Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Firefighters Shot Dead At Upstate NY Fire  
User currently offlineluv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12103 posts, RR: 49
Posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3846 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

What is wrong with people.

http://news.yahoo.com/firefighters-s...50346447--abc-news-topstories.html

I can not even begin to understand why someone would do something like this.


You can cut the irony with a knife
133 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3827 times:

1987, during the riots in West Berlin, rioters attacked several fire engines, which were on the way to extinguish a building set on fire by looters. The firefighters had to run for their lives and barricaded themselves into their firestation. The people living in the burning house (an old 5 story apartment block with a liquor store on ground floor) had to fight the fire themselves. The fire engines were torched by the rioters.

Jan


User currently offlinepvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 1253 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3773 times:

There are loads of messed up people in pretty much every country, and when you mix them with easy access to guns, high social inequality and in some cases lack of healthcare end result is this. Seems like almost everyday stuff in the US I'm afraid.


"A rational army would run away"
User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8840 posts, RR: 24
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3750 times:

Quoting pvjin (Reply 2):

There are loads of messed up people in pretty much every country, and when you mix them with easy access to guns, high social inequality and in some cases lack of healthcare end result is this.

Oh God, you are being ridiculous. MD11 just posted an example of this sort of thing in a country with restricted access to guns, largely socialized medicine and much less social inequality. We also see the same sort of deadly attacks on police in Greece, Egypt and dozens of other countries. I think I could put in a more rational argument that this is caused by an education and social system that teaches people that they are owed something, and are justified in lashing out if they don't get it.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6089 posts, RR: 29
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3730 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting pvjin (Reply 2):
high social inequality

Judging by the location of the fire and the fact it appears to be on a lake I high doubt social inequity had anything to do with it.

It wouldn't suprise me if the dude wanted to kill himself and was pissed that the fireman showed up. He also might have had some sort of beef with the fire department.

Look at what happened in Indianapolis a few weeks back. Some people blew up their house ( a rather nice looking one too) for insurance money and ended up killing people un the process.

Of course in Detroit fireman have been murdered too (felony murder), but since it didn't happen with a gun the national media ingored it.

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121103/METRO01/211030374

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 1):
1987, during the riots in West Berlin, rioters attacked several fire engines, which were on the way to extinguish a building set on fire by looters. The firefighters had to run for their lives and barricaded themselves into their firestation.

That made international news.

Let's not forget about this incident in the UK.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...eatened-with-a-gun-by-rioters.html

But wait; I don't see how this could happen in the UK; guns aren't allowed.... Oh yeah criminals aren't law abiding.   



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5692 posts, RR: 44
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3718 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3):
MD11 just posted an example of this sort of thing in a country with restricted access to guns, largely socialized medicine and much less social inequality.

My recollection (from reading years after the event) of the '87 Berlin riots was that in the midst of a full blown riot Police and Firefighters were attacked with stones and bottles etc.
Somewhat different than first responders coming under seemingly heavy gunfire attending a neigbourhood house fire.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3):
I think I could put in a more rational argument that this is caused by an education and social system that teaches people that they are owed something, and are justified in lashing out if they don't get it.

This part I totally agree with!!



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3702 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 4):
But wait; I don't see how this could happen in the UK; guns aren't allowed.... Oh yeah criminals aren't law abiding.

Why are you pro-gunners constantly lying? I don't know what else to call it when you have been corrected several times.

1) Guns are allowed in UK. It is very restricted but are allowed.

2) No-one expects a gun ban to reduce murders to 0. The idea is to reduce the number, something UK has been very successful at.


But if you set the bar at 0 then remember it must be the same if guns are allowed. Something that is failing miserably. There are murders in Kennesaw even with it's requirement for every household to be armed.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8492 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3696 times:

Quoting pvjin (Reply 2):
when you mix them with easy access to guns, high social inequality and in some cases lack of healthcare

Most psychopaths here are rather successful and have easy access to cash and healthcare, but thanks for playing. The young shooter in Connecticut was from a millionaire banker family. The Unabomber and Joker Killer were both intellectuals arguably at the top of society.

Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were both from stable, middle class families. Klebold, Harris, the Joker Killer, Lanza and the Unabomber all had significant interactions with, and access to, psychiatrists.

There is a pattern here; just not the pattern people might have assumed.

Cho, the Virginia Tech killer, had many encounters with psychiatrists but was not involuntarily committed to a facility, which he apparently should have been. Reading more about him (which is depressing), he was angry at "rich kids" and lots of other things.

These monsters should not have access to guns. If psychiatrists would flag them early, preventing gun buys, that would help.

[Edited 2012-12-24 10:36:56]

User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3686 times:

Not good,

This guy is a stone cold killer plain and simple.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6089 posts, RR: 29
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3676 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cmf (Reply 6):
Why are you pro-gunners constantly lying? I don't know what else to call it when you have been corrected several times.

Was the gun used in this story legally owned?

How many gun related crimes are there in the UK committed by those that have legal guns? I am not talking about people being charged with a crime who defend themselves and their property.


If you think I am lying you need to examine the lies anti gunners tell so they can get their point across, but then again they are only lies when it doesn't fly with your political convictions.

The NRA had a great piece about the rise in knife crime in the UK back in 2007 and I chalked it up to hype to they could get their point across that guns bans don't work. When I took my first trip to the UK in 2008 I read about many knife crimes in the newspaper, including a story about the huge number of teens who carry knives in UK schools. I was amazed to see that the NRA was right on the money about what it said about knives in the UK. I have spent time in Yorkshire several times since 2008 and I read about knife crime about as much as read about gun crime in Detroit.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3647 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 9):
Was the gun used in this story legally owned?

Don't know. Doesn't matter. No-one suggesting gun restrictions suggest it will end all crime.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 9):
If you think I am lying you need to examine the lies anti gunners tell so they can get their point across, but then again they are only lies when it doesn't fly with your political convictions.

If you see lies call them out. It isn't a free ticket for you to lie.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 9):
The NRA had a great piece about the rise in knife crime in the UK back in 2007

With guns being mostly out of the picture of course knifes become the weapon of choice. So what. I'm still much less likely to be murdered by a knife in UK than I am by a gun in US.

More importantly, knifes do not kill and injure bystanders the way guns do.


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3646 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 9):
When I took my first trip to the UK in 2008 I read about many knife crimes in the newspaper, including a story about the huge number of teens who carry knives in UK schools.

Actually a few years ago the Scottish medical association wanted to ban pointed knives and knives above a certain length, including kitchen knives. They even quoted some chefs that long and pointed knives are not really needed in kitchen work. In Limerick, Ireland, a few years ago, the favourite gangland weapon was a box cutter with two blades inserted sife by side, with a matchstick inbetween. This would cause two parallel cuts impossible to stitch back together for a surgeon.
Also, since the handgun ban, Britain has been swamped with illegal guns. Guns have become a status symbol among gangsters, including teenagers, to show how tough they are and that they are not afraid of the cops. Quite a few people got killed by accidentally getting caught in gunfights or drive by shootings.

During the last riots in the UK some ethnic groups (mainly Indians especially ther Sikhs, Pakistanis and Turks) decided to defend their neighbourhoods and set up barricades. The men behind them were armed with tools, like axes or machetes, but also with traditional weapons, like swords and spears. Their neighbourhoods did not get touched by looters, even though looters were seen checking out the neighbourhoods.

Jan


User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7308 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3618 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 9):
How many gun related crimes are there in the UK committed by those that have legal guns? I am not talking about people being charged with a crime who defend themselves and their property.

How much gun related crime happens in the UK, very little in comparison to the US, probably due to the difficulty in purchasing guns and the tight restrictions on what kind of guns people are allowed to own. But I'm talking to a brick wall aren't I?


User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6089 posts, RR: 29
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3583 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cmf (Reply 11):
I'm still much less likely to be murdered by a knife in UK than I am by a gun in US.

You aren't likely to be killed at all if you stay out of drug infested gang controlled parts of country.

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 13):
How much gun related crime happens in the UK, very little in comparison to the US

Cinsidering the UK is smaller than the state of Michigan, by about 2000 square miles, I would say much less. If you take the drug related violence out of Michigan I would bet the gun crime numbers are similar.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 12):
Actually a few years ago the Scottish medical association wanted to ban pointed knives and knives above a certain length, including kitchen knives

That was reported in the US too. That just goes to show that people really want to stop killing and that killing is a problem regardless of how it is accomplished. Murder is already against the law and that doesn't stop people from doing it in a seemingly endless variety of ways.

Quoting cmf (Reply 11):
If you see lies call them out

The biggest one of all.... "kids can buy guns at gun shows" I hear it all the time. You can't even get in a gun show unless you are 18 or with a parent. About half of my guns were purchased at gun shows and I go to them all the time. I never once saw a kid buying a gun, or even allowed to touch one at a gun show.

I also hear about that no background checks are conducted at gun shows. That is BS too; Federal background checks are required by all FFL 01 dealers. Are there dealers who break the law? Sure, but they aren't likely to do it in a public venue with thousands watching.

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 13):
But I'm talking to a brick wall aren't I?

Yep... I cling to my guns and religion. I just don't fit the stereotype because I'm well educated and I travel. Oddly I became more right wing as I became educated.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 7):
Most psychopaths here are rather successful and have easy access to cash and healthcare

For the most part the high profile shooters come from a background far different than your average drug dealer/street gang criminal.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3573 times:

My AR lower was bought at a gun show and the dealer ran the criminal background check.....he borrowed my cell to do it since he couldn't get bars on his in the building!


OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3566 times:

Falstaff,

But I think that you agree that gun ownership requires responsibility. I´m quite sure that your collection has been locked away safely and that you wouldn´t want to leave guns and ammo around where children can get at them. I´m also sure that you agree that minimum safety training standards should be adhered to. And that persons with mental issues should not get access to guns (coming back to the issue of storing guns safely).

Jan


User currently offlineEmirates773ER From Pakistan, joined Jun 2005, 1449 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3556 times:

I wonder why stuff like this doesn't happen in Canada? Oh yea! Cause they don't have guns!


The Truth is Out There ---- Face It!!!!!
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5602 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3547 times:

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 17):
I wonder why stuff like this doesn't happen in Canada? Oh yea! Cause they don't have guns!

Canada most certainly has guns available. Remember, most of the country is wilderness.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21571 posts, RR: 55
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3524 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 14):
I also hear about that no background checks are conducted at gun shows. That is BS too; Federal background checks are required by all FFL 01 dealers. Are there dealers who break the law? Sure, but they aren't likely to do it in a public venue with thousands watching.

There are private sellers at gun shows too, and they're not required to do background checks.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6089 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3504 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 17):
I wonder why stuff like this doesn't happen in Canada? Oh yea! Cause they don't have guns!

It does....

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/guns-notori...till-not-prohibited-234352117.html

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 16):
I´m quite sure that your collection has been locked away safely and that you wouldn´t want to leave guns and ammo around where children can get at them

That depends on your opinion... My house is locked and I have an alarm system that includes motion sensors in the room that I store my guns. Some people would say that isn't good enough and demand that they be stored in massive safes. Considering I have no children and children never come to my house I think that is good enough.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 18):
most of the country is wilderness.

and has a smaller population than California.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 16):
And that persons with mental issues should not get access to guns

I totally agree. I took my concealed pistol class with a man with Cerebral palsy. He worked in a bad neighborhood and was afraid to be a victim because of his disability. He didn't move too fast. He passed the training class without a problem. Some people with cerebral palsy I wouldn't want owning a gun, but in this guy's case I didn't see a problem.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 16):
I´m also sure that you agree that minimum safety training standards should be adhered to

I wouldn't be opposed to safety training. There are a lot of gun owners who are hurt because they don't know how to use them correctly. I learned gun safety as a child, in the Boy Scouts, and if a child can learn it easily than so can adults. Of course that kind of thinking goes with a lot of dangerous things. I am amzed at the number of people who are injured by their lawn mowers and snowblowers, but they can be safely operated by 10 year old if they have the correct training.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3496 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 20):
I wouldn't be opposed to safety training. There are a lot of gun owners who are hurt because they don't know how to use them correctly. I learned gun safety as a child, in the Boy Scouts, and if a child can learn it easily than so can adults. Of course that kind of thinking goes with a lot of dangerous things. I am amzed at the number of people who are injured by their lawn mowers and snowblowers, but they can be safely operated by 10 year old if they have the correct training.

When I was about 5 years old my dad had to work in the mountains of northern Spain in a very remote area. One evening, while we were having our supper in the village in, a squad of Spanish soldiers, who were having a training eercise in the region, came in. The sergeant and my father got into a conversation (my father spoke fluent Castillian Spanish and Catalan), with one topic being the sergeant´s sidearm (I think it was a Llama pistol). The sergeant cleared it and handed it to my father. I was also allowed to handle it and I immediately got a stern talking to by both the sergeant and my father when I didn´t point it just at the floor. This was a lection I always remembered: Never point a gun at anything you don´t want to destroy and always treat any gun as loaded.

Jan


User currently offlinePC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2434 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3486 times:

Oh boy, I'm starting to think this thread will be locked before it's over with.

Back to the topic of the thread, similar even happened in St. Louis a few years back.

http://voices.yahoo.com/st-louis-fir...er-ambushed-line-duty-1707047.html



Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
User currently offlinePowerslide From Canada, joined Oct 2010, 569 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3468 times:

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 17):
I wonder why stuff like this doesn't happen in Canada? Oh yea! Cause they don't have guns!

Oh we have plenty of guns. Difference is we aren't bent on killing each other. The right to life outweighs the right to enjoy firearms, even when the intent is to use them appropriately. I guess that sucks for gun enthusiasts that their freedoms will probably be impinged by gun control legislation, my heart bleeds for them. But honestly, they enjoy something that generally has one purpose; to take life. Until the constitution is rewritten to the 21st century the US, in my mind, will always be the gun-wacko, crazy country no one will want to live in. 'Merica!


User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2853 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3456 times:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 23):
Until the constitution is rewritten to the 21st century the US, in my mind, will always be the gun-wacko, crazy country no one will want to live in. 'Merica!

Wow,

Its rare that we can agree on something, but this is one of those times.

That constitution, rights, bills, and amendments. Just get on and change the damn thing.

The world is sick to the back teeth of waking up to yet another US shooting, and witnessing more innocents killed.....

This time it was, Firefighters.

Who next, doctors, nursers, old people who cant fight back ?

Just so a few don't their "rights" impinged. Get real America, you are better than this BS.



Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3480 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 14):
You aren't likely to be killed at all if you stay out of drug infested gang controlled parts of country.

Tell that to all of you who insist you need to walk around with loaded weapons all the time. But it still stands that you are more likely to get killed here in US than in UK.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 14):
That just goes to show that people really want to stop killing and that killing is a problem regardless of how it is accomplished.

Do you lock your door? It doesn't stop burglars...

Quoting falstaff (Reply 14):
The biggest one of all.... "kids can buy guns at gun shows"

Can't say I have seen it stated here. That the rules are different on gun shows I've seen but not that kids can by them. On the other hand, straw man purchases are stated as a common way for underage to get weapons.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 14):
I also hear about that no background checks are conducted at gun shows. That is BS too; Federal background checks are required by all FFL 01 dealers. Are there dealers who break the law? Sure, but they aren't likely to do it in a public venue with thousands watching.

As long as they are FFL, absolutely. However, sales isn't made just by dealers. And I have no idea how this gives you the right to flat out lie.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 20):
Considering I have no children and children never come to my house I think that is good enough.

I don't. Someone breaking in should not be able to get your guns that easily. If you do not have them in a safe at least have locks on them.


User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3621 posts, RR: 3
Reply 25, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3506 times:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 23):
Until the constitution is rewritten to the 21st century the US, in my mind, will always be the gun-wacko, crazy country no one will want to live in.

If only that were the case, but believe it - you won't be missed.


User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13561 posts, RR: 62
Reply 26, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3524 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting pvjin (Reply 2):
There are loads of messed up people in pretty much every country, and when you mix them with easy access to guns, high social inequality and in some cases lack of healthcare end result is this.

Stop lying. It's all the gun's fault, remember?

Signed,
The Anti-2nd Amendment Howler Monkeys of A.net



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12510 posts, RR: 46
Reply 27, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3529 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting falstaff (Reply 14):
Cinsidering the UK is smaller than the state of Michigan, by about 2000 square miles, I would say much less. If you take the drug related violence out of Michigan I would bet the gun crime numbers are similar.

Square mileage has nothing to do with it. Average number of gun-related deaths per year in the UK hovers around the 50-60 mark. In the US it's close to 10,000. Even allowing for the five times greater population in the US, the rates are massively different. I wonder why?



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2853 posts, RR: 8
Reply 28, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3525 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 28):
Average number of gun-related deaths per year in the UK hovers around the 50-60 mark. In the US it's close to 10,000.

Astounding....

Lets hear the pro gun nuts defend those figures with BS arguments about how America is safe      



Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3621 posts, RR: 3
Reply 29, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3513 times:

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 29):
Lets hear the pro gun nuts defend those figures with BS arguments about how America is safe

You fail to understand that nobody here really cares what you think. You don't have to come here, in fact you have repeatedly said you won't come here so this is a non issue for you. Why is this such a problem for you (besides your hysterical anti-Americanism)? You have no skin in this game.


User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2853 posts, RR: 8
Reply 30, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3503 times:

Quoting mham001 (Reply 30):
You fail to understand that nobody here really cares what you think. You don't have to come here, in fact you have repeatedly said you won't come here so this is a non issue for you. Why is this such a problem for you (besides your hysterical anti-Americanism)? You have no skin in this game.

You see, at the end of the day, that's all you can muster. Personal attacks, Pathetic .

BTW, Have been to the US plenty of times and will continue to go when I please too.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 30):
You have no skin in this game.

Appears that I hit a nerve ?

Now, are you going to "justify" the 10,000 killed per year, or just deflect the argument ?

[Edited 2012-12-24 14:51:08]


Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7702 posts, RR: 21
Reply 31, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3448 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I had no idea Michigan had a population of sixty million. Great comparison.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 32, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3442 times:

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 31):
Appears that I hit a nerve ?

It's not even that. One of the things I've noticed about American culture since living abroad is that when I compare to Australians, Kiwis, Canadians, Israelis, Turks, Russians, Chinese, Indians, etc I've had the fortune to work with overseas, most people make ragging on their homeland a regular part of conversation with people from elsewhere. Bitching about where one is from is often an easy way to build repoire with others because it puts everyone on the level. Americans, to some noticeable extent, are not really able to do this. We have a built-in defensiveness that makes it difficult to accept criticism, for one reason or another. I'm not sure why this is so, but it's really interesting - and unfortunate.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13095 posts, RR: 12
Reply 33, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3431 times:

Some info on this deadly attack: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012...randmother-in-1980-police-say?lite

As the link notes, this sick bastard killed his grandmother in 1980, he was convicted of manslaughter and spent almost 18 (but not enough) years in jail, was paroled, and lived with his sister (who is yet to be accounted for) in this house his attack was based at. His mother who also lived in the house died earlier this year. He apparently set fire to the house and a car, put himself at a berm and shot at the first responders as they approached to fight the fire. He killed two and 2 others were seriously injured but will survive. Then he killed himself. The fire set fire to 6 other houses as the firefighters, fearing more attacks, couldn't get close to fight those fires. The neighborhood had to be evacuated, until the area could be secured.

As a convicted felon, any possession or use of guns, and apparently he had several, were absolutely illegal. I suspect he may have stolen the guns or got them illegally. He was 62 years old, he probably had lifelong mental health issues, and like too many mass murders, he wanted to do something to get a lot of media attention as a big FU to the world to blame everyone but himself for his problems. Of course, he unfortunately he got that attention, but at huge costs to 4 or more people, a community in fear and mourning, did his act on Christmas Eve adding further misery.

As noted, his possession of guns was absolutely illegal. Almost any of the proposed laws to restrict access to semi-auto assault weapons, bullet magazines, ban gun show sales, mental health clerances, wouldn't have done a thing. I hope that anyone that sold those guns or didn't secure them properly face serious criminal prosecution under current NY State laws. We should make sure anyone that is convinced of murder faces life imprisonment with no parole, no plea deals. If such a law existed, at least this deadly attack may not have happened. Maybe too, we need to change our attenion to such gun attacks or terror act, to take away part of the motivation for such persons.


User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 34, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3395 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 23):
Until the constitution is rewritten to the 21st century the US, in my mind, will always be the gun-wacko, crazy country no one will want to live in. 'Merica!

There's no need to change or modify the 2nd Amendment. Simply attach some administrative rider to it that says that the only guns you can own are those consistent with the technology circa 1791 when the amendment became law. My understanding is the best gun you could buy in those days was likely a muzzle-loading, single-shot, smooth bore musket that a really good soldier could reload in a minute or so -- and that would hit a target 100 yards away maybe 50% of the time (if you are a good shot).

Make that simple change, and America's gun-death rate would drop from 10,000 a year to maybe 10 a year. Oh - and no need for permits, licenses -- none of that BS. You can have as many muskets as you want. I believe in the sanctity of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights; the guys that wrote it knew what they were doing.



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 35, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3395 times:

Referring to the post above:

In most cases of massacres (school or workplace shootings) I know the killers had their guns illegally, or, in a case in Germany, the killer had guns he wasn´t supposed to have because both the management of his gun club and the licencing authority were fast asleep and issued him a permit for guns he wasn´t entiteled to. Or in another case the authority did not register that the gun licence of a woman was no longer valid because she did not practice target shooting anymore and by law should have either sold her guns to a licenced person or surrendered them to the police.
Instead she used them years after her licence expired to go on a killing spree.

The laws exist in most bcountries, but are not enforced, like the licenced father of a killer, who, against the law, did not lock his pistol away in a safe, but left it in a wardrobe in his bedroom, together with several magazines of ammunition.

In such cases the persons responsible for not taking care of their weapons or not doing their job as licencing authorities should get punished harshly.

Jan


User currently offlineYVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2454 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3383 times:

The answer is obvious - when youre done arming all the teachers, arm the firefighters too  


Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7893 posts, RR: 52
Reply 37, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3370 times:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 23):
I guess that sucks for gun enthusiasts that their freedoms will probably be impinged by gun control legislation, my heart bleeds for them.

Such a nonchalant attitude regarding taking some people's rights away... sad

I think us gun owners should be for measures to keep gun ownership safer, but our rights, I don't care if it's someone else's cup or tea or not, are still our rights, and see them blatantly disregarded here...



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 38, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3357 times:

Historically in Europe from the middle ages on weapons and especially firearms were the privilege of the ruling class. They were issued to the great unwashed if they had to fight a war for their king, but were collected soon afterwards again. Even when Napoleon´s troops threatened the rest of Europe, the aristocrat ruling class was very reluctant in ordering general military service because they were afraid that the citizens would not return the weapons anymore and would use them to get rid of their nobility. The one exception in Europe is Switzerland, where from the middle ages on the citizens stood up against foreign rulers.
The US is different. The early years meant that many people lived in frontier conditions, where they did not just have bto hunt for food, but als had to depend on themselves for defence.
The US also got their independence in a bloody war of citizen soldies against a colonial power´s army (though in some aspects it also was a civil war between revolutionries and loyalists).
As a German with a strong sense of a "Wehrhafte Demokratie" (a democracy, which can defend itself), I understand the logic behind being able to keep a government incheck. No country is THAT stable that it´s democracy can survive extreme economic breakdowns. In such a case there nis always the tendency to have a strong man in power.

And e.g. when the Nazis got into power, the first thing they did was to check the gun register for person they considered of dubious loyalty and to disarm them. They did the same when the Germans invaded France.

On the other hand today (during the last 20 years or so) we had more and more massacres carried out by people who should never have gotten access to guns. Both in the US, where access is quite easy as well as in Europe, where guns are much more difficult to get hold of.

The question is how to keep guns away from the undesirables (defined as people with marginal psychological stability or criminals) without interfering too much in the rights of the responsible gun owners or to reduce the capability of a "citizen´s defence of the democracy".

One thing would be a national database of people who are banned from owning guns, let it be convicted criminals or people with mental issues. But, at least in the last case, there are privacy laws against it.

BTW, IIRC Powerslide is a member of the Canadian military. I´ve seen the mentality quite often among European soldiers or police officers that only they should be trusted with guns, but not civilians, who are considered as unreliable. In a crunch I wonder where the loyality of the soldiers or police officers would lie: With the constitution and the democratic principles or with those who pay them.

Jan


User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6089 posts, RR: 29
Reply 39, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3334 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cmf (Reply 25):
And I have no idea how this gives you the right to flat out lie.

The gun shows I go to only allow trade with an FFL holder. Sales outside of the show area and not done with an FFL holder are illegal. If you don't believe it you can come and see for yourself.

Here is a reservation form for setting up at a show. Read rule number 6. Not all vendors need an FFL. There are many people at gun shows that don't sell guns. Some of the other items commonly seen at gun shows are; camping/hunting gear, holsters, clothing, books, gun parts, knives, and ammo.

http://www.migunshows.com/resform.html

Quoting cmf (Reply 25):
Someone breaking in should not be able to get your guns that easily

Nobody has the right to break in and steal. I should not have to secure my weapons anymore than than reasonably necessary. A locked door and a security system is plenty. There are a lot of dangerous things in a lot of homes; should we have to lock everything up just because of something somebody might do?


Quoting ltbewr (Reply 34):
didn't secure them properly face serious criminal prosecution under current NY State laws

Why? Should I be responsible if my car is stolen from my driveway and then is involved in a traffic accident that kills somebody (that happens from time to time). I guess my car should be locked in my garage and then locked inside instead of sitting in my driveway were somebody could easily take it.

The family of the teen that beat his father to death with a baseball bat in Detroit should probably sue the maker of the bat and the store than sold it if you want to follow that logic.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 38):
Such a nonchalant attitude regarding taking some people's rights away... sad

I really think it is funny that people think its ok remove a constitution right because it gets outdated; when in another 50 years it will be another outdated right and so on until there are none left. Some people will give up everything for total security. A few years back the left was worried about the rights of a few terrorists and telling us how it was unconstitutional and those people deserved the rights granted to them by the Constitution. I also recall many on the left saying that we righties were too worried about security and were going to let the government take our freedoms away. Funny how that has changed.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 40, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3311 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 40):
The gun shows I go to only allow trade with an FFL holder. Sales outside of the show area and not done with an FFL holder are illegal. If you don't believe it you can come and see for yourself.

As you know each state set their own rules.

"Presently, 17 states regulate private firearm sales at gun shows. Seven states require background checks on all gun sales at gun shows (California, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Oregon, New York, Illinois and Colorado). Four states (Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) require background checks on all handgun, but not long gun, purchasers at gun shows. Six states require individuals to obtain a permit to purchase handguns that involves a background check (Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina, Iowa, Nebraska). Certain counties in Florida require background checks on all private sales of handguns at gun shows. The remaining 33 states do not restrict private, intrastate sales of firearms at gun shows in any manner."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_sho...ates#Gun_show_differences_by_state

Quoting falstaff (Reply 40):
Nobody has the right to break in and steal

Then why do you have an alarm and while you haven't said so I think it is reasonable to assume you have locks. Or why do people feel the need to carry loaded weapons in public for self defense.


User currently offlinePowerslide From Canada, joined Oct 2010, 569 posts, RR: 1
Reply 41, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3283 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 39):
I´ve seen the mentality quite often among European soldiers or police officers that only they should be trusted with guns, but not civilians, who are considered as unreliable.

What are you talking about? There is a massive difference between a soldier having a rifle and a civy that uses one for pure recreation. The only ones who should have those assault style rifles and pistons are those in law enforcement. You don't need a 30-round combat rifle for hunting. Guns are designed to kill people, not to hit tin cans in the back of uncle jacks barn. Time to find a different hobby.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 33):
Americans, to some noticeable extent, are not really able to do this. We have a built-in defensiveness that makes it difficult to accept criticism, for one reason or another. I'm not sure why this is so, but it's really interesting - and unfortunate.

That is because from childhood it is engraved in their psyche that America is the greatest country in the world - and I'll shoot you if you disagree. Well America isn't the greatest country in the world anymore and hasn't been for a long time. This type of arrogance has gotten them where they are today, the most hated nation in the world.


User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6089 posts, RR: 29
Reply 42, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3270 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 42):
This type of arrogance has gotten them where they are today, the most hated nation in the world.

If we really are so hated then why do immigrants keep pouring in?

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 42):
That is because from childhood it is engraved in their psyche that America is the greatest country in the world

Everybody should feel their country is the greatest. It is natural, just like people feel their favorite sports team is better than another team. I have some Canadian friends who feel Canada is the best country on earth, I have German friends who feel that Germany is the best country ever and I have a good friend in the UK who thinks England is the best country ever. Being proud of your country and thinking it is the best is not a bad thing; that is why people cheer on their national athletes at international competitions.

Quoting cmf (Reply 41):
Then why do you have an alarm

It is a reasonable precaution. Building a giant vault and storing every possible thing that could used to hurt somebody that is in my house isn't reasonable.

If I was a gun store I would have a different opinion. A gun store is a target, because everyone who drives by can see what they sell and will know exactly what is in there and exactly what the hours of business are. When you drive past a home you really don't know what is in there and if anyone is there or not.

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 42):
Time to find a different hobby.

I am glad you feel so compelled to tell me what to do.

I guess when the police tell plane and train watchers that they need to find a new hobby because they could be plotting a terrorist attack that it is ok because somebody doesn't like their hobby.

Quoting cmf (Reply 41):
Or why do people feel the need to carry loaded weapons in public for self defense.

Because I can and because there are a lot of people that do with no good on their mind.

Quoting cmf (Reply 41):
while you haven't said so I think it is reasonable to assume you have locks.

What kind of locks? Locks on my house? yes. Locks on my gun cabinets? yes. Trigger locks on my guns? No. I live alone so nobody is going around my guns that shouldn't be. If someone were to break in and steal them a trigger lock means nothing, they are fairly easy to remove if you try. A kid isn't going to get one off, but with a few tools it isn't that hard. I had a lock fail once, on a very substantial trigger lock and I had it off in less than a half hour.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 43, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3142 times:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 41):
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 39):
I´ve seen the mentality quite often among European soldiers or police officers that only they should be trusted with guns, but not civilians, who are considered as unreliable.

What are you talking about? There is a massive difference between a soldier having a rifle and a civy that uses one for pure recreation. The only ones who should have those assault style rifles and pistons are those in law enforcement. You don't need a 30-round combat rifle for hunting. Guns are designed to kill people, not to hit tin cans in the back of uncle jacks barn. Time to find a different hobby.

Read my short ecert on history. Who´s orders do the soldiers or police officers obey if it comes to a crunch? Hint: in 1930s Germany almost all followed the corporal with the funny moustache.
Who has the guns has the power, as could be seen worldwide wherever some tinpot dictator took over.

I don´t advocate anarchy, but law and order based on the rule of the people. In Switzerland almost every family has a miltary rifle at home. Still rates of gun crime are much lower than in the US.

And BTW, soldiers are supposed to be a part of the population and under civilian command, not the other way around.
They are NOT the elite of the country. This is also why I advocate general military service as opposed to a pure professional military, even if it will lose efficiency. It keeps the military firmly anchored in the population and prevents politicians and generals from attemptimng military adventures.

Jan


User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 44, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3127 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 42):
Everybody should feel their country is the greatest

No, everyone should understand what is great about their country. To claim it is the greatest without understanding what is is great and what isn't is fooling yourself.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 42):
It is a reasonable precaution. Building a giant vault and storing every possible thing that could used to hurt somebody that is in my house isn't reasonable.

Vault isn't the only solution.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 42):
Because I can and because there are a lot of people that do with no good on their mind.

Because you can... and many others can... a lot of people are killed and injured each year.

40,000 people killed and injured per year is far too many to be justified by "because I can".

Quoting falstaff (Reply 42):
What kind of locks? Locks on my house? yes. Locks on my gun cabinets?

Locked gun cabinets. Then i probably agree it is enough. Unless they are easily opened. You want to make sure it takes time to collect all the weapons. Give people time to respond to the alarm. Hopefully make the burglars leave without them.


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 45, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3106 times:

Well, I have a collection of deactivated WW2 weapons including some submachine guns plus a replica percussion black powder Shaps carbine from the American Civil War (one of the first working breech loaders, but still for paper cartridges and seperate percussion caps). These are legal in Germany without licence if you are older than 18 years (though you need a seperate powder licence to get the black powder). The main reason is that I can´t be bothered at the moment to get through all the red tape to get a licence for live guns. Also, one requirement is joining a gun club (the idea is that the individual gets controlled by his peers and that if he should act funny, the club management will take action, like reporting him to the police), but I´m not a club person. I have a circle of friends, e.g. some of us are in the process of forming a band for playing music, but every official club has to have a formal structure of a council, president, vice president, secretary, cashier etc. and these positions generally attract a certain personality which at work would be called jobworths (or just pain in the @rrse).
Even though it is not required, I keep the guns in a gun safe. The safe cost me about $150 some years ago and even while I don´t have children in my house, nobody can get me into trouble for exceeding the security requirements (I prefer this to having to explain to the police that during a burglary two submachine guns got stolen. It can lead to all kinds of misunderstandings and expensive lawyer bills until the issue gets sorted). Also, the collection has a certain value and I wouldn´t want to have a burglar run away with it.

Jan


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 46, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3067 times:

$150?

I assume it isn't fire rated. I was looking at some and the ones I saw where starting out at $1200 up to $2500 dollars.

But thesecrecactual fire rated safes.

Only problem is that I think they would go through the floor of my house!



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 47, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3060 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 46):

I assume it isn't fire rated. I was looking at some and the ones I saw where starting out at $1200 up to $2500 dollars.

But thesecrecactual fire rated safes.

Only problem is that I think they would go through the floor of my house!

No, it is not fire rated, but it fullfills the legal requirements for being burglarproof (when it is bolted to a concrete floor / brick wall) for long arms (rifles and shotguns). There is a seperate lockable compartment inside for the ammunition, which again fullfills the law for keeping the guns and the ammunition seperate unless the gun is in direct control by the licenced owner.
Handguns are required to be stored in a stronger, double walled safe, again with the ammunition stored seperately.
The main reason ius that criminals prefer handguns over long guns because they can conceal them more easily.
This is all by German law.

Jan


User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 48, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3045 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 47):
it fullfills the legal requirements for being burglarproof (when it is bolted to a concrete floor / brick wall) for long arms (rifles and shotguns). There is a seperate lockable compartment inside for the ammunition, which again fullfills the law for keeping the guns and the ammunition seperate unless the gun is in direct control by the licenced owner.
Handguns are required to be stored in a stronger, double walled safe, again with the ammunition stored seperately.
The main reason ius that criminals prefer handguns over long guns because they can conceal them more easily.
This is all by German law.

Good common sense law.


User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16248 posts, RR: 56
Reply 49, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3037 times:

Quoting pvjin (Reply 2):
There are loads of messed up people in pretty much every country, and when you mix them with easy access to guns, high social inequality

Well said. A good argument for gun control.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 36):
The answer is obvious - when youre done arming all the teachers, arm the firefighters too

Don't forget hospital workers! 3 were shot last week.

Seriously, the US needs to ban guns, all guns. The rule of law is fast being replaced by the rule of the gun in the US.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3220 posts, RR: 12
Reply 50, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3029 times:

yyz717; I would submit that if the US banned guns, "...all guns." as per your suggestion, the US would have a far more serious gun crime statistic than it currently does now. regards...jack


all best; jack
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7702 posts, RR: 21
Reply 51, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3020 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 50):
yyz717; I would submit that if the US banned guns, "...all guns." as per your suggestion, the US would have a far more serious gun crime statistic than it currently does now. regards...jack

Based on.....?



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 52, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3009 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 48):
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 47):
it fullfills the legal requirements for being burglarproof (when it is bolted to a concrete floor / brick wall) for long arms (rifles and shotguns). There is a seperate lockable compartment inside for the ammunition, which again fullfills the law for keeping the guns and the ammunition seperate unless the gun is in direct control by the licenced owner.
Handguns are required to be stored in a stronger, double walled safe, again with the ammunition stored seperately.
The main reason ius that criminals prefer handguns over long guns because they can conceal them more easily.
This is all by German law.

Good common sense law.

Burglarproof in this case means that the burglar can´t just jimmy a lock open. He will have to use at least an angle grinder to cut out the lock (which is protected against drilling by a hardened steel plate) or to cut a hole into the side of the safe. The door has been designed to allow no purchase for a lever or breaking bar and the safe has been made out of several millimeters of steel. This means that a burglar will have to make noise and that it will take him time (at least 15 minutes) to get into it. Time and noise is the last thing a burglar needs, because the noisier he is and the longer he stays in the building the more likely it is for him to get caught.
Small safes exist with electronic number locks. If I had to have handguns around the house for home defence (quite a possibility e.g. in the Philippines), I would place several of these small and inexpensive safes around the house in hidden places (e.g. bedroom, living room, corridor near the entrance) and keep pistols with their ammunition in them. This way, if I would need a gun in a hurry, e.g. because somebody was trying to break into the house, I still could get nearest gun fast, but neither children nor people I don´t want to get access to my guns would be able to get at therm. This also means that a burglar could not get one of my own guns to shoot me with it.

Jan

[Edited 2012-12-25 12:49:23]

User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3220 posts, RR: 12
Reply 53, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3002 times:

RussianJet; based on the irrefutable fact that criminals and the deranged don't care about laws and bans and such. Ban all guns in the US and only the undesireables will have them. regards...jack


all best; jack
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7308 posts, RR: 5
Reply 54, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2997 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 19):
I took my concealed pistol class with a man with Cerebral palsy.

Cerebral palsy is a physical condition not a mental ne.

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 53):
RussianJet; based on the irrefutable fact that criminals and the deranged don't care about laws and bans and such. Ban all guns in the US and only the undesireables will have them. regards...jack

but what about the other 20,000 odd thousand deaths caused by guns in the US which isn't related to criminal activity with illegal weapons? Or don't those deaths count?

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 284):
gun deaths USA, 2011 (types of weapons not specified)

accidental: 851
suicide: 19,766
homicide: 11,101
undetermined intent: 222

total: 32,940


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 55, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2994 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 54):

but what about the other 20,000 odd thousand deaths caused by guns in the US which isn't related to criminal activity with illegal weapons? Or don't those deaths count?

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 284):
gun deaths USA, 2011 (types of weapons not specified)

accidental: 851
suicide: 19,766
homicide: 11,101
undetermined intent: 222

total: 32,940

I think that quite a few could be prevented by mandatory safety training and storage requirements. Suicides can´t really be prevented. If somebody is determined to kill himself and he can´t get a gun, then he will use other means, e.g. the oldfashioned rope.
As for the homicides, except for cases which cause a lot of uproar, like the recent massacres, which were committed by people with mental issues, I´m quite sure that most of them were committed by one criminal against another criminal in gang wars.

Jan


User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3220 posts, RR: 12
Reply 56, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2987 times:

KiwiRob; I don't know what additional 20,000 deaths you are referring to. Maybe the numbers list I posted was inaccurate? regards...jack


all best; jack
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7308 posts, RR: 5
Reply 57, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2973 times:

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 56):
KiwiRob; I don't know what additional 20,000 deaths you are referring to. Maybe the numbers list I posted was inaccurate? regards...jack

All those not classified as homicide, which is 20,000 or so.


User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 4008 posts, RR: 28
Reply 58, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2974 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 6):
2) No-one expects a gun ban to reduce murders to 0. The idea is to reduce the number, something UK has been very successful at.

And yet I feel a lot safer going out at night in most areas in the U.S. than your regular high-street pub in the U.K. after closing hours... the most unsafe place I have been recently has been in the middle of Paris at night, and don't believe most people there carried guns.

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 22):
in my mind, will always be the gun-wacko, crazy country no one will want to live in. 'Merica!

You mean, except those millions of people who risk their lives every year trying to cross deserts on foot to come to the U.S.?

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 32):
Americans, to some noticeable extent, are not really able to do this. We have a built-in defensiveness that makes it difficult to accept criticism, for one reason or another. I'm not sure why this is so, but it's really interesting - and unfortunate.

Unfortunately, by experience, most non-U.S. people are completely ignorant about the U.S. (not necessarily as ignorant as Powerslide above, but still very ignorant) and simply refuse to learn, because in their minds they are the enlightened ones. Not saying this is totally their fault (after all, most of they know about the U.S. is what they see on entertainment / media, and most U.S. providers of that are just as ignorant) but I can see how that would make U.S. people not as receptive to critics from certain foreigners. The image of the "Ugly American" tourist abroad totally pales in comparison to most "Ugly Europeans" I know.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 38):
.

Great exposé on the European attitude towards guns (and governments in general). Not really sure what took this long (you should have been there a long time ago) but welcome to my RU list.

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 54):
but what about the other 20,000 odd thousand deaths caused by guns in the US which isn't related to criminal activity with illegal weapons? Or don't those deaths count?

So people will stop committing suicide because there are no guns? Do you intend on banning ropes, box-cutters, prescription medication, rat poison and train tracks as well?

[Edited 2012-12-25 13:41:13]


Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3220 posts, RR: 12
Reply 59, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2968 times:

kiwirob; my bad.

I was subconsciously not doing correct math from my own post. However, close to those 20,000 are suicides, so that in itself tells you something about the mental state or perhaps terminally ill condition of those folks who might very well find other ways to accomplish their own demise. regards...jack



all best; jack
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 60, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2966 times:

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 58):
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 38):
Americans, to some noticeable extent, are not really able to do this. We have a built-in defensiveness that makes it difficult to accept criticism, for one reason or another. I'm not sure why this is so, but it's really interesting - and unfortunate.

Great exposé on the European attitude towards guns (and governments in general). Not really sure what took this long (you should have been there a long time ago) but welcome to my RU list.

Uh, this was not my quote.

Jan


User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 4008 posts, RR: 28
Reply 61, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2959 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 60):
Uh, this was not my quote.

Yeah, sorry, my bad, probably had it highlighted when I pressed the button on your post. Was referring to your whole post 38.



Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6089 posts, RR: 29
Reply 62, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2944 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 59):
close to those 20,000 are suicides, so that in itself tells you something about the mental state or perhaps terminally ill condition of those folks who might very well find other ways to accomplish their own demise.

I have known several people who have killed themselves in the last 20 years. One was with a gun, One hanged himself, two died of intentional overdose and one gassed himself with his car. I knew of a woman who slit her wrists when I was in college, but I never met her.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 58):
Do you intend on banning ropes, box-cutters, prescription medication, rat poison and train tracks as well?

A few years ago there was some controversy in San Francisco about wanting to put up barriers on the Golden Gate Bridge to keep jumpers from killing themselves. I don't know what ever happened with that; I read about it in the paper while visiting Superfly.

Every now and then somebody jumps off the Ambassador Bridge, between Detroit, Michigan and Windsor, Ontario. Pedestrians aren't even allowed on the bridge, but somebody drives on the bridge, gets out and jumps off. If the fall doesn't kill you the fast moving Detroit River will, if it is winter that thing is cold and icey.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 58):
the most unsafe place I have been recently has been in the middle of Paris at night

I felt unsafe in Amsterdam at night this past summer. I was worried about criminals with guns/knives and myself not carrying one. I don't fell like that in Detroit, where European tourists might feel unsafe.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 63, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2941 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 52):
This means that a burglar will have to make noise and that it will take him time

Combine it with an alarm and we have reasonable assurance they will not be stolen. The way it should be.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 58):
And yet I feel a lot safer going out at night in most areas in the U.S. than your regular high-street pub in the U.K. after closing hours

Funny. I spend a lot of time in UK and have never felt unsafe. I generally do not feel unsafe in US either but there are many more places here that makes me be alert about the surrounding.


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 64, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2939 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 63):
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 58):
And yet I feel a lot safer going out at night in most areas in the U.S. than your regular high-street pub in the U.K. after closing hours

Funny. I spend a lot of time in UK and have never felt unsafe. I generally do not feel unsafe in US either but there are many more places here that makes me be alert about the surrounding.

As I said, I like shooting and I´m interested in the historical side of military weapons, but in Germany I wouldn´t carry a gun. Unless the situation detoriates significantly, I would feel no need to carry a weapon around in the places I visited or lived in so far in Europe. The same applies to the two places in the US I have been to: Dallas, Teas and San Jose, California.
The Philippines are a different matter. In some areas I feel safe (including a slum, but where I know a lot of the inhabitants personally), but there are other regions where I wouldn´t even go if I were armed to my teeth.

Jan


User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 65, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2926 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 64):
there are other regions where I wouldn´t even go if I were armed to my teeth.

I have never felt the need to be armed. There are areas I have avoided because it didn't feel right. I have seen areas in Europe, America, Asia and Africa. Guess I have not spent enough time in Australia because I have never felt it there  

The worst place I have experience is the highway between Cape Town and Somerset West. I will not drive it late at night, I stay in Cape Town instead. I don't think a gun would do me much good if I got stopped on that highway.

[Edited 2012-12-25 14:52:06]

User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 66, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2917 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 65):
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 64):
there are other regions where I wouldn´t even go if I were armed to my teeth.

I have never felt the need to be armed. There are areas I have avoided because it didn't feel right. I have seen areas in Europe, America, Asia and Africa. Guess I have not spent enough time in Australia because I have never felt it there

The region in the Philippines I mean is the province of Lanao del Sur and the adjoining Muslim provinces. The problem is not that the majority of the population of this region are Muslims, but because a kind of civil war there since decades between the government army and police and various seperatist guerilla organisations has led to certain degree of lawlessness. In the stalemate there mafia-like clans with private armies have taken over and also the distinction between political guerilla and bandits is fluent. Unfortunately this region borders right on the home province of my girlfriend (Lanao del Norte) . I know that if I would follow the road from Iligan City to Marawi City, after about 20-30 km it would become too dangerous for me, especially since my face makes me always recogniseable as a westerner (which means American for most uneducated Filipinos). This again makes me a potential kidnap target, either as a political hostage by the more radical minded (and Al Qaeda related) guerilla groups or for ransom.
There is some hope though: Most normal people there, both Muslims and Christians, are fed up of the fighting and unchecked crime (and the resulting poverty) and the largest (and more moderate) of the guerilla organisations, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), has recently signed a peace agreement with the government. They have given up their ideas of complete independence and the removal of Christians from what they consider ancestral Muslim land (one thing which collapsed the last peace agreement) and agree with an autonomy for a new entity called "Bangsa Moro". They have enough power to convince the smaller, more radical guerilla groups (and to force them to agree if necessary). From what I understand a lot of the peace negotiations were based on the Northern Irish peace deal and the idea about a far reaching autonomy was taken from the Basque province of Spain. Unlike before the rights of the ethnic and religious minorities (Christians and non-Muslim mountain tribes with traditional religions) in the newly proposed autonomous zone were also included in the treaty.

Jan


User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1342 posts, RR: 0
Reply 67, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2811 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 42):

I am glad you feel so compelled to tell me what to do.

I guess when the police tell plane and train watchers that they need to find a new hobby because they could be plotting a terrorist attack that it is ok because somebody doesn't like their hobby.

Completely different. My camera may look threatening and have mental connections people might feel threatened by, but those are mental connections only. A gun is created to propel lethal projectiles. There is a fundamental difference between gun ownership and any other type of recreational item that can be legally owned, and the sooner we recognize that, the better.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 43):
In Switzerland almost every family has a miltary rifle at home. Still rates of gun crime are much lower than in the US.

My understanding, and someone from Switzerland please correct me if I'm wrong, is that the Swiss rifles are actually pretty tightly controlled legally even though they're widely distributed. I'd like to hear more from someone, not to prove anyone's point one way or the other, but to see if Switzerland is actually a valid basis of comparison with the United States, because I've seen them mentioned a lot in arguments from both sides of the gun control fence.

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 50):
yyz717; I would submit that if the US banned guns, "...all guns." as per your suggestion, the US would have a far more serious gun crime statistic than it currently does now. regards...jack

I have to wonder what on earth gives you that impression.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Deaths per 100,000 people, in one year:
United States 10.2
Norway 1.78
United Kingdom 0.25
Japan 0.07

Mexico sits above us at 11.14, but you can only do so much about the amount of gun crime in your own country when the neighbor with which you share a border hundreds of miles long is doing almost nothing.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7893 posts, RR: 52
Reply 68, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2807 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 66):
Quoting Newark727 (Reply 67):
Deaths per 100,000 people, in one year:

To be fair, I wouldn't include suicides in that number... very misleading. We are still higher but it is reduced by ~2/3s



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3220 posts, RR: 12
Reply 69, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2808 times:

Newark727; as I stated before, if all guns were banned in the U.S., then only the "bad guys" would have them. That's position and I'm sticking with it. regards...jack


all best; jack
User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1342 posts, RR: 0
Reply 70, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2800 times:

Quoting cptkrell (Reply 69):
Newark727; as I stated before, if all guns were banned in the U.S., then only the "bad guys" would have them. That's position and I'm sticking with it. regards...jack

That's almost besides the point. Japan and the U.K. have way fewer guns than the United States does; presumably only the "bad guys" have them there also. And look how many fewer people are being killed by guns there. Banning more guns would not increase the amount of people they kill. What you're worried about is who would have guns afterward, and I find that to be a difficult thing to get very worked up about given how easy it is to get a gun, and thus how likely it is that people intending to commit crimes already have one, in the current legal setting.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 68):
To be fair, I wouldn't include suicides in that number... very misleading. We are still higher but it is reduced by ~2/3s

To be honest I'm not sure that it actually is. You have to consider the relative ease and perceived pain/duration of different suicide methods, too. Speaking as someone who was in a very bad way with regard to depression all too recently, one thing I really did consider was how easy it might be if I owned a handgun.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8492 posts, RR: 2
Reply 71, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2778 times:

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 70):
one thing I really did consider was how easy it might be if I owned a handgun.

Definitely the task of killing people (or self) is made easier or harder depending on exactly what tools for killing people are easily available. I don't think any reasonable person could disagree with that.

From a public policy standpoint, we have to ask what kinds of weapons have a beneficial use in the USA. Hunting rifles, maybe. High power rifles for hunting people on a large scale in a shopping mall, I question that.


User currently offlinecptkrell From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3220 posts, RR: 12
Reply 72, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2769 times:

Newark727; if as you say (reply70) "What you're (me) worried about is who would have guns afterward, and I find that a difficult thing to get very worked up about given how easy it is to get a gun, and thus how likely it is that people intending to commit crimes already have one, in the current legal setting."

Hmmm...doesn't compute to me. You're advocating me giving up my legal, registered guns but not to worry about the criminals because they'll get, or have, guns anyway in the current legal setting. Sorry, I'll keep my guns as a responsible owner and let the cops take the guns away from the bad guys, but that ain't gonna happen in any foreseeable legal setting. Want new laws? Why not prosecute the bad guys with the laws we already have and leave the responsible owners alone. Regards...jack



all best; jack
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 73, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2759 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 71):
Hunting rifles, maybe. High power rifles for hunting people on a large scale in a shopping mall, I question that.

Hunting rifles (except for small game and vermin) are more powerful than military assault rifles. They shoot a much stronger, larger (and heavier) round.
The reason military assault rifles were developed comes from the experiences of WW2, where all nations used rifles to fire rounds very similar to modern hunting rifles (in the 6 - 8 mm calibre range). In fact many WW2 rifles and their ammunition are still in use as hunting rifles, e.g. the German 7.92 mm Mauser, the British .303 Lee Enfield, Russian Mosin Nagant in 7.62 (with an incredible powerful cartridge) and the American 30 06 used in both the Garand M1 rifle and the older Springfield (also the equivalent of 7.62 mm). For a good hunter the goal is to kill the game with the first shot to prevent the animal from suffering. So the round has to do ma certain amount of damage. Since the hunter usually can´t get too close to his game, the bullet has to fly a long distance and to be accurate. This means preferably a high speed, flat trajectory.
The result is that a hunting rifle is essentially a WW2 military rifle, which is good for distances of up to 1 km effective range (the range where you can still be sure to hit what you aim at, in fact the bullet can fly a LOT further, up to 3 km).
This also means that a hunting rifle with an optical sight (a scope) is an effective sniper rifle.
During WW2 it was discovered that most fights didn´t happen at ranges of a kilometre, but instead at ranges of 200-300 metres, for which these "battle rifles" are tremendously overpowered.
Since both the rifle and the ammunition are heavy and an infantry soldier has to carry everything on his back, the weight limited the amount of ammunition he could take with him. Also these high powered battle rifles produce a very loud bang and recoil, so it is difficult to train recruits to use them. Additionally such a rifle cannot be fired in full auto because it will become uncontrollable.
Based on experiments the Germans and the Soviets did during the late stages of WW2 using smaller, less powerful cartridges in smaller and lighter rifles most countries from the 1950s on started to develop a new type of weapons called the "Assault rifle". They use less powerfull ammunition than the old battle rifles, but are lighter and more compact. They also include a full auto option to be used for surpressive fire (keeping the enemy´s heads down while the other squad sneaks in to attack) or to defend against the storming of one´s own position (in German Sturmabwehrschiessen, I don´t know the English term). The neither have the range nor the stopping (and killing) power of the old battle rifles, but allow the soldiers to be trained faster and to carry more ammunition with them.

Effectively a hunting rifle can easily double as a sniper rifle, both in range and accuracy, just as the WW2 equivalents did.

Jan


User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7308 posts, RR: 5
Reply 74, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2747 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 62):

I felt unsafe in Amsterdam at night this past summer. I was worried about criminals with guns/knives and myself not carrying one. I don't fell like that in Detroit, where European tourists might feel unsafe.

Where were walking around, Amsterdam is a very nice safe place to wander around at any time of day or night, I think you are just saying this for effect.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5602 posts, RR: 6
Reply 75, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2748 times:

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 49):
Seriously, the US needs to ban guns, all guns.

Seriously, it's never going to happen, ever.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 73):
or to defend against the storming of one´s own position (in German Sturmabwehrschiessen, I don´t know the English term).

The term in English is "being overrun".



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7893 posts, RR: 52
Reply 76, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2733 times:

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 70):
To be honest I'm not sure that it actually is. You have to consider the relative ease and perceived pain/duration of different suicide methods, too. Speaking as someone who was in a very bad way with regard to depression all too recently, one thing I really did consider was how easy it might be if I owned a handgun.

That is a strange reason to argue against guns, but if you feel that way, I respect it. I still think it's misleading when it's referred to as "gun violence..." I guess technically it is, but most people think it refers to homicides and shoot outs. While unfortunate, I don't see this as a reason to ban weapons... although I would say ban firearms from anyone feeling suicidal



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8840 posts, RR: 24
Reply 77, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2713 times:

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 54):

but what about the other 20,000 odd thousand deaths caused by guns in the US which isn't related to criminal activity with illegal weapons? Or don't those deaths count?

Not counting the suicides, There are about 12,000 deaths that you are talking about. There are around 300 million guns in the US, so that's 1 death per 25,000 guns per year.

By comparison, there are about 260 million cars, and 33,000, or about 1 death per 8,000 cars per year. Many of these deaths are caused intentionally (such as death by drunk drivers, which I consider to be no different than murder).

So how about banning cars before banning guns. They are much more dangerous.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 78, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2665 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 77):
So how about banning cars before banning guns. They are much more dangerous.

How about honest use of statistics.


User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8840 posts, RR: 24
Reply 79, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2660 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 78):
How about honest use of statistics.

How was it dishonest?



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21571 posts, RR: 55
Reply 80, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2649 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 77):
By comparison, there are about 260 million cars, and 33,000, or about 1 death per 8,000 cars per year. Many of these deaths are caused intentionally (such as death by drunk drivers, which I consider to be no different than murder).

As idiotic is drunk driving is, you can't compare it to someone pointing a gun at someone else and intentionally pulling the trigger. I doubt very many people drive drunk because they want to kill someone.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinejetmech From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2695 posts, RR: 53
Reply 81, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2633 times:

Quoting luv2fly (Thread starter):

What a sad situation. Apparently, one of those murdered was only 19 years old. I wonder what the NRA types have to say about this? More guns I suppose. Mandate firearms for teachers, firemen, doctors, nurses....hell, why not have trained NRA snipers situated in towers for every square mile of land in the US to protect everyone?

This situation illustrates the lack of logic that goes with the more guns argument, for many of these incidents are ambush situations. The only way more guns could have worked for these firefighters is if they assumed an ambush before hand and carried out a thorough sweep of the area before they attended to the fire.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 39):
I really think it is funny that people think its ok remove a constitution right because it gets outdated; when in another 50 years it will be another outdated right and so on until there are none left. Some people will give up everything for total security.

A certain right become outdated yet you still don't think it is a good idea to even modify it? Why does the removal of one right automatically mean that others must follow? The whole pro-gun side of the argument seems to be based on ridiculous absolutes.

I hardly ever see supporters of gun control advocate anything that is absolute, yet anything they do suggest always gets howled down by the pro-gun side??? If you need to be armed at all times to feel secure, exactly how free are you in the first place???

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 70):
That's almost besides the point. Japan and the U.K. have way fewer guns than the United States does; presumably only the "bad guys" have them there also.

Exactly! And from what we have seen, most gun massacres are not committed by habitual "bad guys,” but ordinary "law abiding" citizens who snap in the heat of the moment.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 77):
So how about banning cars before banning guns. They are much more dangerous.

I always ask the following question in gun debates, and I repeat it here again because I still haven’t got anything like a reasonable answer from the pro-gun side;

"Motorised vehicles provide a widespread beneficial utility to society that far outweighs any deaths associated with them. What is the equivalent utility provided by firearms that comes anywhere near to justifying the deaths caused by them?

About the only people I can think of who rely more on firearms on a daily basis are law enforcement types, professional hunters and maybe professional shooting athletes.

Regards, JetMech



JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1342 posts, RR: 0
Reply 82, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2622 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 76):
That is a strange reason to argue against guns, but if you feel that way, I respect it. I still think it's misleading when it's referred to as "gun violence..." I guess technically it is, but most people think it refers to homicides and shoot outs. While unfortunate, I don't see this as a reason to ban weapons... although I would say ban firearms from anyone feeling suicidal

That's not really what I was arguing there; you were contesting the number of gun deaths because of the suicide statistic but I feel that it's a valid thing to mention and include, even if it's not a direct basis for policy decisions.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 83, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2616 times:

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 70):
Japan and the U.K. have way fewer guns than the United States does; presumably only the "bad guys" have them there also. And look how many fewer people are being killed by guns there.

The UK also has a huge problem with violent crime per capita though, similar to the US.

You simply cannot bring east Asian societies, and especially Japan into this kind of discussion for comparison. There are murders everywhere to be sure, but the very foundation of society and one's sense of self is too different from what we know to adequately compare. We operate on a guilt mentality whereas they operate on a shame mentality. It's basically apples and oranges. If western people had social senses like meiwaku (self policing for inconveniencing others) or wa (maintaining group harmony over individual) then there would be a basis for comparison.

Quoting jetmech (Reply 81):
Exactly! And from what we have seen, most gun massacres are not committed by habitual "bad guys,” but ordinary "law abiding" citizens who snap in the heat of the moment.

Perhaps you're right in reference to massacres. But the vast majority of gun crimes are committed on behalf of the urban drug trade. That is what inflates the numbers more than anything else.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently onlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8840 posts, RR: 24
Reply 84, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2616 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 80):
As idiotic is drunk driving is, you can't compare it to someone pointing a gun at someone else and intentionally pulling the trigger. I doubt very many people drive drunk because they want to kill someone.

They get behind the wheel tipsy knowing full well the risks - drunk driving is hardly an unknown issue. It is no better than playing Russian Roulette, alternatively pointing the gun at yourself and at others.

Quoting jetmech (Reply 81):
I always ask the following question in gun debates, and I repeat it here again because I still haven’t got anything like a reasonable answer from the pro-gun side;

"Motorised vehicles provide a widespread beneficial utility to society that far outweighs any deaths associated with them. What is the equivalent utility provided by firearms that comes anywhere near to justifying the deaths caused by them?


"Armed people are free. No state can control those who have the machinery and the will to resist, no mob can take their liberty and property. And no 220-pound thug can threaten the well-being or dignity of a 110-pound woman who has two pounds of iron to even things out… People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for rule by brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically right."

– L. Neil Smith (from The Probability Broach)

"God made man, but Samuel Colt made them equal,"

– Unknown



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinekiwirob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7308 posts, RR: 5
Reply 85, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2613 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 77):
So how about banning cars before banning guns. They are much more dangerous.

I think to the average American a car is far more important than a gun, if it was a choice between cars and guns which do you think would win out?


User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6187 posts, RR: 30
Reply 86, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2611 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting falstaff (Reply 62):
I felt unsafe in Amsterdam at night this past summer.
Quoting kiwirob (Reply 74):
Where were walking around, Amsterdam is a very nice safe place to wander around at any time of day or night, I think you are just saying this for effect.

I´m sorry Kiwirob, but falstaff is right. The only time I´ve ever been mugged was in Amsterdam. By a huge dutch, drunk guy with a pretty big knife. Fortunately I was not carrying much, but I did hand him a couple of hundred USD and my camera. It was not a pleasant experience. I´m still waiting to hear from the Dutch police...

Of course, that does not mean that in my future travels, I won´t go if I don´t have a 45 caliber gun. I´ve spent months in Nicaragua without ever having any trouble.



MGGS
User currently offlineJetmech From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2695 posts, RR: 53
Reply 87, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2601 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 84):

I can fully empathise with the sentiments expressed by L. N. Smith, but really, it still doesn't answer my question. An adverse situation involving a 110 lb woman and a 220 lb man may possibly be equalized by the lady being armed but there is no guarantee.

How often would the average woman need to use a gun to defend herself? Thankfully, I’d say it would be rare. How often would a woman need to utilize some form of motorised transport to facilitate the on goings of her life? Pretty much every day and if not that, far more often that she would have a need to rely on a firearm.

Regards, JetMech



JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 88, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2566 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 79):
How was it dishonest?

Because you are directly comparing data that isn't equal. In practice you're saying that US defense spending should be equal to Andorra's since they are both countries. The data behind the numbers is important.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 83):
The UK also has a huge problem with violent crime per capita though, similar to the US.

But despite the huge violent crime per capita they have far less murders.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 83):
But the vast majority of gun crimes are committed on behalf of the urban drug trade.

I would not be surprised to see urban drug trade is up there but I have never seen an authoritative report. Do you have a source?


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6606 posts, RR: 24
Reply 89, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2560 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 84):
No state can control those who have the machinery and the will to resist

Except this is no longer true in the United States. We the People have chosen to equip our government with a military that is so powerful that it could easily overpower its own citizens. The argument for having guns as a way to keep our government in check no longer works.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 79):
How was it dishonest?

Because you know full well that most car deaths are purely accidental in nature, while most gun deaths are not. You also know that most people are exposed to cars at an almost daily rate, while exposure to guns is far less common (despite their large number), but far more deadly.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 58):
And yet I feel a lot safer going out at night in most areas in the U.S. than your regular high-street pub in the U.K. after closing hours

But's that just personal paranoia...not a rational belief that is supported by actual data.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 55):
As for the homicides, except for cases which cause a lot of uproar, like the recent massacres, which were committed by people with mental issues, I´m quite sure that most of them were committed by one criminal against another criminal in gang wars.

A common myth, but you'd be surprised by how many homicides are domestic in nature.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 37):
Such a nonchalant attitude regarding taking some people's rights away... sad

I think us gun owners should be for measures to keep gun ownership safer, but our rights, I don't care if it's someone else's cup or tea or not, are still our rights, and see them blatantly disregarded here...

Your rights are already impinged on. You aren't allowed to legally own nuclear weapons and RPG's which are both forms of arms. No one seems to complain about this infringement on rights. Our founding fathers definition of arms was clearly different than today's definition. I have no problem with people owning basic rifles and handguns (as our founding fathers intended), but any weapon beyond that is unnecessary for the civilian population.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 90, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2559 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 88):
I would not be surprised to see urban drug trade is up there but I have never seen an authoritative report. Do you have a source?

Based on CDC data from 2008 that tracks gun-source deaths including suicides and homicides, some reporters at The Atlantic mapped US metropolitan areas ranked by gun violence deaths:

http://cdn.theatlanticcities.com/img/upload/2012/12/01/gunmap.png

There is a table here adapted from the CDC data showing the city and metro rates of gun deaths per 100,000 people:

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/nei...12/geography-us-gun-violence/4171/

Given that central cities show a more or less 2:1 ratio in terms of gun-related death (and even moreso on the chart for homicides-only), it's not an extension of logic to blame most of it on the drug wars on inner city streets.

Interesting as well is the relationship between city unemployment and gun violence:



A good summary here:

http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/urba...ion-narrowing-the-gun-violence-map



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 91, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2545 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 90):
There is a table here adapted from the CDC data showing the city and metro rates of gun deaths per 100,000 people:

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/nei...12/geography-us-gun-violence/4171/

Given that central cities show a more or less 2:1 ratio in terms of gun-related death (and even moreso on the chart for homicides-only), it's not an extension of logic to blame most of it on the drug wars on inner city streets.

I'm sorry but I think that is a very dangerous conclusion. The source you quoted states there is no such coalition

"Our previous state-level analysis (here and here) found several key factors to be associated with gun deaths overall. With images of mentally deranged killers so prominent in the media, it is frequently assumed that gun violence is a product of mental illness or drug abuse. But we found no association between mental illness, stress, or illegal drug use and gun deaths at the state level."


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7893 posts, RR: 52
Reply 92, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2534 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 89):
Your rights are already impinged on. You aren't allowed to legally own nuclear weapons and RPG's which are both forms of arms. No one seems to complain about this infringement on rights. Our founding fathers definition of arms was clearly different than today's definition. I have no problem with people owning basic rifles and handguns (as our founding fathers intended), but any weapon beyond that is unnecessary for the civilian population.

I'm not going to pretend anything and cook up any argument like others have... yes, there is a "line" that needs to be drawn. You are right, you can't own nukes and the like*. And while that is technically that goes against our rights, some rights need to be curtailed, I agree. What I am arguing is a blanket ban on some of these items may be going too far. I'm trying to strip as little rights while maximizing safety. You know the law of diminishing returns, eventually, gun control will reach the point where it's only taking rights away and not saving anyone.

I've proposed a series of levels, higher ones requiring more checks and registration than the lower ones. Obviously, musket-like weapons will have almost no controls. Your assault rifles would be near the top... not burdened by tens of thousands of dollars, but only being able to be own if shown if competent, safe, have storage for it, etc.

Of course, I'm sure this compromise will see the light of day. It'll either be a ban or nothing will happen, that's my prediction

*Not to detract from the argument, just a little trivia, you can legally buy, own, and operate some crazy weapons. You can get anti-aircraft guns and I'm pretty sure you can legally buy RPGs. Just hard to get, rare, expensive, and regulated



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14011 posts, RR: 62
Reply 93, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2529 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 89):
Except this is no longer true in the United States. We the People have chosen to equip our government with a military that is so powerful that it could easily overpower its own citizens. The argument for having guns as a way to keep our government in check no longer works.

Where is the Airforce, Marine Corps and Navy of the Taliban? Where are their tanks? Where are their nukes? Still they are kicking NATO´s @rrse as they did the one of the Soviets. Ever heard of assymetrical warfare?

Jan


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6606 posts, RR: 24
Reply 94, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2502 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 93):
Where is the Airforce, Marine Corps and Navy of the Taliban? Where are their tanks? Where are their nukes? Still they are kicking NATO´s @rrse as they did the one of the Soviets.

Not comparable. The Taliban hide in caves and remote mountains. Most Americans live in traditional cities/towns that could easily be taken down. Few Americans have any training in asymmetrical warfare while the Taliban have a small army that trains specifically for that. The Taliban has better combat training than our National Guard, hence why they have had success.

I'd also add that the Taliban is far better equipped than your average gun owner. Few Americans are experts with RPG's or in IED development.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 92):
What I am arguing is a blanket ban on some of these items may be going too far.

But why does anyone need a semi-automatic weapon? Why does anyone need anything more than a basic pistol or rifle? For the civilian population, there's only two practical reasons to use a gun....hunting and self defense. Neither of those requires much more than a basic rifle or pistol.

I personally think our founding fathers would have been horrified to see the general population arming itself with such powerful weapons.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7893 posts, RR: 52
Reply 95, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2498 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 94):
But why does anyone need a semi-automatic weapon?

Sigh... I've said it many times... no one needs them. I've been saying over and over that the extreme majority use them safely, and yes, they are used in crime, which is a legitimate concern. But I don't see the need to take them away from everyone. It's an extreme over reaction, IMO, just as bad as doing nothing about it. Much good can be done without an outright ban on these weapons... just the mere mention of these bans works everyone up

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 94):
Not comparable.

I think "arming against tyranny or invasion" is a far fetched and conspiratorial reason, and I don't even bother arguing it. But I do think an insurgency would be very effective here, especially in the south. We have soooo many guns down here, short of flat out wiping cities, the south could never be occupied. But again, a retort is unnecessary since I don't support that line of thinking



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6606 posts, RR: 24
Reply 96, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2484 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 95):
just the mere mention of these bans works everyone up

But why does it work everyone up? Why does banning something that no one has any need for like semi-automatic weapons cause people to get worked up? Something doesn't add up here.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 95):
We have soooo many guns down here, short of flat out wiping cities, the south could never be occupied.

Except that most people in the South (and elsewhere) have no idea how to use their guns in a combat situation or how to fight in combat.

Not to mention that you wouldn't really even need to fight in the streets. A few strategic strikes on power grids, water supply, roads/bridges would quickly leave any insurgency totally impotent. This obviously doesn't work with the Taliban as they don't rely on modern infrastructure, but most Americans do.


User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 97, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2478 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 77):
So how about banning cars before banning guns. They are much more dangerous.
[/quote

Aint it the truth !

[quote=cmf,reply=78]How about honest use of statistics.

It sounded like a VERY "honest use" of statistics to me ! (Of course to a lib, NOTHING "makes sense" unless THEY said it..........)

Quoting Mir (Reply 80):
As idiotic is drunk driving is, you can't compare it to someone pointing a gun at someone else and intentionally pulling the trigger. I doubt very many people drive drunk because they want to kill someone.

Mir.......I would like to point something out to you; (for the 500th time) I don't know exactly what the membership of the NRA is right now, but I'll check; if you take the trouble to notice, (which is doubtful), you will be AMAZED to learn that NRA members NEVER "shoot people", unless (and until) those people truly "need" to be shot ! (such as when engaging in an armed robbery, etc.) People who view the world through rose colored glasses as you seem to, are attempting to destroy the ONE organization in this whole country that takes a common sense stand on gun ownership; the NRA's whole "stand"on guns is "training", "responsibility", knowledge of the law, etc. Yet very few (if any) criminals BELONG to the NRA. (I wonder why ? )

Again, I'm not positive about this, but I think it is highly unlikely that the fool that shot the firemen was an NRA member.
And I rather imagine that if you take the trouble to acquaint yourself with the facts surrounding the case, you will doubtless find out that he has displayed a pattern of deviant behavior over and over, but the PC afficianados among us have "pooh-poohed" doing anything about it, choosing of course, to merely blame it on "the guns" !

Quoting jetmech (Reply 81):
This situation illustrates the lack of logic that goes with the more guns argument, for many of these incidents are ambush situations. The only way more guns could have worked for these firefighters is if they assumed an ambush before hand and carried out a thorough sweep of the area before they attended to the fire.

Jetmech; Your username indicates to me that you probably "work on" jet aircraft and engines.......a profession that I normally associate with a high degree of intelligence and common sense; but your "country of origin" flag indicates to me that you doubtless reside in Australia, a country which I have never been to, which is known by science to have more species of venomous snakes as compared to non-venomous, than any other country (or continent) on earth. And for some obscure reason still unknown to me, it also seems to be a country which, (quite unlike the U.S.A.), has managed to lose many of it's former "freedoms", such as the RIGHT of it's citizens to "bear arms" and to protect themselves from violent people who ARE armed. Now, considering all of this, let me tell you what I would do if I were an Australian citizen; first of all, if, like many people, if I had a deathly fear of venomous snakes, I would either A. build myself a completely "snake proof" enclosure and STAY in it, or I would leave Australia and go live someplace where venomous snakes are not a big problem; (Antarctica come to mind)

B. If the "right" to bear arms bothered me, as much as it seems to bother MANY Australians, I would either, A. work tirelessly to "do away with" the idiot politicians that "relieved citizens" of their "rights" to begin with, and failing in that, I would probably MOVE to the U.S.A., where citizens STILL have a "few "rights" ! (thanks largely to organizations such as the NRA) (Thank you Wayne LaPierre ! )

And what I WOULDN'T do is.......I "wouldn't" lecture citizens of "other" countries, about THEIR "laws", pertaining to gun-ownership. (Adhering as it were to the old axiom, "when in Rome, do as the Romans do.)

While we are "communicating" here, allow me to tell you one other thing about Australia that I'M very familiar with, and that I'll be greatly surprised if YOU even know about; were you aware that Australia happens to have a VERY large population of EXTREMELY skilled amateur gem stone facetors? And that because of their, shall we say, "highly nationalistic" feelings relative to being "the BEST in the world", they created, (on their own), an "every other year" "competition" with the amateur facetors of the United States, to be known as "The World Australian-United States Faceting Competition". If you are aware of this, you will also be aware that, so far. the Aussies have NEVER lost ! (This, in spite of the fact that the Americans on the team selected to represent the U.S. are EVERY BIT AS "GOOD" as the Australians are ?) Were you aware of any of this ?

For anyone not being aware of this, and who will doubtless be wondering .........how do the Australians ALWAYS manage to win ? Here are a few "facts", (all of which can be easily verified) 1. The competition is ALWAYS held in Australia 2. The competitors from the U.S. ALWAYS have to send their gem stones that are entered to Australia, where, 3. they are ALWAYS judged by "other " Australians ! 4. The U.S. competitors ALWAYS have to fly to Australia for the "awards ceremony", (where the Australians ALWAYS win all of the Gold Medals !)

Does it seem that I may be intimating that the Aussies "cheat" ? I certainly hope not, as the Australians certainly DO have some extremely talented facetors ! But so does the U.S. ! And one of them just happens to be a very good friend of mine, and I have enjoyed many hours of looking at his work under a very high-dollar 20X binocular gem microscope. You can't hide imperfections, when viewed under 20X, with a high quality gem microscope. I should probably add, the judging for the actual competition is done with a simple, high quality, 10X hand held jewelers loupe, BY an Australian. But the Ausies ALWAYS keep right on winning, and they ALWAYS "balk" at coming to the U.S. to "compete" ! (Kinda like always having the Olympics in Moscow every four years !) (with ALL Russian judges, yet.)

Quoting kiwirob (Reply 85):
I think to the average American a car is far more important than a gun, if it was a choice between cars and guns which do you think would win out?

Rob: There IS no such thing as "an average American" ! ( or an "average German", an "average Norwegian", or even an "average" lunatic ), who, because of some ridiculous feelings of "inadequacy", "lack of self-esteem", or any other behavioral "defect", decides to start shooting people because of what ever perceived problem they happen to have.
( And yes, if I had to choose between giving up my Cube, and giving up my Glock, I would STILL be driving my Cube tomorrow ! (Hell, it's 10 miles to the nearest grocery store !) Incidentally.......even giving up the Glock wouldn't necessarily leave me "defenseless"; ( one thing about living to get married on your 80th birthday.......you have a lot of "tricks" up your sleeve by then ! ) ( a few of which you will only ever "find out about" if you attempt to cause me bodily harm.)

Of course cars are more "important" than guns are ! They're our main means of transportation ! But what does that fact have to do with the fact that there are STILL all of these violent, disturbed people running around "loose", wanting to KILL people ! You may choose to confront such a violent person with your smart phone, to "call the cops", who are ALWAYS 5, 10, or 30 minutes AWAY ! But I don't ! I choose to stand and defend myself; (and so far, I have been pretty fair at it !)

Quoting Jetmech (Reply 87):
How often would the average woman need to use a gun to defend herself? Thankfully, I’d say it would be rare. How often would a woman need to utilize some form of motorised transport to facilitate the on goings of her life? Pretty much every day and if not that, far more often that she would have a need to rely on a firearm.

The answer to your question of course is, completely UNKNOWN, to me, to you, or to the "average" woman, (of which as I've already mentioned, there is no such thing.) Let me answer by asking you this........have you EVER had your house burn down ? I HOPE the answer is "no", but if it isn't, and if you house ever HAS burned down.......I'll "bet" two things....I'll "bet" you now keep it fully insured, and I'll "bet" that you probably keep a fire extinguisher (or two) handy !
I'm 80 years old as of this past Sunday; I have only been "set upon" and robbed at gun point, (and fired at I might add) exactly ONE time in all of those 80 years ! And as far as I know, the "perps" are still breathing; if there is EVER a "reoccurrence", it's a VERY good chance that the next "perp" (or "perps") won't be so fortunate. (if you get my drift)

Now.....that's how I feel about the matter; there are several tens of millions of armed Americans that "feel" exactly as I do. So ANY attempt to "disarm" all of us will result in several tens of millions of MORE "violent armed people" !

Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2853 posts, RR: 8
Reply 98, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2462 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
And what I WOULDN'T do is.......I "wouldn't" lecture citizens of "other" countries, about THEIR "laws", pertaining to gun-ownership. (Adhering as it were to the old axiom, "when in Rome, do as the Romans do.)

So what are you doing with this rant....?

Lecturing, no ?

BTW.

The European honey bee causes more deaths in Australia every year than snakes do !

Like to see you use a gun on a bee

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
So ANY attempt to "disarm" all of us will result in several tens of millions of MORE "violent armed people" !

How terrifying....  



Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 99, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2443 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
It sounded like a VERY "honest use" of statistics to me

I'm sure it does to you. But somehow you don't think it is reasonable to compare US to other countries. Despite that being much more similar data.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 100, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2430 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 91):
"Our previous state-level analysis (here and here) found several key factors to be associated with gun deaths overall. With images of mentally deranged killers so prominent in the media, it is frequently assumed that gun violence is a product of mental illness or drug abuse. But we found no association between mental illness, stress, or illegal drug use and gun deaths at the state level."

That's the conclusion at the *state* level. The conclusions at the city level tell us most of what any reasonable person needs to know about the situation. How do you explain that in a state with some of the most strict gun control laws (California) there are two major cities at opposite ends of the spectrum in the CDC data in the same metropolitan area?? Both Oakland and San Jose are in the San Francisco metropolitan area, and Oakland ranks near the top in gun-related homicide, while San Jose ranks near the very bottom among major US cities. What could possibly explain this?? The two cities are just 30 miles apart! The area is rather well off economically compared to many other parts of the US, but Oakland has historically struggled with gang and drug violence since the military and shipbuilding jobs that were the backbone of the city's employment pool evaporated in the mid-1960s.

The issue is not even drug use per se as termed in the report.. It's the fact that the drug trade is directly correlated with depressed communities. New Orleans, Detroit, Baltimore, St. Louis, Las Vegas, Miami...tell me, what do all of these central cities have in common??

Quoting cmf (Reply 91):
I'm sorry but I think that is a very dangerous conclusion.

See, it's impossible to even have this discussion because the knee jerk reaction is that it has racial overtones. It doesn't matter to me if the ethnography concerned is black, latino, whatever! The point is, the illegal status of drugs and huge black market connected to them obviously fuel the majority of gun-related homicide in the America - and that provides a huge chunk of the statistics people bandy about regarding how many Americans are killed in shootings annually. That will never change until something is done to alter the situation.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 101, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2411 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 100):
See, it's impossible to even have this discussion because the knee jerk reaction is that it has racial overtones.

Racial???

Dangerous because there is nothing in the report supporting the drug connection. It is an element you added by yourself.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21571 posts, RR: 55
Reply 102, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2410 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
And I rather imagine that if you take the trouble to acquaint yourself with the facts surrounding the case, you will doubtless find out that he has displayed a pattern of deviant behavior over and over, but the PC afficianados among us have "pooh-poohed" doing anything about it, choosing of course, to merely blame it on "the guns" !

Show me where I blamed this one on the gun. I blame it on the fact that this guy, with a criminal record, was able to get a gun. But in order to stop that, you need a system that makes it difficult for him to buy a gun legally (background checks for everyone, regardless of who they buy their weapon from), and one that makes it possible for the government to go after those who would sell him a gun illegally (a mandatory registration program). Guess which group has come out in strong opposition to both of those measures? Yup, the good old NRA, supporting the right of everyone to have a gun, including criminals.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7893 posts, RR: 52
Reply 103, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2410 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 96):
But why does it work everyone up? Why does banning something that no one has any need for like semi-automatic weapons cause people to get worked up? Something doesn't add up here.

Well I really don't know what to tell ya. You either get it or you don't. People who very much enjoy shooting and never in a million years would use their semi autos violently may now not be able to use them recreationally or for fun. Maybe it's not your cup of tea, but you can see why it can upset people? If you can't see that, I've got nothing for you, sorry.

Now I'm kinda breaking from the ranks and trying to find a compromise. I know you could care less about anyone having these guns because you don't like them, but I do, a lot, it's a fun hobby of mine, and it sucks seeing a few maniacs every year ruin it for all of us. I know something needs to be done, but, IMO, a total ban goes too far and is very unnecessary.

Try to see it from my end

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 96):
Except that most people in the South (and elsewhere) have no idea how to use their guns in a combat situation or how to fight in combat.

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I've just seen a common trend: pissed off people + weapons = insurgency. I fail to see why America would be any different, your stereotypical gun nut is more likely to be out in the woods, good at hunting, and trust me, do tactical crap just for fun.

If we got invaded, you'd see me out in the woods fighting invaders until I died or they went away. BUT... I don't think that'll happen in a 1000 years  



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 104, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2405 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 101):
Dangerous because there is nothing in the report supporting the drug connection. It is an element you added by yourself.

Empirically, inner city crime is largely drug-related. I didn't add it by myself. What do you think all major American cities' police departments have anti-gang and anti-drug task forces for?!

Is this just intentional obfuscation or what?



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinejetmech From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2695 posts, RR: 53
Reply 105, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2385 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
And for some obscure reason still unknown to me, it also seems to be a country which, (quite unlike the U.S.A.), has managed to lose many of it's former "freedoms", such as the RIGHT of it's citizens to "bear arms" and to protect themselves from violent people who ARE armed.

I'll definitely do more reading on the subject, but from what I have looked at so far, the right to bear arms has never been a guaranteed freedom in Australia. There is no bill of rights granted to the nation as a whole as you have in the US, but apparently, some individual states do have their own bills of rights. Gun laws in Australia did become more restrictive in the wake of the Port Arthur massacre, but they were never as liberal and free as those in the US to begin with.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
Now, considering all of this, let me tell you what I would do if I were an Australian citizen; first of all, if, like many people, if I had a deathly fear of venomous snakes, I would either A. build myself a completely "snake proof" enclosure and STAY in it, or I would leave Australia and go live someplace where venomous snakes are not a big problem; (Antarctica come to mind)

I’m not really sure of the point you are trying to make here, but if you really felt the need to build a snake proof enclosure in which to live you would be acting in a manner that is excessively paranoid and very irrational. Although there is much deadly fauna in Australia, the number of deaths caused by such creatures is extremely low. A completely snake proof enclosure may give you piece of mind, but it would also represent a hindrance that far outweighs the risk. It may be my specific location, but I can’t recall the last time I saw a snake.

I myself generally dislike spiders. I really hate Huntsmans which regularly get inside my house but I have no fear at all of Redbacks. The irrational part is that Redbacks are venomous whilst Huntsmans are completely harmless. Redbacks are small, hairless and have a very elegant appearance, whilst Huntsmans are large, hairy and have no grace or elegance to speak of whatsoever. So in fact, my fear should actually be the opposite for it is the Redback that can actually kill me, not the Huntsman.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
And what I WOULDN'T do is.......I "wouldn't" lecture citizens of "other" countries, about THEIR "laws", pertaining to gun-ownership. (Adhering as it were to the old axiom, "when in Rome, do as the Romans do.)

Surely you must understand that I have no influence whatsoever on the gun laws or lack thereof in the US? This is an internet discussion only, nothing more or less. What I do find most galling however, is the notion that I cannot have a say in the discussion, or that I am somehow “lecturing” those in the US, especially given the fact that since WW2, it is your country more than any other that has exported the most influence over others (some of it forcefully)!

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
Does it seem that I may be intimating that the Aussies "cheat" ? I certainly hope not, as the Australians certainly DO have some extremely talented facetors !

I’m not too sure how Gemstone cutting competitions fits into this thread, but if what you say is true, we could safely say that the competition is heavily biased in favour of Australia.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
I have only been "set upon" and robbed at gun point, (and fired at I might add) exactly ONE time in all of those 80 years ! And as far as I know, the "perps" are still breathing; if there is EVER a "reoccurrence", it's a VERY good chance that the next "perp" (or "perps") won't be so fortunate. (if you get my drift)

This is the exact problem! The excessive number of firearms in circulation in the US is a self-re-enforcing phenomenon. Liberalising gun laws in order to allow “law abiding” citizens to defend themselves also makes it easier for less desirable people to own guns, which then leads to “law abiding” citizens wanting more powerful weaponry, which then in turn makes it easier for less desirable people to gas access to the same firearms ad infinitum.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 97):
Now.....that's how I feel about the matter; there are several tens of millions of armed Americans that "feel" exactly as I do. So ANY attempt to "disarm" all of us will result in several tens of millions of MORE "violent armed people" !

If you have read my comments in previous gun debates, you will see that I have never suggested such a thing. One thing I have suggested is that you think seriously about limiting the number of new firearms that continue to be manufactured.

Regards, JetMech



JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 106, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2375 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 104):
Empirically, inner city crime is largely drug-related. I didn't add it by myself. What do you think all major American cities' police departments have anti-gang and anti-drug task forces for?!

Please show me where in the report they make the connection because all I could find stated the opposite, as you saw in the text I quoted.

You're statement about empirically inner city crime is drug related and police departments have ant-gang and anti-drug task forces doesn't prove anything about how big part of gun crime is related to them.

Again, I'm not saying you're wrong. I am saying that the data provided up till now does not prove it. And again, I would love to see a report breaking down how guns are used.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 107, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2365 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 106):
Please show me where in the report they make the connection because all I could find stated the opposite, as you saw in the text I quoted.
Based on the CDC data, almost 60 percent of U.S. firearm homicides occur in the 62 cities of the country’s 50 largest metros. However, only 27 percent of suicides do. In 2006, firearm suicides were a primarily suburban (and non-central city) phenomenon, which is likely weighing down the relationship between firearm deaths and the city unemployment rate. Firearm homicides and the city unemployment rate are highly correlated.

http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/urba...ion-narrowing-the-gun-violence-map

and from the From the Department of Justice, a bit dated but highly relevant:

http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/gun_violence/sect01.html



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6606 posts, RR: 24
Reply 108, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2351 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 103):
Maybe it's not your cup of tea, but you can see why it can upset people?

I can see why it would upset people to lose their hobby, but I think people need to grow up and realize some hobbies are fundamentally unhealthy.

The fact that people get enjoyment in firing off semi-automatic weapons is one of the reasons the U.S. has such a problem with gun crimes. Sure, most of the people with semi-autos are perfectly law-abiding citizens. But law abiding as they may be, they feed into a culture where guns are viewed as "toys" to play and trade like baseball cards. Even worse, it feeds into the culture where owning a gun is "bad ass" and a macho power trip. Again, not a big problem for most law-abiding citizens, but this culture gets passed down to those who are not so law abiding, not so bright and the mentally ill.

The culture of worshipping guns needs to change...or shootings like this will keep happening at a much higher rate than the rest of the 1st world. Ironically, this culture comes from both the far right and far left which maybe explains why we have such a problem. The far left entertainment/media empire glamorize weapons in TV, music, movies and video games. Meanwhile, the far right (read NRA) place guns on a near biblical pedestal and pushes an agenda where more guns solves all problems.


User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 109, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 2338 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 107):
http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/urba...ion-narrowing-the-gun-violence-map

and from the From the Department of Justice, a bit dated but highly relevant:

http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/gun_violen....html

The first report and the text you quoted from it state nothing about how much is drug related. You use that it happens in a city as proof it is drug related without showing any such connection, i.e. a conclusion without support.

The second report is a lot better stating "The drug market is a major contributor to the Nation's homicide rate." Major doesn't mean most but it doesn't exclude it and the data is old so things may have changed.

As it stands we still do not have support for that most of it is related to drug wars.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 110, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 2335 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 109):
You use that it happens in a city as proof it is drug related without showing any such connection, i.e. a conclusion without support.

Yeah OK, young males under 25 in inner city America are shooting each other for sh*ts and giggles, got it.      



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 111, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 2320 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 110):
Yeah OK, young males under 25 in inner city America are shooting each other for sh*ts and giggles, got it.      

Classy, if it isn't due to drugs it must be for sh*ts and giggles...

Provide some statistics to support your claim that most are related to drugs instead.

Found http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/180/drgcrime.html
"Drug related homicides: 1987: 4.9%; 1994: 5.6%; 2000: 4.4%"

Hard to conclude most based on this.

[Edited 2012-12-28 08:21:58]

User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8492 posts, RR: 2
Reply 112, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 2307 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 90):
Interesting as well is the relationship between city unemployment and gun violence:

Cities are complex and involve inflows and outflows of people (_different_ kinds of people).

A city with gun violence is likely a place from which affluent jobholders are going to move away.

A city with major unemployment problems is likely going to have more poverty, which means more unhappy, idle men looking for trouble.

Conceivably, guns allow people to kill each other more easily, leading to the flight of affluent people from cities. Gun violence may cause unemployment, rather than the other way around. Gun use is never a sign of something good.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7893 posts, RR: 52
Reply 113, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 2294 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 108):
The fact that people get enjoyment in firing off semi-automatic weapons is one of the reasons the U.S. has such a problem with gun crimes. Sure, most of the people with semi-autos are perfectly law-abiding citizens. But law abiding as they may be, they feed into a culture where guns are viewed as "toys" to play and trade like baseball cards. Even worse, it feeds into the culture where owning a gun is "bad ass" and a macho power trip. Again, not a big problem for most law-abiding citizens, but this culture gets passed down to those who are not so law abiding, not so bright and the mentally ill.

Eh, I don't really buy it. Reminds me of the "violent video games makes people violent" line. I see it in gang life but I think it that regard, the gangs are the problem, the firearms just fuel it



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 114, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 2268 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 111):
Found http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/180/drgcrime.html
"Drug related homicides: 1987: 4.9%; 1994: 5.6%; 2000: 4.4%"

Hard to conclude most based on this.

That entire report is a treatise focused on drug users and why they are not to blame for all of society's ills. There is plenty of data on drug users and their relationship to petty and property crimes. What there is not a lot of data on is the drug trade itself, largely due to the unregulated nature of the business, high liquidity of cash flow, and gang-oriented management structure.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 112):
A city with major unemployment problems is likely going to have more poverty, which means more unhappy, idle men looking for trouble.

Conceivably, guns allow people to kill each other more easily, leading to the flight of affluent people from cities. Gun violence may cause unemployment, rather than the other way around. Gun use is never a sign of something good.

Perhaps so, but historical record is helpful here. The only thing most US cities with serious gun violence problems have in common (Las Vegas being a significant outlier) is the loss of manufacturing labor since the 1960s.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 115, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 2255 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 114):
What there is not a lot of data on is the drug trade itself, largely due to the unregulated nature of the business, high liquidity of cash flow, and gang-oriented management structure.

So we are back to no data. Thus making conclusions is, dangerous.


User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 116, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 2252 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 102):
Guess which group has come out in strong opposition to both of those measures? Yup, the good old NRA, supporting the right of everyone to have a gun, including criminals.

-Mir

Mir, you may know a lot about airplanes, but you sure don't know ANYTHING about the NRA !

Quoting Mir (Reply 102):
Show me where I blamed this one on the gun.

I'll be happy to ! Right after you show me ANYTHING that indicates that the NRA "supports" criminals having guns ! (And don't worry, I won't be holding my breath...........).

You may not like the NRA, and I'm sure you are "against" what the NRA is ""for", but when you make ridiculous statements like saying the NRA "supports the "rights" of criminals to have guns..........you just lost all credibility.

I have no idea how this guy who murdered the fireman got his gun, but I can tell you one thing without even knowing the story......the NRA damn sure didn't "support" him getting it ! I can also tell you something else while we're on the subject; this guy is a criminal ! And criminals will ALWAYS get guns ! gun laws or no gun laws; which is exactly why law-abiding citizens have a right to HAVE guns.

Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 117, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 2241 times:

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 98):
So what are you doing with this rant....?

So.........anything that you don't agree with automatically becomes a "rant", eh ? But to answer your question Mr. "Commodore"............I'm stating MY opinion, on a public forum, which just happens to be concerning laws and practices in MY country, which I think I have every right to do; Is that OK with you ?

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 98):
The European honey bee causes more deaths in Australia every year than snakes do !

You know what ? If that statement wasn't so completely ridiculous, it would be humorous ! Apparently you are completely unfamiliar with the insect population in the U.S. We have European honeybees, South American "killer" honeybees, and just plain old "Indiana" honeybees, and as someone who plants a lot of flowers every year, I can tell you that we have ALL of those honeybees, plus about 4 different species of bumble bees, about 29 different species of wasps, and over the course of a summer, I have probably been stung by every one of them at one time or another, and I'm not dead yet !
I'm aware of the fact that certain individuals are allergic to bee venom, and in VERY rare cases, a bee sting does kill someone occasionally, but to say that honeybees kill more people per year than all of the venomous snakes indigenous to Australia is a little ridiculous ! ( However, I don't have the latest "statistics" at hand right at this moment, so I won't belabor the point. )

On the other hand, we don't have any Australian brown snakes, any tiger snakes, any taipans, any funnel web spiders, or any salt water crocodiles;

And BTW.........I NEVER kill bees of ANY species; even when they sting me........they're ALL pollinators, and we need every one of them ! The ONLY member of the bee family that I DO kill, is the great big carpenter bees (that look almost exactly like bumble bees), and even then, it's only because they chew great big half inch diameter holes all over my front porch; but I DON'T use my Glock to kill them........I find that a badminton racquet does a much better job ! ( And it's much easier on my woodwork !)

Charley

Like to see you use a gun on a bee



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 118, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 2230 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 115):
So we are back to no data. Thus making conclusions is, dangerous.

In the absence of object data it is often necessary to treat other related information inferentially. You may require a direct relationship in terms of data between inner city poverty, gun violence, and the illegal drug trade - criminologists and law enforcement do not. They know from experience.

The numbers on where gun violence happens in America and its heavy concentration in city propers being what they are, it is by no means a dangerous conclusion to make.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21571 posts, RR: 55
Reply 119, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2211 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 116):
Right after you show me ANYTHING that indicates that the NRA "supports" criminals having guns !

Perhaps "support" was too strong a word. They've put a lot of effort into making it hard to stop criminals from getting guns, though, so I'll revise my statement to say that the NRA condones criminals getting guns.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 120, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2206 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 118):
The numbers on where gun violence happens in America and its heavy concentration in city propers being what they are, it is by no means a dangerous conclusion to make.

Without data there is only an assumption.

Assume = Ass + u + me


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 121, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2198 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 120):
Assume = Ass + u + me

Oh for crying out loud. Assumptions have to be made before one even knows where to start looking for the data to investigate. A hypothesis is essentially an educated assumption based on existing observation.

A lot of very bright minds have been unable to collect good data on the inner workings of the drug trade for several decades now - I wonder why that might be?



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 122, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2196 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 121):
Oh for crying out loud.

Cry all you want. Without data all you have is a theory you like.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 123, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2191 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 122):
Without data all you have is a theory you like.

The same can be said of hoping for total gun control that will magically solve everything. The root of the problem is still there.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 124, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2188 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 123):
The same can be said of hoping for total gun control that will magically solve everything. The root of the problem is still there

More unsupported conclusions.


User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 125, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 2189 times:

Quoting jetmech (Reply 105):
I’m not really sure of the point you are trying to make here, but if you really felt the need to build a snake proof enclosure in which to live you would be acting in a manner that is excessively paranoid and very irrational. Although there is much deadly fauna in Australia, the number of deaths caused by such creatures is extremely low. A completely snake proof enclosure may give you piece of mind, but it would also represent a hindrance that far outweighs the risk. It may be my specific location, but I can’t recall the last time I saw a snake.

I was just making a point; when I said "if i was afraid of snakes.........But I'm NOT ! Look; when I was much younger, I was intensely interested in reptiles; from all over the world; I've handled all linds of snakes, all of my life, from rattlesnakes and copperhead from the U.S. to a friends 18ft Burmese Python, to another friend's 12 ft King Cobra from Burma; I DON'T "fear" snakes because I have a very good understanding of them; I was merely pointing out that, because of my interest in reptiles and other exotic animals, I'm very familiar with the fauna of Australia, even though I have never been there.

Quoting jetmech (Reply 105):
Surely you must understand that I have no influence whatsoever on the gun laws or lack thereof in the US? This is an internet discussion only, nothing more or less. What I do find most galling however, is the notion that I cannot have a say in the discussion, or that I am somehow “lecturing” those in the US, especially given the fact that since WW2, it is your country more than any other that has exported the most influence over others (some of it forcefully)!

The last paragraph...........You're right ! We are discussing a very serious subject here; and you DO have every right to have a say in the discussion; I really didn't wish to offend you, and I do apologize if I have.


[quote=jetmech,reply=105]This is the exact problem! The excessive number of firearms in circulation in the US is a self-re-enforcing phenomenon. Liberalising gun laws in order to allow “law abiding” citizens to defend themselves also makes it easier for less desirable people to own guns, which then leads to “law abiding” citizens wanting more powerful weaponry, which then in turn makes it easier for less desirable people to gas access to the same firearms ad infinitum.


I guess that's just where we'll have to agree to disagree; yeah, there are a lot of guns in the U.S. There's also a lot of cars, a lot of drugs, a lot of alcohol, a lot of really BAD people; and THAT'S the problem............ther guns aren't the problem..........it's the criminals............they're the problem. Did anyone see the photo of the guy the murdered those firemen ? That guy should have been locked up and the key thrown away, a long time ago;

There are a lot of misconceptions here; everyone seems to think that just not "allowing" people to carry guns is going to make everyone "safe"; yet the least "safe" place in the whole U.S. now is Chicago, where almost no one but cops are "allowed" to carry guns, and they have the most murders and highest crime rate in the country, and when you point that fact out to the "gun haters", they ignore it; they don't even answer !



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3362 posts, RR: 9
Reply 126, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 2170 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 7):
These monsters should not have access to guns. If psychiatrists would flag them early, preventing gun buys, that would help.

When mentally ill you are only flagged as such if there is a system in place to identify and treat them pro-actively and any infrastructure that would make this easy to determine no one wants to pay for.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 9):
Was the gun used in this story legally owned?

I sure hope not as the alleged shooter served 17 years for manslaughter and if there is anyone that shouldn't have legal guns its this guy.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 17):

Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 17):
I wonder why stuff like this doesn't happen in Canada? Oh yea! Cause they don't have guns!

Canada most certainly has guns available. Remember, most of the country is wilderness.

Correct we have guns but they are mostly used for hunting and if you want a semi-automatic or even a pistol in Canada you are going through a background check that takes months. Also we just don't have that culture of guns for protection on the same levels (those who do are the minority).

Most of the guns used in crimes in Canada are illegal and we know where they come from.

They are smuggled in from the US.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 32):
One of the things I've noticed about American culture since living abroad is that when I compare to Australians, Kiwis, Canadians, Israelis, Turks, Russians, Chinese, Indians, etc I've had the fortune to work with overseas, most people make ragging on their homeland a regular part of conversation with people from elsewhere. Bitching about where one is from is often an easy way to build repoire with others because it puts everyone on the level.

Ahh self-deprecating humour, the best way to get different cultures to mingle.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 32):
Americans, to some noticeable extent, are not really able to do this. We have a built-in defensiveness that makes it difficult to accept criticism, for one reason or another. I'm not sure why this is so, but it's really interesting - and unfortunate.

Its not the American style, look at your comedy and outside of a few American comics not a lot of them poke fun at US culture where the "Commonwealth countries" tend to make fun of themselves often and without shame.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 38):
The question is how to keep guns away from the undesirables (defined as people with marginal psychological stability or criminals) without interfering too much in the rights of the responsible gun owners or to reduce the capability of a "citizen

A national gun registry database would help things out so if you failed a background check once, every other dealer in the country knows about it and denies you the sale of a gun. I saw the head of the NRA protesting that on CNN yesterday morning and if you want to actually curb massacres like in Newtown this is a good step.

The NRA won't do this of course because at the end of the day it hurts gun sales.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineYVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2454 posts, RR: 0
Reply 127, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 2172 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 116):
I have no idea how this guy who murdered the fireman got his gun

According to the news in YVR this afternoon, his female neighbor purchased them for him fully in the know of what he wanted them for. In fact, he even went along to the store and chose the two weapons himself, then she bought them - for him, while he was there!

I am not advocating banning guns. But how can anyone fail to see how basic "gun contol" should have worked here?

Sure, he was a criminal, he would have found a ways and means, but this was clearly far too simple. They said if convicted the woman will get 10 years. Bolting the door after the horse ran for it.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 125):
a lot of really BAD people; and THAT'S the problem............ther guns aren't the problem..........it's the criminals............they're the problem

So what is your solution to stopping these bad people and criminals?

Quoting Geezer (Reply 125):
Did anyone see the photo of the guy the murdered those firemen ? That guy should have been locked up and the key thrown away, a long time ago;

But it might be infringing on someones right to profile them in this way before he did anything wrong..............

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 103):
Now I'm kinda breaking from the ranks and trying to find a compromise. I know you could care less about anyone having these guns because you don't like them, but I do, a lot, it's a fun hobby of mine, and it sucks seeing a few maniacs every year ruin it for all of us. I know something needs to be done, but, IMO, a total ban goes too far and is very unnecessary.

Well done. You understand that with rights come responsibility. If as a result of Sandy Hook and this incident it makes all gun owners re-think about who has access to their weapons - particularly if there is someone with mental issues in the home - and how they store them and also who gun sellers are selling to (clue - with a friend in the store who is a felon and selected the purchases) then progress will be made.

Not to pick on Falstaff exactly (whos posts I repsect) but for example.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 39):
Nobody has the right to break in and steal. I should not have to secure my weapons anymore than than reasonably necessary. A locked door and a security system is plenty. There are a lot of dangerous things in a lot of homes; should we have to lock everything up just because of something somebody might do?

A gun is clearly the most dangerous thing in a home which cant be bought on a supermarket shelf. No one has the right to break and enter, but its not outside the realm of possibility someone may - and they have some great easy pickings. Even with the alarm, they can be in and out and several blocks up the road before the alarm alerts anyone into meaningful action.

In our complex, we suffer from regular car break ins in our parkade. I have not bothered replacing the lock after the third time. The strata and police are unable to do anything and say any meaningful solution is outside of the budget what strata members are willing to pay - so their solution? Dont leave anything in the vehicle. So I dont, the point being dont do anything to aid or abet a criminal.

I fail to see how common sense like this is translated into bans and taking away rights. Everyone posting on here may be a perfectly responsible gun owner, but there have clearly been many who have not been.

Rights do not negate responsibiity.



Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
User currently offlinejetmech From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2695 posts, RR: 53
Reply 128, posted (1 year 8 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2114 times:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 125):
if i was afraid of snakes.........But I'm NOT

No worries, I did miss the part where you said "if" in your original post. Interestingly, I read an article in the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) today that broke down the causes of all deaths in Australia for 2010.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/healt...-life-of-death-20121228-2bz8u.html

Of the 143,473 deaths in 2010, the vast majority were from natural biological causes. 8918 deaths were from non-biological causes, and of these, the total number caused by venomous snakes, lizards, hornets, wasps and bees was 6.

Assuming each of these creatures was responsible for one death to make it onto the list, the maximum number of deaths from poisonous snakes for the whole of Australia in 2010 was 2. Interestingly, there were no firearm homicides listed   .

Quoting Geezer (Reply 125):
The last paragraph...........You're right ! We are discussing a very serious subject here; and you DO have every right to have a say in the discussion; I really didn't wish to offend you, and I do apologize if I have.

No offence taken Geezer, and for my part, I hope you take no offence from me for commenting on domestic situations in your country. It is interesting how many outside the US are so absorbed with events going on inside the US. I actually think you and your countrymen can take comfort in this, for it shows an element of care and concern however small that may be.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 125):
There are a lot of misconceptions here; everyone seems to think that just not "allowing" people to carry guns is going to make everyone "safe"; yet the least "safe" place in the whole U.S. now is Chicago, where almost no one but cops are "allowed" to carry guns, and they have the most murders and highest crime rate in the country, and when you point that fact out to the "gun haters", they ignore it; they don't even answer !

If I ever have the privilege of working and living in the US for any extended period of time, I would seriously consider the purchase of a firearm and training for the purposes of self-protection. This may seem to fly in the face of the opinions I express in gun debates, but then again, I'm going to be honest even if it puts me in a moral conundrum.

Nonetheless, I must state again that I have never advocated for a complete ban on firearms and removal of these weapons from citizens in general. What I do advocate however are many common sense measures such as mandatory background checks on all purchases (eliminate gun show loophole), a national register and some measures to reduce the number of newly manufactured firearms.

Another article in today’s SMH talks about the NRA’s response to the Sandy Hook massacre, and more specifically, the role of Wayne LaPierre. If the article is to be believed, the Columbine perpetrators acquired their weapons via the gunshow loophole, the closing of which was something Mr LaPierre lobbied heavily against prior to the incident.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/gunman-f...-just-one-shot-20121228-2bz7k.html

Regards, JetMech

[Edited 2012-12-29 10:35:14]


JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5692 posts, RR: 44
Reply 129, posted (1 year 8 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2055 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jetmech (Reply 128):
Interestingly, there were no firearm homicides listed .

Actually there were, If you go past that incredibly useless and counter intuitive graphic(that didn't even work on some browsers.)
The underlying data from the ABS shows 231 firearm deaths, 162 Self harm(Suicide), 10 Accidental, 28 where the intent could not be determined and 31 Assault(homicide)

I know simplistic comparisons are not truly representative but extrapolating that figure by the difference in the populations of Australia and the USA, by using the rough guide of 15 times Australia's Population- a comparison.

Column one is the Australian figure x 15 (both sets of data from 2010)

Aus (USA)
Self Harm 2,430 (19,392)
Accident 150 (606)
Assault 465 (11,078)
undeterm 420 (252)

Total 3,465 (31,328)

So even on a (rough) per capita basis the firearm death rate in the USA is something like 9 times that of Australia,
The argument that lack of access to firearms will cause people to use other means- Holds up to some extent Total from all causes

Self Harm 35,415 (38,364)

Assault 3255 (16,259)

Something like 70% of US homicides are committed with a firearm compared to approx 15% in Aus and the figures spread even further for suicide.

Interestingly the murder rate in Australia was almost identical in 2010 to that of 1915 yet the murder by firearm rate has almost halved.

Not trying to force an opinion on anyone just putting up some figures for discussion

**Data from Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Nat. Vital statistics report from the US Dept of Health & Human services



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 130, posted (1 year 8 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2012 times:

Here's something that I think everyone in other countries should think about, when attempting to understand what's "going on" in the U.S.............

First; where do most people ( in the U.S. and also outside the U.S.) hear about events taking place in the U.S. ? For the most part, from Television, to a lesser extent (especially for people in other countries), from radio; also, from news magazines and newspapers.

Here's what people outside the U.S. are largely unaware of: in the "distant past", TV News programs , and even most major newspapers and magazines were actually "objective", "impartial", and just reported things as they occurred; I must tell you, THOSE days are long gone, and FAR behind us ! In today's media, it's exactly the opposite as it was "back in the day";
Today's "media stars" are about as "impartial" and "objective" as are todays so-called "Hollywood Movie Stars"; Now......to see what I mean about that, try this; ask ANY Hollywood so-called "star" what THEY "think" about "this and that", then let me know what you think of the "objectivity" that you heard from them ! If there's ANYTHING which should be "banned" in the U.S., it's the whole damned movie industry ! Long gone are the Jimmy Stewarts, the John Waynes, the Ernie Borgnines, and all the rest of "the good guys"; yeah, they've all been replaced by the Sean Penns, the Alec Baldwins, the Charlie Sheens, that famous knuckle dragger, Tom Cruise, and all the rest of the degenerates that have made the film industry into a huge "not so funny joke" !

Spend just a bit of time observing how these people go about their lives, and you will quickly see what I mean; here's just one example; Sean Penn; this guy's main "claim to fame" in the beginning was (are you ready for this ?); he was "going with", and later married that all-time paragon of virtue..........."Madonna" ! "The Immaterial Girl"! It's tempting to point out a few of HER "indiscretions", but I won't, as she's perfectly capable of making an ass of herself, with no help from me; then follow Sean Penn around, and watch his "act".......flies to........of all places, Iraq; where he meets, "sucks-up" to, (and gets brown ring around nose from)........that famous "humanitarian"........Sadaam Husain ! Big "buddies" they were ! But wait......he needs MORE "wholesome friends"; so the next stop on his quest to befriend the "world's biggest"......is Venezuela; where he repeats the whole "sucking up", brown ring around nose act with the Latin Lothario himself, Hugo Chavez !

Keep in mind here, all of the time this miserable, disgusting piece of Hollywood garbage is running around the world, sucking up to dictators, he's also trying to convince the American people (who paid the money that made him rich enough to do the senseless things that he's so well known for)......he's trying to convince US that HE'S much smarter than WE are, therefore anything HE says is far more "important" than everything WE say, multiplied by ten ! So.......you think the U.S. is "screwed up" ? I think you would be making a pretty fair assumption ! (at least about some of the idiots born here, and who consequently are citizens.) If you were ever to have an I.Q. contest between a "Hollywood "star" and a piss-ant, the piss-ant would win

But Make no mistake.........The U.S. IS a wonderful country; it USED to be a wonderful place to bring up your children; but that's changed somewhat, over the years. So you can see from the above, we have a lot more things than guns that are needing to be "banned", "outlawed", and "done away with" in the U.S. We have obviously created a lot of "garbage", (most of which has two legs); we need to "take out the garbage", then start over from there.

The big problem now a days is, you never hear about any of this from the so-called "media"; and the reason is simple; they've basically gone the same way as the "entertainment industry"; They're not satisfied to report the news any more, they anly carecabout MAKING the news; Because they're SMARTER the rest of us; (thay think)

Later.....
Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
User currently offlinestealthz From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5692 posts, RR: 44
Reply 131, posted (1 year 8 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1999 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Geezer (Reply 130):
Here's something that I think everyone in other countries should think about, when attempting to understand what's "going on" in the U.S.............

Trying to paint the rest of the world as simpletons whose only knowledge of the USA is what they get from movies... and ranting about the current crop of "stars" .. stars largely because that is what US society made them!
Outstanding contribution to the discussion.. Not!



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2722 posts, RR: 8
Reply 132, posted (1 year 8 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1985 times:

Quoting stealthz (Reply 129):
Something like 70% of US homicides are committed with a firearm compared to approx 15% in Aus and the figures spread even further for suicide. Interestingly the murder rate in Australia was almost identical in 2010 to that of 1915 yet the murder by firearm rate has almost halved. Not trying to force an opinion on anyone just putting up some figures for discussion

You cannot compare the two societies. The inner cities of the US are where most of this happens and much of it is from the gangs and drug trade. It is not the guns it is our society that is way different.



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 133, posted (1 year 8 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1926 times:

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 127):
But it might be infringing on someones right to profile them in this way before he did anything wrong..............

I'm not entirely certain what you mean when you say "infringing on someones right to profile them..........
The word "profile" has become a dirty word in the U.S. And all because the libs are so "concerned" about "rights"; the big problem is though, they have it exactly backwards ! They're not concerned about "rights" when it concerns ordinary, law abiding people; they're only "concerned" when it comes to criminals, terrorists, and illegal aliens who sneak into the country, etc.

Here's an example of what I mean; let's say for example that a lady is beaten and robbed by two armed intruders in her own home; luckily, she survives, calls the police to report the crime; obviously, the police are going to ask her for a description of the "perps"; now, before we go any further here, we are all aware that there are white people, black people, people who "appear" to be of hispanic origin, and there are blond haired, blue eyed, very fair complexioned people; Obviously, if the police have any chance of apprehending the "perps", they're going to need an accurate description of them; If the individuals who assaulted the lady are, say, black guys, and she tells the police this, they are obviously going to get on their police radios and put out an all points bulletin, concerning two black individuals. At this point, they are obviously not concerned about chinese men, red haired, freckled, blue eyed English-looking men, they are just concerned with two black individuals, because that's what the victim has reported. But the police have this HUGE problem; it's referred to in the U.S. as "PC".........as in "politically correct"; so now, you're asking.....what in the hell does politics have to do with this poor woman being assaulted in her home ? The answer of course, is ........absolutely nothing; however, because of the likes of people such as "The Reverand Jesse Jackson", and a jack-ass named "Reverand Al Sharpton", if the cops put out the APB for "two black guys".........they have just become GUILTY ! Of "profiling" ! and that simple fact right there is behind about 3/4ths of "what's wrong with the U.S."!

The very minute you "suggest" that a black person could possibly have committed a crime, you are IMMEDIATELY branded as a "racist" ! I don't care if 9 different with cameras snapped photos of the perps, they're going to be called "racists" too! This is just a forum......where lots of people express their opinions; so I really can't go into all of the"why's and "where-fores", because I don't have the time, the space, or the inclination........and you don't have time to read it even if I did. But if you ever have any serious expectation of solving a particular problem, you're going to have to "identify" the problem before you ever have any chance of solving it. That ubiquitous little word, "profile" is holding the whole effort up!

Now.........had the individuals who beat up our "victim" appeared to look like blond haired, blue eyed Norwegians......we have no problems; we simply putout an APB for two BH, BE, SA)">NW's, and the search begins ! So much for the "slippery slope" of PC !

Quoting jetmech (Reply 128):
Another article in today’s SMH talks about the NRA’s response to the Sandy Hook massacre, and more specifically, the role of Wayne LaPierre. If the article is to be believed, the Columbine perpetrators acquired their weapons via the gunshow loophole, the closing of which was something Mr LaPierre lobbied heavily against prior to the incident.

I'm not intimately familiar enough with the details of the so-called "Columbine case" any more to even comment on that, but I can tell you this; there is a HUGE body of mis-information concerning gun shows; the ant-gun group would have you think that gun shows are completely devoid of any regulation or enforcement, and that just isn't true. Many of the laws pertaining to gun shows are Federal, and others are State; so before you can have any meaningful discussion about gun shows, we need to know where the gun show is at. (And it's no where near where most anti-gun people would have you believe.)

Quoting windy95 (Reply 132):
You cannot compare the two societies. The inner cities of the US are where most of this happens and much of it is from the gangs and drug trade. It is not the guns it is our society that is way different.

I would have to agree with the above; I would also add, if you were to have a meaningful discussion about the "inner cities" and what happens there, you are going to be obliged to have an extremely "politically incorrect" discussion !

Quoting stealthz (Reply 131):
Trying to paint the rest of the world as simpletons whose only knowledge of the USA is what they get from movies... and ranting about the current crop of "stars" .. stars largely because that is what US society made them!
Outstanding contribution to the discussion.. Not!

I didn't say anything about the rest of the world being "simpletons", you did ! And everything I said about the "current crop of stars" is a matter of public record; as for your "observation" of them being what "U.S. society made them".........you're only half right on that assumption; I notice in another thread that almost everyone is griping about "reality shows"; the type of people that watch this kind of crap, are the SAME people who are responsible for the fools I was alluding to becoming celebrities, and is in no way indicative of overall views of U.S. Society as you call it.
Incidentally, would you consider YOUR "rant" as being an "outstanding contribution" to the discussion ?

Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Multiple Victims Shot Dead At Amish School -- Fox posted Mon Oct 2 2006 18:39:02 by AerospaceFan
Female Police Officer Shot Dead At Armed Robbery posted Fri Nov 18 2005 19:08:33 by BMIFlyer
The Count Von Count Is Dead At 40 posted Fri Aug 24 2012 13:56:52 by jetjack74
Rodney King. Dead At 47 posted Sun Jun 17 2012 09:24:38 by varigb707
Former Cowboys' QB Dead At 72 posted Mon Dec 6 2010 09:01:16 by mayor
Chicago Cubs Legend, Ron Santo, Dead At 70 posted Fri Dec 3 2010 10:23:51 by mayor
Teen Shot Dead After Halloween Prank posted Mon Nov 1 2010 21:33:51 by futurepilot16
John Wooden Dead At 99 posted Sat Jun 5 2010 16:46:17 by N1120A
Number 3 Is Dennis Hopper, Dead At 74 posted Sat May 29 2010 10:27:37 by dxing
'Godfather' Of Cuban Tobacco Dead At 91 posted Sun Apr 18 2010 10:23:50 by photopilot