shooting in gay club orlando

Screeeech said:
It's a rubbish analogy, because deterrence with nuclear weapons is effective - because nobody dies,

deterrence, where everyone is armed with guns is ineffective, because 30k people a year die.
Click to expand...

Figures like that are misleading. It implies 30K wilful homicides.

This is not the case,

The majority of Gun deaths in the USA are actually suicides. less than a third of "Gun Deaths" are criminal homicides. Obviously if guns are readily available they are likely to be the method of choice for depressed people.

The USA's suicide rate is higher than the UK's but it is not exceptional, there is no evidence to suggest that the availability of firearms makes suicide significantly more likely in the US than elsewhere in the developed world

There are many European countries with higher suicide rates than the US, despite far stricter gun controls.

Of the gun deaths that are wilful homicides, they make up around 2/3 of all homicides. Yes, despite the ready availability of firearms, a third of US Homicides actually involve some other method. (Stabbing, strangling and so on)

Furthermore some 3/4 of US homicides take place during the commission of some other felony (Burglary/Robbery etc)

It is tempting to argue that if one snapped ones fingers and made all the civilian guns in the US disappear that 30K/a would no longer die but it would almost certainly be wrong.

It might make a slight difference, but in the main, Suicides will still suicide, they will just find a different way of doing it.

And Robbers will not give up the life of crime and stay at home, They will (as many already do) just use knives etc instead.

And the handful of people each year who go Postal and decide to destroy a School or a nightclub will use home made explosives/Poison gas/whatever. Obviously, this is harder than using a readily available firearm, but not that much harder and almost certainly not so hard as to put them off.
 
Chris Wilson said:
OK, I see what you are saying, and I tend to agree most media coverage is now over done and sensationalised, from Diana's funeral, to that of Mohammed Ali and Mandela, from semi dramatised and choreographed nightly news bulletins, to news chat shows and newspaper headlines. It's an industry and a rather dirty one.
Click to expand...

The whole industry has gone from a service, which seemed to exist in order to inform the public of events and news occurring in the world, both locally and abroad. To an insane, almost psychotic competition to sell information in the most aggressive and competitive way possible.

I don't read newspapers, but I always glance over the front pages on my daily shop for a giggle, and every day it's "Islam" "Immigrants" "Islam" "Immigrants" "Islam" "Immigrants" "Islam" "Immigrants" "Islam" "Immigrants" "Islam" "Immigrants" on every single page.

Then when something happens in the world, everyone's opinions are already skewed in that direction, so it simply fulfils the stereotype.

I'd never for a moment suggest that there aren't problems with Islam because there blatantly is a problem - but the media are drastically contributing to it in my opinion - whilst holding their hands up and saying "We're just doing our jobs..."
 
Chris Wilson said:
A captive bred wild animal is not, and cannot be immediately acceptive to a new environment, and with respect people with deeply entrenched beliefs utterly opposed to western values, which themselves have changed drastically in recent times, (homosexuality was of course illegal here in England until comparatively recently), do not change them due to a first or second generation US birth. Hell, I know plenty of native English Christian people who still do not think homosexuality should have been legalised. I don't know of any who are so strongly opinionated, or led, to murder them en masse though.
Click to expand...

Sadly, Christians have murdered gay people in this country in recent memory.
 
plasmahal said:
That's a very good point/analogy.
Click to expand...

No its not the govenrment has tanks, tocket launchers, eroplanes and nukes.

Youve got a few muppets with rifles.

Who will.of course always be the minority.

And likley quickly killed by thier fellow citizens who would be government backed paramilitary malitias
 
I am not sure just what information needs to be available to the FBI to pique their interest, but to me, as an outsider, it's not the local bobby on the beat having a word with him, for some organisation like the FBI to take a view to interviewing him multiple times, surely it would have to be something pretty damning? Someone mentioned internment, we did it here with Nazi sympathisers, is this the way things will have to go?
 
Unless you are forced to live in the USA why are people so worried about US gun laws here in the UK? Haven't we got enough home grown issues to fret about if people have excess mental capacity for problem solving? I can't believe so many UK based people get so uptight about what the NRA wants, or what they don't want.
 
scorza said:
Where does it say David Copeland was a Christian?
Click to expand...

Taken from a profile at the time:

While in the BNP David Copeland found information on the internet on how to make bombs from fireworks. He also read racist and anti-Semitic literature from extreme right wing Christian groups in America.

He was radicalised by online Christian extremist material.
 
do_ron_ron said:
On the Radio this morning, President Obama saying this guy was known to the FBI but the NRA fights to ensure that he cannot prevent this guy being able to buy guns.
Click to expand...

the NRA might be able to stop supplying him, but doesn't mean he wont look else where.

just heard the FBI say he had had contact with a known terrorist but it wasn't enough to worry them :rolleyes: Any contact should be enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom