Donald Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jez said:
I am not meaning to be obtuse here but since when is hunting not a sport, either in the UK, US or anywhere else? :confused: Thousands of people hunt, some of my family actually host a regular hunt, and organised hunts take place every week all over the country....
Click to expand...

I don't agree with "hunting" animals for sport at all, but that's a completely different discussion.

Fair enough kill them to eat, but not for fun.
 
rxodium said:
There are estimated to be 393,347,000 privately held firearms in the US as of 2017.

All poisoning deaths
  • Number of deaths: 75,354
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 23.1
Motor vehicle traffic deaths
  • Number of deaths: 38,659
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 11.9
All firearm deaths
  • Number of deaths: 39,773
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 12.2
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

Cars are nearly as deadly as firearms in the US and unlike here, the only people driving them into crowds of people seem to be Trump supporting rednecks.



And they do use them. And they do hit their targets. But people successfully using their firearms to protect themselves tends not to make the news as much.



For hunting, you use what makes a clean kill and you don't take the shot unless you know you've got a clean shot. Which, with something like deer, is a side on shot behind the shoulder. Using a calibre that has enough penetrating power and velocity to break the skin, break the muscle, cut through the meat, break the bones (should it come in contact with them) and still have enough energy to destroy the lungs and the heart.

In the UK it doesn't matter what you think would spoil the meat. Under the deer act 1991, you cannot take a deer with a smooth bore gun, with a calibre less than .240 inches, or any air gun, air rifle or air pistol. Nor can you use any cartridge for use in a smooth bore gun, nor any bullet for use in a rifle, other than a soft nosed or hollow nosed bullet. Why? Because they want you to use a bullet that does the maximum amount of damage.
Click to expand...


Yeah but what proportion of the population drive? I'd guess its over 50%, maybe even above 60%. Now what percentage of people own guns?

My point with women owning guns wasn't that none of them use them, its that a percentage won't because in the moment they panic, freeze or even if they do pull it they miss because they aren't trained to use it. This isn't only a women thing, I'm sure the same is true off men who carry guns but men don't carry guns becuase they are scared of women where a good percentage of women carry because they are scared of men.
 
Last edited:
deuse said:
Look at this left wing liberal
Glad the police are looking in to it.
Click to expand...

He an idiot. Are you expecting to find people in here who won't say he's an idiot? However in the US you have free speech. So just like the MAGA hat wearing Neo nazi/white suprematists who march down the road spouting hateful speech, they can't be arrested for it. And I wouldn't describe him as "left wing liberal". He's far left or even extremest left. Just like far right and extremest right they are idiots and just as dangerous and divisive. .
 
chroniclard said:
not like its a sport.
Click to expand...

Trophy. Hunting.

chroniclard said:
US is too far gone up its own arse for any gun laws to fix the country now but it could at least try.
Click to expand...

The Americans taught the British that an armed civilian population was detrimental to them trying to push their ******** on people. Which is why after having their cheeks slapped by the yanks the British then went about disarming their own civilian population as insidiously as they could. Wouldn't want that independence malarky that was sweeping the colonies and Europe infesting the United Kingdom and Ireland. And certainly not any of that Republicanism.

VincentHanna said:
Imagine what the Country could have been like if the 2nd amendment was "Right to bear muskets"
Click to expand...

Knew better than to limit themselves. Same can't be said for the British. One instance of "won't anyone think of the children" and knee jerk reactionary bills are being thrown around all over the place and people are bending over and asking for more. Didn't see too many bills when the Paras were shooting civil rights marchers in Derry or Ballymurphy. But one nutter shoots a load of kids in a school on your own side of the water and suddenly nobody can have guns except the state because they have civil rights marchers to be slaughtering.

Colonel_Klinck said:
Yeah but what proportion of the population drive? I'd guess its over 50%, maybe even above 60%. Now what percentage of people own guns?
Click to expand...

43% of men own a gun. 17% of women.

Colonel_Klinck said:
My point with women owning guns wasn't that none of them use them, its that a percentage won't because in the moment they panic, freeze or even ion they do pull it they miss becuase they aren't trained to use it. This isn't only a women thing, I'm sure the same is true off men who carry guns but men don't carry guns becuase they are scared of women where a good percentage of women carry because they are scared of men.
Click to expand...

Your point was....

Colonel_Klinck said:
Only if they are actually prepared to use it in that moment and are capable of hitting the target. If they aren't it is just going to get taken off them.
Click to expand...

Your point on how women react when confronted with needing to use their firearm is not only ignorant as hell, but sexist as hell. More women are willing to be trained in the correct use of firearms because they don't come with the ******** bravado of most male gun owners. Firearms instructors actually prefer training women because they come as a blank slate and can be taught firearms handling without any preconceived notions. I'm not sure what your point is regarding men not carrying guns because they're scared of women? They carry guns to defend themselves, because they're afraid of being car jacked, robbed, whatever. The same as women. The difference is, where a 6ft something 200+ pound man could intimidate the **** out of an unarmed woman and even smaller men, the gun is the great equaliser and a smaller man and even a woman, despite how you THINK she'll react, who is trained to use it is just as lethal as any man, armed or not.
 
VincentHanna said:
I don't agree with "hunting" animals for sport at all, but that's a completely different discussion.

Fair enough kill them to eat, but not for fun.
Click to expand...
That’s a whole different discussion...but what I didn’t follow was the guy saying that hunting is not a sport...
 
chroniclard said:
How is it a sport....there is no competition involved, no skill involved, any donkey with a gun can do it.
Click to expand...

Genuinely i have no idea what you are referring to or could mean. Hunting/shooting is about a text book definition of "a sport" as is possible!
 
rxodium said:
Trophy. Hunting.



The Americans taught the British that an armed civilian population was detrimental to them trying to push their ******** on people. Which is why after having their cheeks slapped by the yanks the British then went about disarming their own civilian population as insidiously as they could. Wouldn't want that independence malarky that was sweeping the colonies and Europe infesting the United Kingdom and Ireland. And certainly not any of that Republicanism.
Click to expand...

But they didn't. My father owned shotguns and a .22 rifle. I owned shotguns until I moved to London in my early 20s. You can still own shotguns and rifles just not semi or fully auto and you need to be licensed and each weapon must be registered. We only banned auto rifles/shotguns and handguns after Hungerford and Dunblane massacres. Guess what, we haven't had a gun massacre since and I doubt you'd find 10% of the population that would change the law on this issue.


rxodium said:
Knew better than to limit themselves. Same can't be said for the British. One instance of "won't anyone think of the children" and knee jerk reactionary bills are being thrown around all over the place and people are bending over and asking for more. Didn't see too many bills when the Paras were shooting civil rights marchers in Derry or Ballymurphy. But one nutter shoots a load of kids in a school on your own side of the water and suddenly nobody can have guns except the state because they have civil rights marchers to be slaughtering.
Click to expand...

But you have limited it. Can you go out and buy an Apache helicopter and fully arm and fly it or an A10 Warthog fully armed if money was not an issue? Could you buy and use a Javalin missile? Could you buy and own a nuclear weapon? Even if you couldn't buy these things would the Gov let you build and use them? No because that would be madness. So there are limits on what "arms" you can own. If there are already limits then those limits can be changed and altered.


rxodium said:
43% of men own a gun. 17% of women.
Click to expand...

I'm guess you got those stats from this Gallop poll? That is a very small sample, just 3,064 people. Even so the average is 30% of adults own a gun.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/264932/percentage-americans-own-guns.aspx

Gallop says 83% of US adults drive frequently. So just under 3 times as many people drive as own a gun. Now how do those stats pan out now?
https://news.gallup.com/poll/236813/adults-drive-frequently-fewer-enjoy-lot.aspx


rxodium said:
Your point was....



Your point on how women react when confronted with needing to use their firearm is not only ignorant as hell, but sexist as hell. More women are willing to be trained in the correct use of firearms because they don't come with the ******** bravado of most male gun owners. Firearms instructors actually prefer training women because they come as a blank slate and can be taught firearms handling without any preconceived notions. I'm not sure what your point is regarding men not carrying guns because they're scared of women? They carry guns to defend themselves, because they're afraid of being car jacked, robbed, whatever. The same as women. The difference is, where a 6ft something 200+ pound man could intimidate the **** out of an unarmed woman and even smaller men, the gun is the great equaliser and a smaller man and even a woman, despite how you THINK she'll react, who is trained to use it is just as lethal as any man, armed or not.
Click to expand...

I see you left out the bit where I say men just the same as women can freeze, panic or even if they pull the weapon might miss because they aren't properly trained. But yeah go on paint me as a sexist :rolleyes: I can completely believe that women are easier to train with firearms because they don't have the ego that men do or the male bravado. That doesn't mean every women who buys a gun gets trained though does it? In fact wouldn't it be a very sensible law to state that when you apply to a gun licence that you have to attend a firing range and be trained to use that weapons safely. Until you pass that training you can't get a licence?
It strikes me as an outsider that 2A nuts won't even concede to sensible laws. No one is getting rid of the 2A, not going to happen but having to obtain a licence and registering guns costs them nothing. Passing a safety test before getting a licence just seems a sensible thing to do. Wouldn't you feel safer knowing everyone carrying a gun has been trained to a certain standard?
 
Jez said:
Genuinely i have no idea what you are referring to or could mean. Hunting/shooting is about a text book definition of "a sport" as is possible!
Click to expand...

Hmm I used to shoot but I'm not sure it could ever be called "sporting" in a modern definition. The only chance the animal has is if you miss. All the odds are on your side if you are well practiced with the weapon you are using. Its like Barcelona playing the local under 13s team and expecting it to be anything other than a massacre. "Sporting" for me means there is at least a fair chance of the result going either way. I gave up shooting as I just didn't have it in me to shoot animals anymore, even the ones I took home to eat. I'm not saying it should be banned though or anything silly. Some animals need to be controlled as they are pests for crops or because we've killed off their natural predators. However I am not a fan of big game trophy hunting. Why anyone wants to go and shoot elephants or big cats is beyond me and I'd question their mental health.
 
plasmahal said:
you and your leftist co-horts here and in the Sc thread do this very well and on a regular basis. Must be an absolute bummer when someone uses it on you and then you whine about it.
Click to expand...

PMSL. You and your fellow TDS Trumpeteers are masters of deflection in the Trump thread in SC. Every time you are asked a question or are shown to be wrong about something you go "but Hilary, but Biden, but Democrats, etc" :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom