Jump to content

Florida School Shooting


Matty89
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Scully said:

Despite what you say, there is still nothing to stop anyone from walking into a UK school with a legally held handgun and semi automatic rifle and running amok.

The English handgun ban had nothing to do with handguns and everything to do with politics.

You could license or even ban all firearms in the USA tomorrow and it wouldn’t make the slightest bit of difference. 

I mostly concur. The Dunblane killings for examle were not the fault of the existing perfectly adequate gun laws. They were the result of failure by the local police to apply them properly.

The big problem that I can't see how to solve is that a person's mental health profile may be fine at the time of the background checks but can deteriorate later. On the face of it, that seems to have been the case with Cruz. A year or so ago he passed the checks and took a semi automatic rifle home, yet by yesterday he was homicidal.

What kind of "gun control laws" can cater for that? Even a licensing system such as we have with 5 yearly renewals doesn't always work - as demonstrated at Whitehaven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Rewulf said:

I think you are missing Scullys point.
A person who ( being not of sound mind )wishes to do a mass shooting in the UK would likely acquire an illegal firearm.
The banning of pistols and semi auto centerfires, hasnt stopped murders using such weapons.
Ill admit , the procedures of gaining firearms licences has been tightened up since Hungerford and Dunblane, but you must know that both of those incidents,and others since using legally held guns, the perps should not have had them anyway.
 

On the contrary I think it is you who has missed the point. We here in the UK or indeed much if not all of Europe do not have anywhere near the incidents and sheer number of mass shootings and NO it is not possible for someone to get hold of illegal weapons as easily as it is clearly possible to get hold of legal ones over in the US. One of the reasons we thankfully don't have the same problem (numerically at least) is our sane gun laws. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK maybe we need to ask why so many people over there appear to suffer such catastrophic mental breakdowns and why they so often feel it's resolvable by killing so many innocents. That state of mind does not seem to exist elsewhere where guns are available such as Canada or much of Europe !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Hamster said:

On the contrary I think it is you who has missed the point. We here in the UK or indeed much if not all of Europe do not have anywhere near the incidents and sheer number of mass shootings and NO it is not possible for someone to get hold of illegal weapons as easily as it is clearly possible to get hold of legal ones over in the US. One of the reasons we thankfully don't have the same problem (numerically at least) is our sane gun laws. 

Thats not what I said.

I said if you are planning an atrocity such as this , you arent going to go through the procedure of gaining an FAC are you ?

Do you think the recent terrorist attacks in Europe were committed with legally held AK s ?
Or do they not count ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know the true extent of checks done before a person can buy a gun of the type used in this latest atrocity. Is it just the buyer who is checked or is it as here that if you have a mentally unstable person living in your home you are liable to be refused.if you have a person convicted of violence living there does that compromise it.also is there any requirements to secure guns out of reach of others.you read about shotguns under the bed. Handguns in bedside cabinets etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bostonmick said:

Does anyone know the true extent of checks done before a person can buy a gun of the type used in this latest atrocity. Is it just the buyer who is checked or is it as here that if you have a mentally unstable person living in your home you are liable to be refused.if you have a person convicted of violence living there does that compromise it.also is there any requirements to secure guns out of reach of others.you read about shotguns under the bed. Handguns in bedside cabinets etc.

It differs state to state, but you can be sure that when it comes to checks and security, its pretty damn lax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hamster said:

OK maybe we need to ask why so many people over there appear to suffer such catastrophic mental breakdowns and why they so often feel it's resolvable by killing so many innocents. That state of mind does not seem to exist elsewhere where guns are available such as Canada or much of Europe !

I have a theory that there is a powerful cultural imperative in America to conform with the expectations of society. Unlike here and much of Europe, there seems little tolerance for nonconformists or those who don't fit the mould. Being 'different' in terms of not being attractive or gregarious or simply being introverted draws scorn and ostracism, especially among the young.

From what I've seen on the news and documentaries, almost all the perpetrators of school shootings were treated (or thought they were) as social pariahs and felt victimised or carried a grievance because of it.

It seems that America is about the worst country to live in for those who are, or who feel like outcasts and the relatively easy access to rapid fire guns designed for use against humans offers them a sense of power they wouldn't otherwise achieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Westward said:

I have a theory that there is a powerful cultural imperative in America to conform with the expectations of society. Unlike here and much of Europe, there seems little tolerance for nonconformists or those who don't fit the mould. Being 'different' in terms of not being attractive or gregarious or simply being introverted draws scorn and ostracism, especially among the young.

From what I've seen on the news and documentaries, almost all the perpetrators of school shootings were treated (or thought they were) as social pariahs and felt victimised or carried a grievance because of it.

It seems that America is about the worst country to live in for those who are, or who feel like outcasts and the relatively easy access to rapid fire guns designed for use against humans offers them a sense of power they wouldn't otherwise achieve.

Therin lies the truth of the matter.
However ,the big question is accessibilty and or availability.
There are so many guns in the US that, even if they were licenced and restricted tomorrow, there are decades left of unregistered guns and ammunition lying around.
Then you have the issue of more guns being imported across its thousands of miles of borders, ports ect.
Its not worked here, we have more gun crime than before the bans, why would it work there ?

Image result for good guys with guns

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Thats not what I said.

I said if you are planning an atrocity such as this , you arent going to go through the procedure of gaining an FAC are you ?

Do you think the recent terrorist attacks in Europe were committed with legally held AK s ?
Or do they not count ?

Terrorist attacks count whatever that means but we're talking about a monumental problem with guns and mass/school shootings in the USA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Therin lies the truth of the matter.
However ,the big question is accessibilty and or availability.
There are so many guns in the US that, even if they were licenced and restricted tomorrow, there are decades left of unregistered guns and ammunition lying around.
Then you have the issue of more guns being imported across its thousands of miles of borders, ports ect.
Its not worked here, we have more gun crime than before the bans, why would it work there ?

Image result for good guys with guns

Do you not realise there are many people who do not wish to own guns.who do not wish to shoot another person.and also in most cases I would suggest the bad guy already has his gun in the good guys face whilst the good guys is in a holster or cupboard.i wonder who is going to get shot.also government is there to protect the population. And that includes the non gun owner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Therin lies the truth of the matter.
However ,the big question is accessibilty and or availability.
There are so many guns in the US that, even if they were licenced and restricted tomorrow, there are decades left of unregistered guns and ammunition lying around.
Then you have the issue of more guns being imported across its thousands of miles of borders, ports ect.
Its not worked here, we have more gun crime than before the bans, why would it work there ?

Image result for good guys with guns

It has worked here as it has in Australia where following a couple of atrocities certain guns were banned and licencing tightened up, we have not had a repetition of Hungerford or Dunblane and if and when we do the numbers of such rampages are well below that of America. No good confusing crime in general with mass killings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bostonmick said:

Do you not realise there are many people who do not wish to own guns.who do not wish to shoot another person.and also in most cases I would suggest the bad guy already has his gun in the good guys face whilst the good guys is in a holster or cupboard.i wonder who is going to get shot.also government is there to protect the population. And that includes the non gun owner.

I dont think youre following the argument.
Taking away, or licencing further the legal owners of firearms , doesnt stop gun crime.
Weve done this argument so many times ?!

Ill put it another way, you are a criminal ,armed with a 9 mm handgun, and you are going to rob/burgle someone(s)/ house.
You know there is little chance of encountering an armed victim, so proceed with confidence.

Now think about whether the victim is armed, behind that door he may well be waiting, watching you with his CCTV ,with a short 12 g with heavy load.
How confident do you feel now ?

Switch it round,  you live in a rough neighbourhood, there has been home invasions in the area.
Would you rather be armed or not ?

6 minutes ago, Hamster said:

It has worked here as it has in Australia where following a couple of atrocities certain guns were banned and licencing tightened up, we have not had a repetition of Hungerford or Dunblane and if and when we do the numbers of such rampages are well below that of America. No good confusing crime in general with mass killings. 

What do you mean ?
By definition a mass killing is more than one.
How many people a week get shot in the UK?  
Add them all together ,you probably get a mass killing very week !
All with guns they shouldnt have, legislate that if you can.
Or are we talking about something else ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I dont think youre following the argument.
Taking away, or licencing further the legal owners of firearms , doesnt stop gun crime.
Weve done this argument so many times ?!

Ill put it another way, you are a criminal ,armed with a 9 mm handgun, and you are going to rob/burgle someone(s)/ house.
You know there is little chance of encountering an armed victim, so proceed with confidence.

Now think about whether the victim is armed, behind that door he may well be waiting, watching you with his CCTV ,with a short 12 g with heavy load.
How confident do you feel now ?

Switch it round,  you live in a rough neighbourhood, there has been home invasions in the area.
Would you rather be armed or not ?

What do you mean ?
By definition a mass killing is more than one.
How many people a week get shot in the UK?  
Add them all together ,you probably get a mass killing very week !
All with guns they shouldnt have, legislate that if you can.
Or are we talking about something else ?

I am not in any argument.just stating a fact there are millions of people who do not want to own guns.why should they be forced into it because government cannot control it's country.also not everyone is capable of intentionally killing another human.personally I am not interested in what the Americans do.but I am in the influence it has on our lawmakers and the knee jerk reactions and consequences it has on us legal sporting shooters in the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

What do you mean ?
By definition a mass killing is more than one.
How many people a week get shot in the UK?  
Add them all together ,you probably get a mass killing very week !
All with guns they shouldnt have, legislate that if you can.
Or are we talking about something else ?

Scraping the bottom of the barrel big time :rolleyes:, we in the UK do NOT have a school/mass shooting problem, if you need to pretend that we do to make your argument stick then by all means go ahead but I won't be engaging in said delusions anymore. 

ps. that graph is a fine example of an extremely complex problem being given a simplistic outlook to appeal to the simple minded. Let me explain, there are dozens and dozens of countries in the world whose public can apply for and buy guns for various purposes including sporting and hunting use but which do NOT have a problem with mass killings, homicides etc, on the scale of the US. So this idea that we need guns to protect ourselves from the bad guys :rolleyes: is hogwash nonsense, on planet earth that is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think in part its a matter of access but there is something else in the US psyche that is driving this stuff. Maybe it's in part the drive of the machismo culture to out do and outperform at everything or maybe related to the gung-ho attitude of actions speaking louder than words. Some feeling of alienation and fear creating a need to hit back (Trump style?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, oowee said:

I think in part its a matter of access but there is something else in the US psyche that is driving this stuff. Maybe it's in part the drive of the machismo culture to out do and outperform at everything or maybe related to the gung-ho attitude of actions speaking louder than words. Some feeling of alienation and fear creating a need to hit back (Trump style?).

Maybe however like him or loathe the man this has been going on for decades in America.and not one president has took any kind of stand.apart from of course sanctioning mass killings in other countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, bostonmick said:

I am not in any argument.just stating a fact there are millions of people who do not want to own guns.why should they be forced into it because government cannot control it's country.also not everyone is capable of intentionally killing another human.personally I am not interested in what the Americans do.but I am in the influence it has on our lawmakers and the knee jerk reactions and consequences it has on us legal sporting shooters in the UK.

I dont think gun ownership is compulsory, even in America !

 

38 minutes ago, oowee said:

I think in part its a matter of access but there is something else in the US psyche that is driving this stuff. Maybe it's in part the drive of the machismo culture to out do and outperform at everything or maybe related to the gung-ho attitude of actions speaking louder than words. Some feeling of alienation and fear creating a need to hit back (Trump style?).

Yes Ill go with that, what is has to do with Trump though Im not sure.

 

51 minutes ago, Hamster said:

Scraping the bottom of the barrel big time :rolleyes:, we in the UK do NOT have a school/mass shooting problem, if you need to pretend that we do to make your argument stick then by all means go ahead but I won't be engaging in said delusions anymore. 

ps. that graph is a fine example of an extremely complex problem being given a simplistic outlook to appeal to the simple minded. Let me explain, there are dozens and dozens of countries in the world whose public can apply for and buy guns for various purposes including sporting and hunting use but which do NOT have a problem with mass killings, homicides etc, on the scale of the US. So this idea that we need guns to protect ourselves from the bad guys :rolleyes: is hogwash nonsense, on planet earth that is. 

Im not sure its scraping the barrel at all, we have more gun crime since the bans , fact.
So has gun control worked in the UK ?
Yes, if you count not getting legal access to pistols and semi auto centre fires.
Have we had any more mass shootings, yes we have , you may remember a man called Bird, who managed very well without pistols or centre fire semi autos.
How we didnt get more restrictions after that Im not sure, but it was definitely talked about.

You can talk about American gun control (usually in the wake of its latest mass shooting) all you like, its not going to change.
Because that illustration is how those 'simple minded' Americans think.
There ARE bad guys out there, they do have guns, do you bring a knife to a gunfight ? No.
Call it hogwash if you want, they call it their 2nd amendment rights.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bostonmick said:

also government is there to protect the population. And that includes the non gun owner.

Well therein lies another misconception. Government, and  by that I presume you mean police and military, are simply not able to protect the population. That's why these mass killings and terror attacks happen. We're rendered defenceless by our own government who've given in to pressure from the police and the metropolitan media leaving a situation where I for example cannot defend myself, my family or your my property without fear of arrest and prosecution, yet outside office hours the nearest functioning police station is 10 miles away. Just a couple of weeks ago a guy round the corner was woken at  night by banging and crashing which proved to be his van being broken into by 3 thieves using hammers and crowbars to smash their way in. He called the police, who arrived 25 minutes after the ****** had driven off in what proved to be a stolen car and the very first thing the Sergeant did was demand to know why the homeowner was holding a baseball bat and the 2nd thing he did was to inform the owner he'd be arrested if it had been used.

D'you get my point???

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Westward said:

Well therein lies another misconception. Government, and  by that I presume you mean police and military, are simply not able to protect the population. That's why these mass killings and terror attacks happen. We're rendered defenceless by our own government who've given in to pressure from the police and the metropolitan media leaving a situation where I for example cannot defend myself, my family or your my property without fear of arrest and prosecution, yet outside office hours the nearest functioning police station is 10 miles away. Just a couple of weeks ago a guy round the corner was woken at  night by banging and crashing which proved to be his van being broken into by 3 thieves using hammers and crowbars to smash their way in. He called the police, who arrived 25 minutes after the ****** had driven off in what proved to be a stolen car and the very first thing the Sergeant did was demand to know why the homeowner was holding a baseball bat and the 2nd thing he did was to inform the owner he'd be arrested if it had been used.

D'you get my point???

 

You do realise this thread is about America.and we are a long way off them and their society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Westward said:

Yes, but it was you who brought up the subject of our government "protecting" us.

Sorry do the Americans not have government then.and I said nothing about the UK government. Nobody can say the UK government does not take steps to at least try.where the USA seem to encourage it.but you just carry on twisting posts to suit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever, but the fact is that neither the US government nor ours can protect the population from anyone determined to wreak death. At the Aurora cinema mass shooting there were 2 off duty serving police officers in the audience, both armed, yet they failed to prevent the deaths of 12 people because they were confused as to what exactly was happening and didn't want to risk opening fire.

Most US states subscribe to the "Castle" doctrine which is a modern version of the ancient "An Englishman's home is his castle"principle. Under this, Americans are legally entitled to shoot someone entering their home with malicious intent and without fear of prosecution. Whatever our Guardian reading BBC & Channel Four worshipping liberal elite might think about gun owners, the stats show that home invasions are less prevalent in states with a high percentage of guns in private hands. The trick is to ensure that guns don't get into the wrong hands and that seems to be impossible, with or without gun laws.

If I lived in the US you can bet your socks I'd have a handgun or a pump at home for protection, but I feel no need here.

This latest shooting seems to have been both predictable and avoidable and as with Dunblane, if law enforcement agencies had been on the ball neither atrocity would have happened. Technically known as a failure of communication!

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...