Squinting shot Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 It's OK Jeremy vine is banning all firearms so it can't happen in the future. Or until the bad guys pull out their guns. Good old BBC. No mention of knife crime being an all time high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultrastu Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 So .the us police have no idea what motivated him to comit such an act ? Well maybe .he thought that America is NEVER gonna change its gun laws unless the absolute worst you can imagine happens .Well I think it just did. Possibly he was in favour of gun control and a banning of fully automatic weapons. But to achieve this he felt that the full horror of their existence had to be seen . This isn't a nice thought but could shed some light on the mind set of a clearly sick individual . Some lives today .save thousands in the future . I'm sure there are more than 60 deaths by guns across America every day ?? . God willing this Will change the tide . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmytree Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 It's OK Jeremy vine is banning all firearms so it can't happen in the future. Or until the bad guys pull out their guns. Good old BBC. No mention of knife crime being an all time high. Just caught something on the news about a proposal to ban online/postal knife sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deker Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 This popped up on Facebook, and it pretty much explains the problem anyone will have trying to change the 2nd amendment: "All these people suddenly becoming anti-2nd Amendment today are forgetting one really big thing. As horrible as it was to see what happened last night when I read the news this AM, 50+ dead is not what the 2nd Amendment is about. The 2nd Amendment is about a populace that cannot be enslaved by their government because they are NOT a soft target like the event last night. No, the 2nd Amendment is so that government never can take the freedoms of the citizens without the citizens being able to competently and with deadly force resist.History shows that unarmed citizens are soft targets for governments and the death toll when government's are not held at bay by armed citizens is far higher that 50+. How many millions did Hitler, Stalin, Pol-pot, and many other twisted dictators kill?So...., an entire country is considering giving up their only defense against tyranny because of a horrific mass murder that cost 50+ lives. Hmmm, the numbers do not add up! Give up the protection against tyranny for many millions in response to the loss of 50+ citizens.As horrific as last night was, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Nazi death camps, Stalin's gulag and the Russian revolution are far worse fates. That 2nd Amendment was put there for a reason. It is not about an occasional mad man and the loss of 50+ citizens." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me matt Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 This popped up on Facebook, and it pretty much explains the problem anyone will have trying to change the 2nd amendment: "All these people suddenly becoming anti-2nd Amendment today are forgetting one really big thing. As horrible as it was to see what happened last night when I read the news this AM, 50+ dead is not what the 2nd Amendment is about. The 2nd Amendment is about a populace that cannot be enslaved by their government because they are NOT a soft target like the event last night. No, the 2nd Amendment is so that government never can take the freedoms of the citizens without the citizens being able to competently and with deadly force resist. History shows that unarmed citizens are soft targets for governments and the death toll when government's are not held at bay by armed citizens is far higher that 50+. How many millions did Hitler, Stalin, Pol-pot, and many other twisted dictators kill? So...., an entire country is considering giving up their only defense against tyranny because of a horrific mass murder that cost 50+ lives. Hmmm, the numbers do not add up! Give up the protection against tyranny for many millions in response to the loss of 50+ citizens. As horrific as last night was, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Nazi death camps, Stalin's gulag and the Russian revolution are far worse fates. That 2nd Amendment was put there for a reason. It is not about an occasional mad man and the loss of 50+ citizens." Plenty of other countries get along jusy fine without an equivalent to the second amendment...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squinting shot Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Just caught something on the news about a proposal to ban online/postal knife sales. That would be a good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunderbuss Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 I have to say that I have little sympathy for for the American people who got shot I have every sympathy for all of the other people from all around the world who got mixed up in it What a deeply obnoxious comment. There are some odd human beings on this forum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinfireman Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 I have to say that I have little sympathy for for the American people who got shot I have every sympathy for all of the other people from all around the world who got mixed up in it .If the American people are so stupid as to let any Tom **** or Harry buy these automatic guns then they cannot complain when some nutter gets hold of one and dose something like this as I have said before I have no problem with people having hand guns hunting rifles and shot guns but full automatics is madness.Sad you feel no sympathy for the American victims who got shot.............but then again, I bet you have never been over there! What a deeply obnoxious comment. There are some odd human beings on this forumCorrect! Its not the fairies that vote in the people who make laws that says that any nutter can buy a fully automatic gun it is these people who got shot I'm sorry but if they have not got the gumption to do something about it that is there fault.Total garbage! 58 dead and over 500 injured. I wonder what the dead and injured children, pacifists, pensioners etc make of your comment (and some of the other comments on here). Tasteless has found new meaning. I do wonder what the commentary would have been if this wasnt a Country and Western event (with the gun slinging pro-Trump overtone), but say an American Muslim prayer meeting, a national spelling bee event or a pregnant women against abortion rally.. Correct! Dropped in late to this conversation, but absolutely appalled to read this comment. Really staggered and appalled.Well said! Stupid and insulting comment!Correct! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 what happened today is a horror but a gun is not needed to kill In the usa in 2016, just over 15,000 died from guns (excluding suicides but including gang/drug crime), but over 35,000 died due to cars. I have mentioned this many times, as have many American commentators following shootings such as Columbine and Sandyhook. The mental health screening and help for the average person is abysmal. Banning guns is not gonna stop the nutters........it hasn't worked in the UK......it is just a pathetic attempt to divert the public from the real issue, inadequate and underfunded health care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 That would be a good idea. Why. I would have thought the rules are stringent enough already. I bought a knife online yesterday and had to email them a copy of my driving license to prove my address and that I was over 18. How is a online purchased knife more dangerous than one bought in person from a shop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Banning guns is not gonna stop the nutters........it hasn't worked in the UK..... It certainly hasn't. With the latest UK annual figures showing that there were 6375 firearms offences of which 42% were committed with handguns, which as we all know are banned. So that worked didn't it !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Banning guns is not gonna stop the nutters........it hasn't worked in the UK......it is just a pathetic attempt to divert the public from the real issue, inadequate and underfunded health care. Yes it has, one of (by no means the only) the reasons we have nowhere near as many mass shooting incidents is our much more sensible gun laws, whatever you say about the hand gun ban the reality is that there have been non since the ban and if and when we do get other mass killings the simple truth is that we will still be in a completely different universe compared to the US. You can't stop gun crime but you most certainly can take away weapons that allow the mentally ill or plain evil commit their acts with such devastating impact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 four-wheel-drive, on 02 Oct 2017 - 9:22 PM, said: Its not the fairies that vote in the people who make laws that says that any nutter can buy a fully automatic gun it is these people who got shot I'm sorry but if they have not got the gumption to do something about it that is there fault. What planet are you on, for all you know the people killed were for tighter gun control. Governments do all sorts of things that the people voted for them doint like. You seem to be going out of your way to be insulting and insensitive, you should be ashamed of yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Plenty of other countries get along jusy fine without an equivalent to the second amendment...... Correct , the idea that you need guns to protect yourself against bad guys has no basis here or across most of the civilised world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tetlee Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 My Granddaughter, 30 years old and a Government employee has been reading the posts re: Vegas, some of which made her blink... She just asked me, " Time for psychometric testing for any type of Uk gun certificate issue, Grandad?..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retsdon Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 The problem isn't gun ownership per se,it's being able to amass a small armory full of military spec weapons and ammunition. It's like drinking and driving. Doubtless 99 percent of the time someone, especially if they're accustomed to doing it, will be able to get home without doing any damage even while half-jaked. But people aren't allowed to drive around over a prescribed limit because beyond that prescribed point it's deemed that the potential for doing serious harm trumps the freedom of the individual. So you're allowed one beer but not half a dozen - irrespective of anything else. And where the limit is set varies from country to country depending on the culture, the traffic, etc, etc. So it's not an absolute principle either way - just common sense based on experience. One would have thought that was time in the States for a grown up debate on the limits of gun ownership. Paddock was armed with a slew of legally modified military style weapons, each capable of firing 400+ rounds per minute - a degree of personal firepower that even thirty years ago most infantry riflemen on the planet could only dream of. Fifty years ago when traffic was far lighter and cars much slower, after a particularly festive BMA dinner dance a policeman once actually helped my late father into his car. Of course it wouldn't happen today because there are simply too many cars on the roads to allow inebriated drivers the privilege of driving themselves home. The potential for disaster is too high. Likewise with US gun laws. When just about anybody can buy an AR15 and mod it with a bump stock or a trigger kit to fire hundreds of rounds a minute then the technology has outstripped the law. It's not about principles. It's about practicality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me matt Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 What a deeply obnoxious comment. There are some odd human beings on this forum +1 A lot of his comments are troll worthy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scobydog Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Yes it has, one of (by no means the only) the reasons we have nowhere near as many mass shooting incidents is our much more sensible gun laws, whatever you say about the hand gun ban the reality is that there have been non since the ban and if and when we do get other mass killings the simple truth is that we will still be in a completely different universe compared to the US. You can't stop gun crime but you most certainly can take away weapons that allow the mentally ill or plain evil commit their acts with such devastating impact. ERR, Derek Bird, Cumbria mass killing, forgot that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Correct , the idea that you need guns to protect yourself against bad guys has no basis here or across most of the civilised world. Good guys with guns have been defending themselves and others against bad guys with guns for hundreds of years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Good guys with guns have been defending themselves and others against bad guys with guns for hundreds of years. Really ? In war context or out in the streets which is the subject of this thread ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Yes it has, one of (by no means the only) the reasons we have nowhere near as many mass shooting incidents is our much more sensible gun laws, whatever you say about the hand gun ban the reality is that there have been non since the ban and if and when we do get other mass killings the simple truth is that we will still be in a completely different universe compared to the US. You can't stop gun crime but you most certainly can take away weapons that allow the mentally ill or plain evil commit their acts with such devastating impact. Have you forgotten about Bird? Ryan, Hamilton and Bird weren't deemed to be mentally ill at the time they applied for and were granted their firearms. There is nothing in current UK firearms legislation to prevent a mass shooting taking place at any time, with any type of firearm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Have you forgotten about Bird? Ryan, Hamilton and Bird weren't deemed to be mentally ill at the time they applied for and were granted their firearms. There is nothing in current UK firearms legislation to prevent a mass shooting taking place at any time, with any type of firearm. No there isn't but there are huge barriers in place compared to the US, that's the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 (edited) No there isn't but there are huge barriers in place compared to the US, that's the point. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one Im afraid.Much is being made of the number of firearms he owned for some reason. It doesn't matter whether hoe owned one or one hundred, as has been proved. You can only use one at a time. Edited October 3, 2017 by Scully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 The problem isn't gun ownership per se,it's being able to amass a small armory full of military spec weapons and ammunition. It's like drinking and driving. Doubtless 99 percent of the time someone, especially if they're accustomed to doing it, will be able to get home without doing any damage even while half-jaked. But people aren't allowed to drive around over a prescribed limit because beyond that prescribed point it's deemed that the potential for doing serious harm trumps the freedom of the individual. So you're allowed one beer but not half a dozen - irrespective of anything else. And where the limit is set varies from country to country depending on the culture, the traffic, etc, etc. So it's not an absolute principle either way - just common sense based on experience. One would have thought that was time in the States for a grown up debate on the limits of gun ownership. Paddock was armed with a slew of legally modified military style weapons, each capable of firing 400+ rounds per minute - a degree of personal firepower that even thirty years ago most infantry riflemen on the planet could only dream of. Fifty years ago when traffic was far lighter and cars much slower, after a particularly festive BMA dinner dance a policeman once actually helped my late father into his car. Of course it wouldn't happen today because there are simply too many cars on the roads to allow inebriated drivers the privilege of driving themselves home. The potential for disaster is too high. Likewise with US gun laws. When just about anybody can buy an AR15 and mod it with a bump stock or a trigger kit to fire hundreds of rounds a minute then the technology has outstripped the law. It's not about principles. It's about practicality. They could ban all firearms in America tomorrow, and it would not stop these type of incidents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinfireman Posted October 3, 2017 Report Share Posted October 3, 2017 Banning guns is not gonna stop the nutters........it hasn't worked in the UK......it is just a pathetic attempt to divert the public from the real issue, inadequate and underfunded health care. Plus a gang culture out of control, which youngsters want to emulate...... 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.