Mass Shooting in Las Vegas

jsmoke · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:08

Roar87 said:
Smoking and drinking kill over half a million a year in the US, I suppose there's not a big news story about that though

Diabetes biggest killer i think.

teaboy5 · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:09

Yet another OCUK 100 page thread on how guns are bad and how they need banned.

glenimp617 · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:10

teaboy5 said:
Yet another OCUK 100 page thread on how guns are bad and how they need banned.

Just out of interest, how many people have died from a nerf gun wound?

I know they say "guns dont kill people, people do" so my question is valid

What people need to understand, is guns facilitate the killing

timmeh · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:11

jsmoke said:
Diabetes biggest killer i think.

and your point is...

wesimmo · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:16

teaboy5 said:
Yet another OCUK 100 page thread on how guns are bad and how they need banned.

Even if they aren't banned, they need to be controlled far better.

That's the main issue, a complete lack of control over weapons just not needed by anybody outside the military.

As per my post above I have friends who own a gun shop, I come from a rural background where shotguns are fairly common and I enjoy fishing so come into contact with lots of people who hunt as well.

I'm therefore not totally anti guns, but I also don't think people should be able to go and buy weapons with mass killing capability on a whim with no checks.

DJMK4 · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:16

Roar87 said:
People are going to commit crimes and kill other people. As far as I know in the UK bombs are illegal but we still had the Manchester bombings at the arena and the London bombings in 2007. Guns are illegal in Paris but there was still the Paris shootings. Guns are banned in Germany so people rent trucks and drive them into crowds. People are the problem.

Rubbish.

How many suicide vests have you seen go off in the UK, how many shootings have you seen in America?

There is FAR more gun crime in the US.

This is about mass shooting and general gun crime in the US. There is before you throw in any possible terror threat.

jsmoke · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:17

^That you could ban fatty/suggary/chemically laced foods and save many lives and prevent much suffering?

teaboy5 · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:18

wesimmo said:
Even if they aren't banned, they need to be controlled far better.

That's the main issue, a complete lack of control over weapons just not needed by anybody outside the military.

As per my post above I have friends who own a gun shop, I come from a rural background where shotguns are fairly common and I enjoy fishing so come into contact with lots of people who hunt as well.

I'm therefore not totally anti guns, but I also don't think people should be able to go and buy weapons with mass killing capability on a whim with no checks.

Yes controlled better and that shouldn't be to easy to sort out. Better check and storage laws would go a long way.

RoboCod · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:22

DJMK4 said:
So your saying lets brush it under the carpet and get on with the 2nd amendment as it is, rather than looking to do something now for the take of the future where gun crime can be decreased, and over the longer term hopefully get a decent control of it. Or they can go on happily as if nothing happened, then people complain everytime there is a shooting in a School, Cinema, Concert Hall, club, or now from a hotel room in to a crowd. - This is without terrorism which is still another threat in itself.

What need is there to have fully automatic weapons roaming around like this?

I know you can "stop" gun crime, but atleast get a grip on it and do something about it rather than "well I better not because I may annoy a lot of americans if I take it off them/make it harder"

I don't think WE, as in you and I, are going to do anything about another countries gun laws

RoboCod · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:24

Chris Rock had the right idea years ago. Make bullets cost like $10000 each.

NewGamer11 · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:29

One More Solo said:
I'm sorry but that is a ludicrous argument. America has a disproportionate gun crime problem. Manchester does not have a comparable bombing problem, nor does Germany have a truck problem. Those are tragic and thankfully rare occurrences. Guns have cost literally hundreds of thousands American lives.

40,105 people killed or injured (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34996604) out of 326,000,000 people in 2015 (https://www.census.gov/popclock/) is 0.01% of the population affected by gun death or injury. Doesn't sound disproportionate to me in a country which allegedly has 1 gun for every person.

wesimmo said:
What shocked me was not so much what he was able to fire legally, which was scary in itself, but what else he managed to get his hands on as a pretty unconnected UK citizen in America.

What's shocking or scary about being able to fire weapons in a controlled environment monitored by professionals? The second part I don't understand. Are you saying your friend has illegally dealt in weapons he wasn't supposed to?

teaboy5 said:
Yet another OCUK 100 page thread on how guns are bad and how they need banned.

LOL.

Personally, I don't think they should be banned. I would own a gun in this country if I could to go target shooting in a range. It does seem they need a more extensive, joined-up background checking process (doesn't sound as if the records are online to be accessed by law enforcement but I may be wrong), registration of individual weapons, psychological evaluations, etc. That said it doesn't seem it would help in this case where someone of previous 'good character' (to be confirmed) snaps.

wolfie138 · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:32

Heisenberg said:
Different effect?

probably would've chewed people up a lot more.

Destination · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:35

Robbo said:
58 dead, 515 injured (and more to come presumably).

Quite the figure.

Indeed.
Are the injured reported to be victims of the shooting, or those hurt while running for cover etc?
Have they broken down the figures in any fashion?
How much ammo did this chap have?

Mark A · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:35

Roar87 said:
Smoking and drinking kill over half a million a year in the US, I suppose there's not a big news story about that though

How does people killing themselves slowly over years in full knowledge of the dangers compare to someone taking at least 58 lives in a couple of minutes with the help of a gun?

peterhc · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:36

Guns don't kill people ! people kill people, and this stinks of some kind of setup, all that situation is fishy af !

TJM · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:38

NewGamer11 said:
Personally, I don't think they should be banned. I would own a gun in this country if I could to go target shooting in a range. It does seem they need a more extensive, joined-up background checking process (doesn't sound as if the records are online to be accessed by law enforcement but I may be wrong), registration of individual weapons, psychological evaluations, etc. That said it doesn't seem it would help in this case where someone of previous 'good character' (to be confirmed) snaps.

Wasting police resources on checks and endangering the public when an owner inevitably turns his gun on someone so that a few people can engage in a hobby? Unlikely to make an appearance in any party's manifesto.

Vonhelmet · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:41

peterhc said:
Guns don't kill people ! people kill people, and this stinks of some kind of setup, all that situation is fishy af !

Don't be a fool.

Yas786 · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:43

peterhc said:
Guns don't kill people ! people kill people, and this stinks of some kind of setup, all that situation is fishy af !

Really?? You think this is some sort of setup?? Please do expand on your theory that this could be some sort of setup.

Rroff · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:43

NewGamer11 said:
Personally, I don't think they should be banned. I would own a gun in this country if I could to go target shooting in a range. It does seem they need a more extensive, joined-up background checking process (doesn't sound as if the records are online to be accessed by law enforcement but I may be wrong), registration of individual weapons, psychological evaluations, etc. That said it doesn't seem it would help in this case where someone of previous 'good character' (to be confirmed) snaps.

Firearms licensing and procedures are actually pretty good in this country (the UK) and people can actually own a wider range of firearms than often thought.

NewGamer11 · 2 Oct 2017 at 19:44

TJM said:
Wasting police resources on checks and endangering the public when an owner inevitably turns his gun on someone so that a few people can engage in a hobby? Unlikely to make an appearance in any party's manifesto.

If you're talking about the UK then UKIP did want to reintroduce handguns.

Relatively speaking, it's hardly going to be wasting police resources when they can have an online system for performing the background checks and they already do have dedicated officers for checking that weapons are correctly stored in safes.

The risk is so low I don't see the problem. Farming, gamekeeping, etc. aren't hobbies from what I can tell.

Rroff said:
Firearms licensing and procedures are actually pretty good in this country (the UK) and people can actually own a wider range of firearms than often thought.

I know. I rent at the moment so can't have a safe. Also, having bolt action AR-15s is daft. Don't you also have to have 'a good reason' for owning? I'm not sure me wanting to target practice for fun is a good reason?

I don't think there are many ranges near me either.