that there were no real restrictions on any firearms. Laws won't take the 300,000,000 guns off the streets and that is not the answer. There is no answer to the issue is there?

[HDAV]

There is no answer to the issue is there?

Certainly not a quick one that can be wrapped up and parcelled for mass audiences the awful fact is humans are as equally brilliant and creative as they are cruel and destructive. Any reaction at this point will probably be wrong. Germany has a good level of control sensible with enough checks. Wider gun control issues include the number of accidents in the US.

 

 

The school shooting while tragic is the very thin end of the wedge.

 

In the U.S. for 2010, there were 31,513 deaths from firearms, distributed as follows by mode of death: Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600.

http://library.med.u...NS/GUNSTAT.html

 

The US has some shocking statistics http://listosaur.com...ted-states.html 2,000 people a year drown 600 are killed accidentally with firearms. 42,000 on the roads.... more than the total number of firearms related deaths (38000) but the levels for under 15's is the real cause for concern IMO not an isolated incident.

 

Banning all guns would save lives but even more would be saved by banning other things. Prohibition doesn't work look at drugs. Personally I think it is far to big an issue to tackle in the US at a federal level both logistically and culturally. There has been a big rise in sales in the US over the last few years a trend i can see continuing. The shooters mother is reported to have been a "prepper" a survivalist convinced that the the collapse of civilisation was coming. Hoarding fuel food and guns. Only time will tell if this was paranoia or preparation. I hope the former but any are convinced the later...

Edited December 17, 2012 by HDAV

[JonathanL]

Certainly not a quick one that can be wrapped up and parcelled for mass audiences the awful fact is humans are as equally brilliant and creative as they are cruel and destructive. Any reaction at this point will probably be wrong. Germany has a good level of control sensible with enough checks. Wider gun control issues include the number of accidents in the US.

 

Can you expand on this? Firearms accidents (at least as far as deaths are concerned) are very, very low considering the number of firearms in circulation.

 

J.

[Scully]

Found it interesting to note that on another thread there were 48 murders with handguns in one year(don't know which)in Japan;a country where everybody, with the exception of Olympic athletes(according to a blurb in the Leeds Royal Armouries)is strictly prohibited from owning firearms.Only 10 less in the same year as Israel,which at times resembles a war zone.

While I can sincerely understand why anyone would call for a ban on guns,following the shootings,I'm afraid it's too late.There are simply too many already in circulation,and not only in the USA.Bans do not work,the answer lies elsewhere.If anyone can cite an example of a successful gun registration policy followed by a ban(with the exception of the highly successful one introduced in Nazi Germany just before the SS went in to the ghettoes) anywhere world wide,then I'd be interested to learn of it.

US politicians will no doubt feel pressurised to 'do something',and no doubt there will be those who use this as a point scoring exercise,and who knows,they may even introduce some restrictions on a 'type' which has no bearing on the school shootings(sound familiar?)and everyone will be somewhat placated.....'til the next time;and there will be a next time,(with or without guns)because guns aren't the issue here,but drugs and/or mental instability is,and whether it's on the increase or society's capacity to cause it is on the increase,or our capacity to detect it isn't on the increase,I don't know,but this is the issue which needs addressing.Mentally stable people do not go on shooting sprees.Guns have been aplenty in the USA since the time of George III;mass shootings of civilians in peace-time are a modern phenomenon as far as I know.

Guns are here to stay whether we like it or not,and with this in mind perhaps the introduction of armed guards in all public places wouldn't be popular,but would be sensible.

As was mentioned on another post somewhere,these shootings in the majority of cases occur where the assailant knows they will be unopposed.

[HDAV]

Can you expand on this? Firearms accidents (at least as far as deaths are concerned) are very, very low considering the number of firearms in circulation.

 

J.

 

Alot of fatal accidents and a of them lot involving under 15's.......I think too many. The whole sleeping with a loaded gun under the bed and a another in the bed side draw is IMO taking things too far.

[JonathanL]

Alot of fatal accidents and a of them lot involving under 15's.......I think too many. The whole sleeping with a loaded gun under the bed and a another in the bed side draw is IMO taking things too far.

 

Do you have a figure on fatal firearms accidents in the USA?

 

J.

[Vince Green]

There are well over 100,000 deaths from firearms in America each year including accidents and suicides. The biggest death toll of cop deaths each year is by other cops. The chances of being accidently shot by a police officer is greater than the chance of being shot by an intruder in your own home and if you do get unlucky and die in a gun related homicide the chances are you will be killed by somebody you are related to unless you have served a term in prision or are addicted to an illegal substance.

 

Another gruesome fact, if you die in a gun related suicide its 70% likely you will take more than two hours to die, many take days.

 

YUK! Would you want to live in this world. I am one of the greatest opponents of gun controls. I am also a regular visitor (and shooter) to America but their gun laws are weird. My friend Jim who lived in Nebraska (he died last year) slept every night with a loaded gun in his bedside drawer for the whole of his life. So did/does every one of his neighbours. But nobody can ever remember a single incident or problem in his sleepy little town ever. Its safer than here, they don't lock their cars and rarely lock their doors. When I went to visit Jim, people came up to me and said welcome. They knew who I was, it was a very small town.

Edited December 18, 2012 by Vince Green

[Lock Stock & Barrel]

From the news reports today, the Americans are about to royally screw things up, yet again. Introducing a ban (which actually won't ban anything) on 'Assault Weapons' (which will just just arbitrarily defined as they were in the last 'ban') will achieve absolutely nothing. They look as though they are going to pander to the 'something must be done' mentality at the expense of actually doing something which might, possibly, work.

 

J.

 

It's the American way - shoddy compromise.

 

Incidentally, the last 'assault weapons ban' (under Clinton) merely changed the number of rounds in the clip, the size of the foresight and a design element of the stock and certain types of machine pistols (like the Mac-10). Hardly an assault weapons ban.

Edited December 18, 2012 by Lock Stock & Barrel

[margun]

The 2nd amendment was implemented in 1791. The guns back then (muzzle loading flintlocks or whatever) were a far cry from today's automatic assault rifles.

 

I'm no fan of TOO strict gun control, and hold both FAC and SGC, but I've never had a desire or need to own an M16, AK47 or the like, its not necessary unless you want to indiscriminately hose something or someone with bullets.

[shakari]

The whole sleeping with a loaded gun under the bed and a another in the bed side draw is IMO taking things too far.

 

Trust me, if you'd ever lived in a high crime society, you wouldn't feel that way. I always had a holster fixed to the underside of my bedside table and my .40 S&W went in there as soon as I went to bed. Keeping a handgun on top of the bedside table isn't a good idea though as there have been several instances where burglars have used the sleeping householder's own gun to shoot them with.