Today's mass shooting in the US

muon said:
The NRA don't want any kind of central database being used to deny people the ability buy guns.
Click to expand...
but surely it wouldnt deny the people who are legally entitled to buy guns from buying them...and it would make it far harder for people who are banned from owning them, from being able to buy them

I am genuinely bemused why anybody thinks this would be a bad idea?
 
If criminals don't care about laws, make it the non criminals job to care?

Hold sellers accountable for not correctly checking and such?

Make bump stocks illegal to make obtaining them harder?
 
FTM said:
but surely it wouldnt deny the people who are legally entitled to buy guns from buying them...and it would make it far harder for people who are banned from owning them, from being able to buy them
Click to expand...

Nah the NRA think the government will put them on the list. They don't trust the government. Welcome to far right America.

Here is their statement on something which only contains a few thousand American citizens and hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160615/nra-statement-on-terror-watchlists

The very fact it contains hardly anyone that actually lives in America also means such a check is pretty ineffective anyway. But that is a separate matter.
 
Effective gun controls, will show that gun controls can be effective. It will end up with heavily reduced sales sooner or later and glorification of expensive bits of metal will fade with time.
 
Thing I don't get is we have other countries in the world with high rates of gun ownership that don't seem to have these issues. Cyprus is a prime example. When has there ever been a mass shooting there?
 
Dis86 said:
Thing I don't get is we have other countries in the world with high rates of gun ownership that don't seem to have these issues. Cyprus is a prime example. When has there ever been a mass shooting there?
Click to expand...

I suggest checking what type of guns are actually owned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation#Cyprus

Sounds like you can own a shotgun and that is about it. But I'm sure some Americans won't let that inconvenient difference get in the way.
 
Americans don't want gun restrictions, I do not understand why you people even debate this, if they did they'd vote in a President and congress members who promised to put those restrictions in place. You are wasting your time and energy suggesting anything to do with gun control, it will not happen because they do not want it to happen. Period.
 
muon said:
Natural cycles. You can't fight nature. In 1545 there were only 10 deaths from guns and there were no restrictions. Explain that.
Click to expand...

Stupid point :rolleyes:


Australia's gun laws stopped mass shootings and reduced homicides, study finds
Researchers from the University of Sydney and Macquarie University analysed data on intentional suicide and homicide deaths caused by firearms from the National Injury Surveillance Unit, and intentional firearm death rates from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. For the period after the 1996 reforms, rates of total homicides and suicides from all causes were also examined to consider whether people may have substituted guns for alternative means.

From 1979 to 1996, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths was rising at 2.1% per year. Since then, the average annual rate of total non-firearm suicide and homicide deaths has been declining by 1.4%, with the researchers concluding there was no evidence of murderers moving to other methods, and that the same was true for suicide.

The average decline in total firearm deaths accelerated significantly, from a 3% decline annually before the reforms to a 5% decline afterwards, the study found.

In the 18 years to 1996, Australia experienced 13 fatal mass shootings in which 104 victims were killed and at least another 52 were wounded.
There have been no fatal mass shootings since that time, with the study defining a mass shooting as having at least five victims.
Click to expand...
Source = https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/23/australias-gun-laws-stopped-mass-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds
 
Roar87 said:
Americans don't want gun restrictions
Click to expand...

As a generalised statement that is not true, poll after poll shows the majority (>50%) of voters do want tighter gun control.

This is split along very partisan lines with like 80% of Democrats for and 70% Republicans against. The people against gun control are the NRA, who spend millions of dollars bribing lobbying congress to not pass any restrictions
 
or they could, i dunno, require a licence for guns, requiring an in-depth background check by the police, details of the type of firearm they want to buy, and a reasonable and provable justification for why they need said firearm.
 
C.R.A.Z.Y said:
Stupid point :rolleyes:


Australia's gun laws stopped mass shootings and reduced homicides, study finds

Source = https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/23/australias-gun-laws-stopped-mass-shootings-and-reduced-homicides-study-finds
Click to expand...

Works for global warming mate.

adolf hamster said:
or they could, i dunno, require a licence for guns, requiring an in-depth background check by the police, details of the type of firearm they want to buy, and a reasonable and provable justification for why they need said firearm.
Click to expand...

But then some people might be denied guns! Who are you to deny me my constitutional right. I want a gun for self defence in case the government one day decide to attack me, or criminals that currently easily get guns because I don't like denying people guns.
 
Ban semi-autos/machine guns and keep hand guns legal but require stronger background checks on them.

This will still ensure compliance with the 2nd amendment whilst keeping mass shooting death tolls lower.

Guns do save lives in a lot of situations though... home invasions etc... It only logically makes sense to ban semi/automatics.
 
muon said:
But then some people might be denied guns! Who are you to deny me my constitutional right. I want a gun for self defence in case the government one day decide to attack me, or criminals that currently easily get guns because I don't like denying people guns.
Click to expand...

way around that is an amnesty, like they did for the machine gun ban, set a cutoff and let people come forward and be given a licence for their guns no questions asked (the original machine gun amnesty cleared the person of any crimes related to the gun as well, including folk who'd literally just stolen m16's from the military).

that way all the good honest law-abiding citizens get to keep their guns, only shady criminal types would try to avoid it, which is fine because after the cutoff any unlicensed firearm is an instant life sentence with the gun confiscated and destroyed.

then after that anyone who wants a gun has to justify it, start off still allowing fully automatic guns, concealed carry and pistols (like for example is the case in northern ireland) and then when today's redneck generation dies off their offspring find it increasingly more difficult to inherit the deadly modern stuff.

you don't need to prevent access to guns, just make access much harder and it'll put most casual folk off.
 
FTM said:
so they rely on the honesty of convicted felons not telling fibs to make sure that people who are legally banned from owning a gun, dont go and buy one??

am I being thick here or does that sound like the worst idea they could come up with?!?!
Click to expand...
Almost as bad as their ESTA form where it asks if you are a member of a terrorist organisation - seriously, are they really expecting a terrorist to tick 'yes'? :rolleyes:
 
enkoda said:
Almost as bad as their ESTA form where it asks if you are a member of a terrorist organisation - seriously, are they really expecting a terrorist to tick 'yes'? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Why not?

It is best not to lie on these things else you'll lose your entitlement to visa waivers. The majority of people it would apply to are not likely to be intending to commit acts of terrorism on that trip.
 
Roar87 said:
Americans don't want gun restrictions, I do not understand why you people even debate this, if they did they'd vote in a President and congress members who promised to put those restrictions in place. You are wasting your time and energy suggesting anything to do with gun control, it will not happen because they do not want it to happen. Period.
Click to expand...


Well said, if ll the people in other countries spent the time they seem to berating Trump, the USA gun laws and other things beyond their business and control, and spent it doing good deeds for the elderly, disabled and less fortunate in their own countries a hell of a lot could be usefully achieved with their impotent time :)

If guns were banned tomorrow in the USA just how long would it take a country literally awash with sophisticated firearms and their ammunition to clear them out the extent where a fellon, terrorist or frustrated husband or lover couldn't lay their hands on some? Totally impractical, they love guns and the majority vote for their continued ability to buy, carry and use them. It's what makes countries of the world different. If the majority love them, so be it, let `em have `em, `tis their gaff. I'm off to boost the local licensed victuallers profits and to hell with `em..
 
Freakbro said:
As a generalised statement that is not true, poll after poll shows the majority (>50%) of voters do want tighter gun control.

This is split along very partisan lines with like 80% of Democrats for and 70% Republicans against. The people against gun control are the NRA, who spend millions of dollars bribing lobbying congress to not pass any restrictions
Click to expand...

You might find that in a poll, depending where and when it was carried out, but if opinions were strong enough among the population then they would vote for the party or people who want to get rid of guns, and those people would then win. As that isn't happening then we can deduce that they either don't want guns banning or are apathetic about them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom