Scully Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 I fail to actually see you point through Obviously. The claim that you or I are both of sound mind is totally irrelevant.All the major shooting attrocities carried out in this country were committed by men deemed to be of 'sound mind' to the extent they were entrusted to posess firearms,just like you and me,including Hamiltons mass school shooting.Still want to thank God for UK gun laws? As for joe public,he just goes to Asda and buys a knife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) Sorry, but this just isn't true. J. Why is it not true? Pretty much true as far as I can see. OK you have to fill in a form but thats no big deal. I am not a fan of gun control but I go to Arizona from time to time and it is just so lax it is actually scary. As are some of the people. Edited March 9, 2013 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) J. Edited March 9, 2013 by JonathanL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 How many people choose to shoot up police stations, army bases, gun shops or shooting ranges?. J. Go to Arizona, EVERY traffic sign has multiple bullet holes, even in the cities. Every years people die from stray bullets where no identifiable intent is ever identified. Just people shooting at tin cans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) Are they receiving the same training as police officers? In America the biggest cause of officer deaths, by far, is accidental shooting by other officers. This is the big elephant in this particular room. Arming teachers? yes if they want to I can see the logic in a perverse sort of way. Have you any statistics for that statement. ? I find it a bit strange as the police here have being armed for as long as i can remember and i have never heard of one being killed by a negligent discharge. Edited March 9, 2013 by ordnance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 Have you any statistics for that statement. ? I find it a bit strange as the police have being armed for as long as i can remember and i have never heard of one being killed by a negligent discharge. I would agree that the afore-mentioned 'statistic' is probably utter rubbish. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 Go to Arizona, EVERY traffic sign has multiple bullet holes, even in the cities. Every years people die from stray bullets where no identifiable intent is ever identified. Just people shooting at tin cans. How does this relate to the point I made though? J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 In the end what it comes down to is in countries like ours where not many people have guns and those that do have heavy restrictions on what they can be used for and who can have one the question of arming teachers just would not arise. In other countries with much more lax gun laws where lots of people own guns and there use is not restricted and guns are easy to get hold of things like letting people carry guns in public or even arming teachers things that we would find hard to except they may well think that there is nothing wrong with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathanL Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 Are they receiving the same training as police officers? In America the biggest cause of officer deaths, by far, is accidental shooting by other officers. This is the big elephant in this particular room. Arming teachers? yes if they want to I can see the logic in a perverse sort of way. However, teachers, or anybody, actually firing a gun in a school = too risky for words. The logic I believe is to deter people from trying it in the first place but most high school shooters end up shooting themselves anyway so are they functioning on a level where it will deter them or excite them? Thats hard to predict Do you have a study to back up that statement? On the second highlited point; I assume that you have data from actual defensive (or non-defensive) shotings in schools to support what you say? J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hafod Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 without trying to sound unfeeling and unsympthetic , its an american problem , and we should let let them sort it out in their own unique way , however they decide to tackle the issue . when an outsider wades in to the row , look how they have closed closed ranks and attacked that person (i,m no fan of piers morgan but look at the reception that pompous condercending idiot , got when he opened his mouth on the larry king show , did they deport him after ) you,ve got to remember we,ve had a school shooting here , so throwing stones and glasshouses etc , etc does not help , the situation here is not perfect i agree , we,ve had to live with the results of hungerford and dunblaine . the sitation in america is unique to that country and requires a unique answer which they have to sort out the best way they can i dont wish to raise any hackles on this issue but thats my personal view . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kennym Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 Obviously. The claim that you or I are both of sound mind is totally irrelevant.All the major shooting attrocities carried out in this country were committed by men deemed to be of 'sound mind' to the extent they were entrusted to posess firearms,just like you and me,including Hamiltons mass school shooting.Still want to thank God for UK gun laws? As for joe public,he just goes to Asda and buys a knife. ok stats in 2011 there was 600 shotgun crimes(not all licanced) 3000 with hand guns and 4000 with air rifels so even if all the shot gun crimes were with legal guns the crimes with ilegal guns is nearly 12 to one ... do the math as they say in the US of A Just over half of all firearms offences occurred in just three major forces - the Metropolitan Police in London, Greater Manchester and West Midlands in the US there are 3 fatal shooting per 100,00 people in the UK it is .07 to save you the math thats 40 times higher the conclusion is just comman sence more guns + more dead people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombadil Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 ok stats in 2011 there was 600 shotgun crimes(not all licanced) 3000 with hand guns and 4000 with air rifels so even if all the shot gun crimes were with legal guns the crimes with ilegal guns is nearly 12 to one ... do the math as they say in the US of A Just over half of all firearms offences occurred in just three major forces - the Metropolitan Police in London, Greater Manchester and West Midlands in the US there are 3 fatal shooting per 100,00 people in the UK it is .07 to save you the math thats 40 times higher the conclusion is just comman sence more guns + more dead people. The common aspect of things is the problem really. What is called common sense is all to often the incorrect conclusion. There are plenty of developed nations with a high amount of individuals with access to firearms that don't mirror the US and some that do. To simply say high murder rate + high rate of gun ownership = guns are the problem, is far to simplistic. When I see these arguments it reminds me of American fundamentalist Christians who critisize atheists by saying that without god, there are no moral restrictions and that therefore there is no barrier for committing rape and murder. It worries me that people think that if there is access to guns, society will just break down into some murderous mayhem because they can. Many things can account for the high murder rate in America. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kennym Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 The common aspect of things is the problem really. What is called common sense is all to often the incorrect conclusion. There are plenty of developed nations with a high amount of individuals with access to firearms that don't mirror the US and some that do. To simply say high murder rate + high rate of gun ownership = guns are the problem, is far to simplistic. When I see these arguments it reminds me of American fundamentalist Christians who critisize atheists by saying that without god, there are no moral restrictions and that therefore there is no barrier for committing rape and murder. It worries me that people think that if there is access to guns, society will just break down into some murderous mayhem because they can. Many things can account for the high murder rate in America. Im pretty sure your wrong about gun ownership being directly proportional to gun crime http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm so again more guns = more gun deaths proven fact Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombadil Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 Im pretty sure your wrong about gun ownership being directly proportional to gun crime http://www.gun-contr...rk.org/GF01.htm so again more guns = more gun deaths proven fact Well you could show me a raft of correlating graphs and it wouldn't mean that 'guns = more gun deaths'. Oddly enough your link contains data on Switzerland which had a lot of buzz in the current debate due to it's incredibly high rate of firearms ownership and yet comparatively low crime rate. Why not link information about gun crime in developed countries with strict gun control such as Brazil? See how that fits in. You should also keep in mind that America is a diverse country, and the places with the highest rate of gun ownership have some of the lowest crime. LA, Chicago and New York all have strict gun control measures yet they are places with high murder rates. The old mantra that guns don't kill people - people kill people, is still relevant. Places with varying degrees of gun ownership have varying crime statistics. Countries aren't filled with people just waiting to shoot each other but unfortunately without access. Just as an example of the usefulness of correlating statistics and the varying explanations of crime take a look at this: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline It's also worth noting that I assume you meant to say 'more guns = higher murder rate' because obviously in a world without guns there would be 0 gun deaths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kennym Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 Well you could show me a raft of correlating graphs and it wouldn't mean that 'guns = more gun deaths'. Oddly enough your link contains data on Switzerland which had a lot of buzz in the current debate due to it's incredibly high rate of firearms ownership and yet comparatively low crime rate. Why not link information about gun crime in developed countries with strict gun control such as Brazil? See how that fits in. You should also keep in mind that America is a diverse country, and the places with the highest rate of gun ownership have some of the lowest crime. LA, Chicago and New York all have strict gun control measures yet they are places with high murder rates. The old mantra that guns don't kill people - people kill people, is still relevant. Places with varying degrees of gun ownership have varying crime statistics. Countries aren't filled with people just waiting to shoot each other but unfortunately without access. Just as an example of the usefulness of correlating statistics and the varying explanations of crime take a look at this: http://www.motherjon...e-link-gasoline It's also worth noting that I assume you meant to say 'more guns = higher murder rate' because obviously in a world without guns there would be 0 gun deaths. HA-HAR you will go far in politics, you ignor the massive magority of stats which suport my claims and single out the bit which suports yours you have a differant view to me & thats a good thing but i'm not sure you can prove your case as for your saying guns dont kill people people do, thats right, but people with guns are better equiped to do it, a good brawl can oftern settle your difrances ....but you both wake up in the morning acheing but at least you wake up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogone Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 America does have a gun culture quite different from a lot of countries. I have met many people there who own and carry only for defence. They have never target shot or hunted and have no intention to. They also have no desire to shoot someone but will if needed. Her in Canada gun ownership mostly comes from hunting . It may lead to other to collecting or targets but I know practically no one who has purchased a firearm just for defence. Yes some mention that their AR 15 would be good for such an event but it is pretty much just talk. My wife is a school teacher in a school of 180 students. There are about 10 teachers. Knowing most of them for years I would suggest that perhaps 4 would be capable and could become competent to carry. I doubt it will ever come to that here but a larger school of 900 students 40 miles away does have a full time armed mountie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombadil Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) HA-HAR you will go far in politics, you ignor the massive magority of stats which suport my claims and single out the bit which suports yours you have a differant view to me & thats a good thing but i'm not sure you can prove your case as for your saying guns dont kill people people do, thats right, but people with guns are better equiped to do it, a good brawl can oftern settle your difrances ....but you both wake up in the morning acheing but at least you wake up. Likewise I also appreciate differing opinions. What I am saying is that your stats infer but don't explicitly draw a connection, and that is because they can't. I could see a thousand graphs showing murder rates and gun owner ship but that wouldn't mean a connection. You will find that since David Cameron was elected internet usage has gone up, but that doesn't mean the two variables are related. I haven't as of yet put forward my beliefs on the worryingly high murder rate in the USA, I have simply said that you can't draw the explanations you offer from the statistics you provide. I believe that the causes for the high murder rate in America are deep routed in the pathology of the American dream, capitalism, ego and it's historical context. Something a single graph can not accurately convey. And something that no single piece of legislation can solve. To think that more guns = more murders or violent crime would assume that irradiating firearms would turn society to a bunch of angelics and hapless criminals. People portray the USA as a wild west like place, rife with gun violence, but if you were to pass legislation which made owning a gun illegal (which would be the obvious conclusion if you believe that more guns = more murders) then you would leave a lot of innocent people at the mercy of criminals. Edited March 10, 2013 by Bombadil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) The thing I have always found strange about the US is the casual way they treat guns. They leave them loaded around the house because they feel they need them for defence. Yet strangely large swathes of America is rural, sleepy to the point of being dopey and very crime free. Switzerland does have a very high rate of gun possession (not actually ownership because a lot are owned by the government) but they have to be strictly locked away in cabinets. The Swiss are not paranoid about this self defence issue which seems to be key to the American problem. The Americans are now stock piling ammo and buying up assault rifles because they fear civil unrest is coming.That could end very badly and to an extent becomes a self fulfilling prophesy. There you have the difference in my opinion Edited March 10, 2013 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickS Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 "Are they to receive the same training as police officers? In a country where the are few restrictions an anyone buying a gun," Sorry, but this just isn't true. J. What is untrue? Police officers receive weapon training and ongoing range time. As long as you have proof of identity and residency and no convictions for a felony you may buy a gun. I am not sure what you are taking issue with. Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unapalomablanca Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) Aint it funny how we have all banged in with an opinion (me included) on this story, almost as if we are yanks talking about our America. I cant believe they have forums debating our major topics of the day like man love. What the hell is this to do with us? Edited March 10, 2013 by unapalomablanca Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 If these people can carry in their day to day lives (As I'm sure they legally can) I see no reason why that can't be extended into their place of work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 (edited) gazz - fair point. :good: It won't be long before someone pops along with a graph or some stats. :no: Edited March 10, 2013 by Gordon R Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 The thing I have always found strange about the US is the casual way they treat guns. They leave them loaded around the house because they feel they need them for defence. Yet strangely large swathes of America is rural, sleepy to the point of being dopey and very crime free. Switzerland does have a very high rate of gun possession (not actually ownership because a lot are owned by the government) but they have to be strictly locked away in cabinets. The Swiss are not paranoid about this self defence issue which seems to be key to the American problem. The Americans are now stock piling ammo and buying up assault rifles because they fear civil unrest is coming.That could end very badly and to an extent becomes a self fulfilling prophesy. There you have the difference in my opinion One could make a good argument for saying that a lot of places are crime free simply because there there are a lot of guns about if some young people decide to mug an old person for cash or there phone in this country they would have no problem doing it. whereas in the US if they did the same thing they would not now if the old person had a little .38 revolver in there pocket and new how to use it perhaps they would think twice before doing it. The same thing applies for burgling peoples houses you could say that it would encourage burglars to be armed as well I would say that most thieves are petty and whilst they would not mind doing a few months in gale they would not want to risk 10 20 30 years if something went wrong and someone got killed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 in the US there are 3 fatal shooting per 100,00 people in the UK it is .07 to save you the math thats 40 times higher the conclusion is just comman sence more guns + more dead people. Ok,so by your own logic(more guns+more dead people)surely less guns=less dead people.If you truly believe this no doubt you'll be handing yours in then.After all,it's the price we must pay. While compiling your statistics did you take into account the number of guns in circulation in that same 100,000 population in both the USA and the UK?I doubt three shootings as a percentage of all those firearms in circulation in the same 100,000 is very significant to any but the relatives.Statistics can be used and abused to satisfy the agenda on both sides of a debate. Did you also ask yourself why,in those states where legislation is pretty similar to ours, such as Washington DC,shootings are more commonplace than many other states with more relaxed legislation? Did you also consider that despite Hungerford,Dunblane and West Cumbria,the percentage of shootings with legitimately held firearms as a percentage of the total shootings in the UK is extremely low;somewhere around the 2% mark unless I'm mistaken? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 Scully - I too await those who want less guns handing theirs in. It's always someone else who has to make the first step - never them. I wonder why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.