Some truths about the politcal left from a gay Brit

[dbane883]

This popcorn is delicious.

[StormTooper4]

That Tool argument is a crock

seriously only farmers would really ever need a gun as a tool.

The majority of people who are not America think the right to bear arms is nonsensical. 

Sadly the hole the USA has dug itself with gun laws is too deep to ever get out of. Things will only get worse and innocent people will continue to get killed. 

[freddy333]

7 minutes ago, StormTooper4 said:

The majority of people who are not America think the right to bear arms is nonsensical. 

I agree with your statement, but I would disagree with the majority's conclusion. And so does Ronald Noble, Secretary General of Interpol.

"Ask yourself: If that was Denver, Col., if that was Texas, would those guys have been able to spend hours, days, shooting people randomly?" Noble said, referring to states with pro-gun traditions. "What I'm saying is it makes police around the world question their views on gun control. It makes citizens question their views on gun control. You have to ask yourself, 'Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past with an evolving threat of terrorism?' This is something that has to be discussed."

"For me it's a profound question," he continued. "People are quick to say 'gun control, people shouldn't be armed,' etc., etc. I think they have to ask themselves: 'Where would you have wanted to be? In a city where there was gun control and no citizens armed if you're in a Westgate mall, or in a place like Denver or Texas?'"
After Westgate, Interpol Chief Ponders 'Armed Citizenry'

[tyrantblade]

24 minutes ago, freddy333 said:

'New Zealand provides a useful comparison to Australia. Both are isolated island nations, and they are socioeconomically and demographically similar. Their mass murder rate before Australia's gun buyback was nearly identical: From 1980 to 1996, Australia's mass murder rate was 0.0042 incidents per 100,000 people and New Zealand's was 0.0050 incidents per 100,000 people. The principal difference is that, post - 1997, New Zealand experienced the drop over the same period of time without altering its gun control laws.'
For full details, see Report to the Parliament of Australia on “The ability of Australian law enforcement authorities to eliminate gun - related violence in the community”

Let me pose 2 simple questions -
1. In the hands of a law-abiding American, how is a belt-fed .308 caliber light machine gun any more dangerous than a small, .25 caliber single-shot derringer?
2. In the hands of a violent criminal, how dangerous is a pressure-cooker?

Actually, let me add a 3rd & simpler question -

Which is more dangerous - that .308 caliber light machine gun in the hands of a law-abiding American or that pressure-cooker in the hands of a violent criminal or terrorist?
 

When it comes to such a machine gun, it should have some basis in practicality, and except for shooting targets i see no practicality in such a gun, and its not like such a weapon would be practical in a situation where theres a criminal/terrotist out to do bad, at least not in a crowded area such as the club in Orlando.

If there were more practical scenarios for such a weapon, i would not say they should be restricted from civilians.

You don't need such weapons to hunt, shoot targets, or defend oneself or others; whereas a precision semi-automatic can fit all those scenarios and more well.

They want gun control, fine give them a little, just don't keep pushing the agenda more and more (as the anti-gun extremists tend to do).

[ldegeneve]

9 minutes ago, dbane883 said:

This popcorn is delicious.

Mine's been pretty stale but I've been trying to spice it up. How about this:

IMHO, gun control advocates often fail to consider the idea that pro-gun people tend to love their guns about as much as they love their...um...guns. (suddenly Charlton Heston's famous speech takes on a whole new dimension)

So what is it you could say? What is your approach? Not joking. Figure that one out.

[freddy333]

16 minutes ago, tyrantblade said:

When it comes to such a machine gun, it should have some basis in practicality, and except for shooting targets i see no practicality in such a gun, and its not like such a weapon would be practical in a situation where theres a criminal/terrotist out to do bad, at least not in a crowded area such as the club in Orlando.

If there were more practical scenarios for such a weapon, i would not say they should be restricted from civilians.

You don't need such weapons to hunt, shoot targets, or defend oneself or others; whereas a precision semi-automatic can fit all those scenarios and more well.

They want gun control, fine give them a little, just don't keep pushing the agenda more and more (as the anti-gun extremists tend to do).

Valid points except where you cited 'need' as a deciding factor. Americans have the constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nowhere does the US Constitution say you have rights only where 1 can demonstrate a need that someone else agrees with.

Personally, although I have experience with them, I am not a fan of automatic weapons, but I do grant that they are fun toys. So I am also willing to grant those who enjoy (& can afford the expensive ammo) the right to enjoy their toys in a lawful manner as long as their enjoyment does not directly harm me. Considering there are around 200,000 machine guns in civilian hands in the US & I am not aware of a single crime that has been committed using any of those legally owned firearms since 1934. Therefore, while there are any number of theoretical issues 1 can suggest, in practice, there just have not been any demonstrated danger to the public from the civilian ownership of lawfully owned & operated automatic weapons. If someone has evidence to the contrary, I would love to see it.

That, I believe is the premise of the US Bill of Rights. The idea that you are free to swing your arm around all you want as long as it does not hit me in the nose. Once that happens, it is the government's responsibility to get involved. But not before then. At least, that is my understanding.

9 minutes ago, ldegeneve said:

Mine's been pretty stale but I've been trying to spice it up. How about this:

IMHO, gun control advocates often fail to consider the idea that pro-gun people tend to love their guns about as much as they love their...um...guns. (suddenly Charlton Heston's famous speech takes on a whole new dimension)

So what is it you could say? What is your approach? Not joking. Figure that one out.

Sorry, but what is my approach to what?

[ldegeneve]

That question was for gun control advocates.

[StormTooper4]

 A man asked a gun shop why people buy rifles. The answer was chilling. http://a.msn.com/01/en-au/AAhcr6c?ocid=se

next to the loss of life the saddest thing is the justification. Perhaps if a gun loving American could slightly admit they were wrong but didn't know what else to do, some progress could be made.

if there were no guns there would be no senseless killings. 

 

 

[freddy333]

Interesting & thank you for posting that.

It would also be helpful for people to know the difference between fully-automatic machine-guns or 'assault rifles' & semi-automatic sporting rifles. Watch this veteran California police officer demonstrate the difference -

 

[Nanuq]

if there were no guns there would be no senseless killings.

If only it was that simple. And it's not isolated to America either.

"In 2013, knives or other cutting instruments were used to kill 1,490 victims. In contrast, rifles were the cause of death of 285 murder victims. 2009, the ratio was very similar: knives were used in five times as many murders as rifles."

http://thefederalist.com/2014/11/11/knives-kill-more-people-each-year-than-rifles-time-for-knife-control/

"On Saturday, more than 130 people in a train station in Kunming, China, were injured when about ten men and women wielding knives began stabbing others at random."

"It’s unclear exactly how many knife attacks have taken place in China over the years, but the almost regular media reports of the attacks suggest that efforts to regulate the purchase of knives or punish offenders haven’t been successful.

Most recently, targets for these knife attacks have included schools and shopping centers. Last June, knife-wielding assailants killed nine policemen and 17 civilians at a police station in Lukqun Township in Xinjiang."

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/outside-americas-knives-are-often-weapon-choice-homicides-180949953/

It seems to me the problem is not that guns or knives or hammers are so readily available. It's that society is becoming more and more "broken". Why is that? I'm sure there are myriad reasons.

But it also seems if people could find a place where they are welcome and wanted, accepted as valued members, and find ways to vent anxieties and mutually rub off good vibes on each other instead of bad, maybe we'd see fewer solitary troubled people striking out in violence.

That's another good reason to call this place home.

[freddy333]

Nanuq, I think Stormtrooper4's point is valid, to a degree. If there could be a successful universal prohibition on guns in America, that would eliminate the problem. But it would cause another. Without guns, how does the 95 pound woman defend herself from the 250 pound, knife-wielding drug-addled attacker? Without guns, how does the 5'4" gay man defend himself from 3 ruffians who attack him with fists? How do unarmed innocent office workers gathering for a birthday celebration in a local hotel protect themselves from 2 terrorists that attack them with rifles?

Remember, we tried prohibition with alcohol (& again with our 40 year-long 'War on Drugs') & the result was both alot more alcohol & alot more crime, not to mention alot more illegal guns in criminal hands. And with 300,000,000+ guns already in the US, I do not see prohibition as being a reasonable option. Add the fact that the Second Amendment prohibits confiscation & it just is not going to happen.

The problem, as Nanuq indicated, is with society itself. I believe there is something within portions of the culture that has eaten away at the core principals of truth, honesty & fairness & people, not just in the US, seem to have forgotten how to treat each other with respect. At the same time, parts of Islam, at war with itself, has once again turned its expansionist sights towards the west, mostly, I believe, due to envy. But also because it fears the very modern world we so crave. I believe we are heading for a clash of civilizations of historic proportions &, whether we like it or not, we in the west must need to accept the fact that Islam has been at war with us for decades & get in the game before we lose it.

[Nanuq]

I figure society is lost one person at a time as mores and culture and simple principles of integrity are not passed on to our youth. That's why I'm a strong supporter of the Boy Scouts. We do our best to help boys grow and mature, one at a time.

I spotted these fine young men at the Isle of Man last week and shook their hands. What a great bunch!

[freddy333]

Spot on, Nanuq. I began as a young Cub Scout myself back during a time when we would walk to school with our rifles over our shoulder & no one batted an eye. Of course, this was at a time when the idea of using that rifle to harm other people was preposterous & absurd. It may be time to rethink where we are today & consider setting our cultural clocks back a bit.

[Sogeha]

Sadly very few things are black and white, the Boy Scouts being a case in point. It s a worldwide organisation almost universally accepted as a good thing, yet its founder was a peodiphile.

We don't have guns in Europe, except we do. I live on the Irish border and there are plenty of illegal guns here still. There is also a lot of gun crime in my local town, which isn't even a village by American standards. We have a shooting roughly every month. Population 1400. 

Two days ago a close friend of mine in Poland. A frail lady about five feet tall and crippled. Also Buddhist, hippy, pacifist, was out shopping and sees two guys get out of a car and walk into a large shop. You see the cctv picture, these guys are well tooled. She reaches into the car and takes the keys out of the ignition and throws them into some bushes or long grass. She rips up a paving slab, walks into the shop and hits the biggest guy over the head with it. He's in a coma unlikely to wake up. She kicks the second guy in the balls, he runs and gets into the car, she breaks the window and bodily drags him out of the car, causing him multiple cuts and glass embedded in his face and hands. The cops arrive.

The newspaper report says it was good for the terrorist that the cops arrived to save him.

Then yesterday this just a few miles from my hometown.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-36565801

The simple truth is that making it difficult for law abiding citizens to own the types of firearm under discussion does not hinder those with criminal intent. What it does do is seriously reduce the amount of minors who accidentally kill themselves or others. However the number of children killed by foolhardy use of farm machinery, especially tractors in Ireland is sad. Nanny State can say you can't have a gun or a tractor or it can say you will be held accountable if by your foolishness or lack of responsible storage and use your gun falls into the hands of a minor.

[Champagnesky]

Any relatives of victims of gun violence here?

[Ezio]

This is a very hard topic to talk about as X military i Would say weapons of all sorts are a serious thing a knife a pistol and so on 

 

in Denmark and Scandinavia we have some of The most strict gun Laws in The World even though i own several pistols and hunting rifles i Think its great if a society Works with guns or not 

 

and some talked earlier about where did you wanna be in a mass shooting Texas or some other place i Would not Pick any more over the other it just because people have guns dont mean They Will use Them 

 

so you guys predict just because we standing with a group of folks with guns They Would have succes in shooting The bad guy ? Who dont say They Will kill more innocent people 

Take This from a guy who knows how it is pulling The tricker 

i killed men i killed children who were too Young to do anything Else then playing and have Fun i Will have to live with that and im not afraid to say i did Those things war is The worst thing there is i been granted medals of Those things which i sold to charity No honour in war accept scars of what i did was it for The Greater good ? No such thing 

no one have a right to take another life period! 

 

but back to topic 

9.9 out of 10 Would flee a shooting even if They had a gun Would any of you do otherwise run against a man you know is ready to kill and you Think you are let me you tell you it aint easy and it isnt something we all have in us 

 

 

its a society thing we could arm everybody and maybe it Would rise maybe it Would fall its how people Think and threat eachother there is No red string 

 

we need to work on how our society is with or without guns 

[lumbee]

8 hours ago, StormTooper4 said:

 A man asked a gun shop why people buy rifles. The answer was chilling. http://a.msn.com/01/en-au/AAhcr6c?ocid=se

next to the loss of life the saddest thing is the justification. Perhaps if a gun loving American could slightly admit they were wrong but didn't know what else to do, some progress could be made.

if there were no guns there would be no senseless killings. 

 

So, you are saying that before the invention of guns nobody was killed? When Ogg got the larger piece of mastadon Gurg beat him in the head with a rock till he was dead. Senseless killings happen all the time in places with extreme gun laws. Knives, clubs, pencils, keys, bricks and just about anything else can be used to kill someone. Getting rid of guns won't stop killing. 

One other thing to consider...it is an old line but still valid: "When they outlaw guns, only outlaws will haave guns"

 

 

 

1 hour ago, champagne-communist said:

Any relatives of victims of gun violence here?

Yes. I won't go into the specifics, but yes. 

[StormTooper4]

32 minutes ago, lumbee said:

 

 

What I should of said is "significantly less" a "no" was a rather optimistic and unrealistic expectation.  Mass killings would be less likely 

[automatico]

To the anti gunners...

While gun ban advocates fret and ring their hands about guns...how many guns were used in the 911 attacks?

While gun ban advocates fret and ring their hands about guns...how many guns are involved when thousands of people are killed each year by drunk drivers? Compare people killed by drunk drivers to people who die because of guns...then look at the people who were saved by guns and compare it to the people who were saved by drunk drivers.

To the people in charge...

Why not take a close look at the loonies who carry out these attacks? It's not like they live in a vacuum and no one knows about their beliefs and activities. The Orlando shooter had been spouting off for 10 years and the Feds knew about it and did nothing. Who are you going to blame that on? Oh, I get it...blame the guns he used. 

I know about guns. I've owned quite a few, took them apart, put them back together, am a very good shot. I've been shot at twice and had a gun pulled on me once. I live in the real world...unlike a 'Ban the Guns' whiner that never gets out of the house but wants everyone's legal guns taken away. Otoh I am not a 'concealed carry' or 'make my day' advocate but agree with the right of a sane person to 'carry if necessary'.

It's the loonies I am worried about.

[Champagnesky]

To the anti gunners...

While gun ban advocates fret and ring their hands about guns...how many guns were used in the 911 attacks?

While gun ban advocates fret and ring their hands about guns...how many guns are involved when thousands of people are killed each year by drunk drivers? Compare people killed by drunk drivers to people who die because of guns...then look at the people who were saved by guns and compare it to the people who were saved by drunk drivers.

To the people in charge...

Why not take a close look at the loonies who carry out these attacks? It's not like they live in a vacuum and no one knows about their beliefs and activities. The Orlando shooter had been spouting off for 10 years and the Feds knew about it and did nothing. Who are you going to blame that on? Oh, I get it...blame the guns he used. 

I know about guns. I've owned quite a few, took them apart, put them back together, am a very good shot. I've been shot at twice and had a gun pulled on me once. I live in the real world...unlike a 'Ban the Guns' whiner that never gets out of the house but wants everyone's legal guns taken away. Otoh I am not a 'concealed carry' or 'make my day' advocate but agree with the right of a sane person to 'carry if necessary'.

It's the loonies I am worried about.

What does it take to get a gun licence in the states?

[Sogeha]

3 hours ago, champagne-communist said:

Any relatives of victims of gun violence here?

Yes.

[freddy333]

3 hours ago, Ezio said:

9.9 out of 10 Would flee a shooting even if They had a gun Would any of you do otherwise run against a man you know is ready to kill and you Think you are let me you tell you it aint easy and it isnt something we all have in us 

Short answer, yes. Americans tend to be different in this aspect than many in other countries. This is why 3 Americans recently rushed & took down a Muslim terrorist on a European train. It is why a civilian in an Oregon shopping mall drew his gun on a mass shooter, which caused the shooter to retreat & shoot himself in the head. Another armed civilian stopped the mass shooting at a barber shop. These things happen all the time in the US, but the media refuses to tell the stories.

Recently, while in a Starbucks, I came to the aid of an filthy, inebriated homeless person after he fell off his chair unconscious. Most of the other (likely politically liberal) customers recoiled away from the man as I began checking his condition. It is just the way some Americans are brought up to 'do the right thing' & 'treat others as you would have them treat you'.

=== For some reason, the RWG forum software keeps combining all of my separate posts===

“The Pink Pistols gives condolences to all family and friends of those killed and injured at Pulse,” Ms. Patton said. “This is exactly the kind of heinous act that justifies our existence. At such a time of tragedy, let us not reach for the low-hanging fruit of blaming the killer’s guns. Let us stay focused on the fact that someone hated gay people so much they were ready to kill or injure so many. A human being did this. The human being’s tools are unimportant when compared to the bleakness of that person’s soul.

“I say again, GUNS did not do this,” she added. “A human being did this, a dead human being. Our job now is not to demonize the man’s tools, but to condemn his acts and work to prevent such acts in the future.”
Pink Pistols urge gays to arm themselves: ‘Guns did not do this, a human being did’

1 hour ago, automatico said:

Why not take a close look at the loonies who carry out these attacks? It's not like they live in a vacuum and no one knows about their beliefs and activities. The Orlando shooter had been spouting off for 10 years and the Feds knew about it and did nothing. Who are you going to blame that on? Oh, I get it...blame the guns he used.

It turns out that, as is usually the case with these people, the danger signs were there for decades, but political correctness kept virtually everyone from reporting or doing anything about them.

Orlando shooter Omar Mateen's behavioral issues went as far back as elementary school, where his disruptive conduct and "lack of remorse" as a small boy were noted in his school records.Mateen's school records paint a picture of a troublesome, angry and inappropriate young boy, who struggled both academically and behaviorally. The problems shown in school records continued into high school, where Mateen was suspended from school nearly 50 days. As a young man, coworkers described Mateen as angry and said he "could do nothing right in his father's eyes."
Orlando shooter's early school records note he "lacked remorse"

[automatico]

"What does it take to get a gun license in the states?"

Basically a background check with no personal interview. They check for small rapes/minor murders/prison records etc...no in depth interview asking about mental stability, political beliefs, who you have a grudge against etc and this is where much of the real trouble is. A good interviewer can weed out many of the loonies.

edit:  Left out...also requires basic hand gun training in most states.

[freddy333]

1 hour ago, champagne-communist said:

What does it take to get a gun licence in the states?

It varies depending on the state. Most states require that you are not a criminal & lawfully permitted to own a firearm. Some states require some form of training (which is what I do) & background check. A few states permit anyone without a criminal record to own a gun. There are also differences depending on the type of gun. In some states, pistols/handguns require a special handgun permit, but most rifles & shotguns can be purchased over-the-counter after successfully passing a federal NICS background check. The gun laws in the US, which are often written by people with no knowledge or experience with guns, are both complicated & nonsensical.

I have been a state certified firearm trainer for a number of years & have trained all sorts of people. One thing I can tell you is that the common belief that people who wear uniforms are more safe with guns than civilians is false. Some cops & military are better shots than I am, some are worse. Similarly, some civilians are better, some worse. But, overall, I find that civilians, who shoot for passion vs people in uniform, who often shoot only to qualify for their jobs, tend to be better & safer shooters. I can also tell you that those cities with weaker gun laws & more law-abiding people - like Plano, Texas, which is a perfect example, because nearly every home has an 'arsenal' & there is little to no crime there - are far safer than cities with much stricter gun laws & more criminals - like Baltimore, Maryland or Chicago, Illinois, both of which are often compared (negatively) to Mogadishu or Mosul & for good reason.

The gun is a tool, your finger is the weapon.

[Nanuq]

Any relatives of victims of gun violence here?

Yes. Triple murder. Home invasion.