Firearms Possession discussion (in response to yet another US shooting)



"You want to know why. This may sound cynical, but here's why.
It's because of the way the media reports it. Flip on the news and watch how we treat the Batman theater shooter and the Oregon mall shooter like celebrities. Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris are household names, but do you know the name of a single *victim* of Columbine? Disturbed
people who would otherwise just off themselves in their basements see the news and want to top it by doing something worse, and going out in a memorable way. Why a grade school? Why children? Because he'll be remembered as a horrible monster, instead of a sad nobody.
CNN's article says that if the body count "holds up", this will rank as the second deadliest shooting behind Virginia Tech, as if statistics somehow make one shooting worse than another. Then they post a video interview of third-graders for all the details of what they saw and heard while the shootings were happening. Fox News has plastered the killer's face on all their reports for hours. Any articles or news stories yet that focus on the victims and ignore the killer's identity? None that I've seen yet. Because they don't sell. So congratulations, sensationalist media, you've just lit the fire for someone to top this and knock off a day care center or a maternity ward next.
You can help by forgetting you ever read this man's name, and remembering the name of at least one victim. You can help by donating to mental health research instead of pointing to gun control as the problem. You can help by turning off the news." - Morgan Freeman.


He has a completely legitimate point and I agree with him completely.
 
George said:
Idiotic is in the view of the individual. I think your counties is, and as a non US citizen it's inapprpriate to be petitioning the President about something that really none of your business. Bad enough to put up with crap from the local wacko hoplophobes like Shumer & Fienstien. I guess some like the feel of the Govt thumb.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately your gun glorifying and gangsta based social values are being exported to other countries via the News, social media, movies and TV etc.

I see it in the attitudes of young Australian men, who although they have grown up in a relatively gun free environment are demonstrating this loony idolisation of guns and their use as weapons to be carried everyday on the street. Whereas when I grew up men wanted to be known for their ability to behave acceptably with firearms, those who did not, were ostracised, whereas now they seem to all have a team of like minded admirers all trying to outdo one another with their desire to emulate all that is worst in polite gun owning society.
 
Last edited:
I think you need to be a American to really understand the rights to bear arms in that state. I come from a country where the use of firearms are really restricted- and all Singaporean have this mentality that guns are not something you take for granted- I suppose that kind of thinking is something very alien to Americans.

I will not challenge the rights to bear arms or otherwise, that is something for the citizens of USA to decide, but there must be something done to restrict the use of firearms. As the saying goes "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is very much true.
 
viper2007 said:
I will not challenge the rights to bear arms or otherwise, that is something for the citizens of USA to decide, but there must be something done to restrict the use of firearms. As the saying goes "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is very much true.
Click to expand...

That is an incomplete statement though, it is more accurate to say that guns don't kill people, people kill people with guns.

That being said I agree we shouldn't get involved in these discussions outside expressing our bewilderment at the lack of action on the issue I don't see any point in saying a lot on the matter at all because lets face it within the next month or two it will happen again and as Einstein rightly said..."The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

The question is should we even be expressing sympathy over these issues as much as the loss of life is tragic I think it fair to say if you play on highways don't complain when you are run over.
 
MontyB said:
About half of them I have had "soft" deactivated because they are collectors pieces (and have no ammunition for) most of the rest have small amounts of ammunition (less than 200 rounds) and I have about 5 that I use regularly for hunting and have reasonable stocks of ammunition for.

However because of my collection I get regular police visits and ammunition and weapons are registered and stored as required by law basically I am happy with our laws and happily stay within them.
Click to expand...

The guy arrested had a stock pile of ammunition. Why would anyone need so much ammunition for his collectors pieces...
 
lolwhassup said:
And before CF says anything, I have a completely legitimate reason for needing one, I am a soldier and I need to continually practice BRM in order stay within the standard and be an efficient soldier.

It's like they say the only way to get better at something is to practice. :m1:
Click to expand...

Just my opinion, but that's hardly a "legitimate" reason. That's just my personal opinion of course. :thumb:
 
senojekips said:
Unfortunately your gun glorifying and gangsta based social values are being exported to other countries via the News, social media, movies and TV etc.

I see it in the attitudes of young Australian men, who although they have grown up in a relatively gun free environment are demonstrating this loony idolisation of guns and their use as weapons to be carried everyday on the street. Whereas when I grew up men wanted to be known for their ability to behave acceptably with firearms, those who did not, were ostracised, whereas now they seem to all have a team of like minded admirers all trying to outdo one another with their desire to emulate all that is worst in polite gun owning society.
Click to expand...
Drive by shootings were rare untill they were prominantly featured in some movie, gave the not overly bright street trash ideas.
 
MontyB said:
I have never understood the point to magazine restrictions as it only takes 1 bullet to kill and you can do that with a musket.
Click to expand...

I believe its try and restrict mass shootings.

As you'll know, the larger the magazine, the greater the number shots can be fired before reloading.
 
m551sheridan said:
OK, I broke my promise not to post further... one thing you folks are forgetting is most of us west of the Mississippi enjoy shooting, it's a sport and a lifestyle, we have wide open spaces. The Forest Service District that I worked on is 260,000 acres with another 240,000 acres in wilderness - we are sportsmen and woodsmen.... but that said I posted this for Sevens benifit as she takes no message, read it in another forum. Because of this incident Feinstein is proposing a ban on assault weapons (and this should NOT include autoloading .22"s), yepper, the liberals jump right on this, BUT


If the liberals want gun control, LET THEM START WITH THE PRESIDENT . He sells them to Mexicans and they shoot Americans!
Click to expand...

I have no issue with legitimate reasons for a firearm such as hunting etc. Each to their own and all that. I fully understand that and don't have a problem with that approach.

But how many US firearms owners actually go hunting? I'll guess not many, especially when the weapons they have aren't suitable for hunting.
 
Last edited:
MontyB said:
That is an incomplete statement though, it is more accurate to say that guns don't kill people, people kill people with guns.

That being said I agree we shouldn't get involved in these discussions outside expressing our bewilderment at the lack of action on the issue I don't see any point in saying a lot on the matter at all because lets face it within the next month or two it will happen again and as Einstein rightly said..."The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

The question is should we even be expressing sympathy over these issues as much as the loss of life is tragic I think it fair to say if you play on highways don't complain when you are run over.
Click to expand...

100% spot on!

I agree that non-US citizens shouldn't get involved in the discussions and I don't think anyone here said that they should???

With regards to expressing sympathy, I doubt we should bother tbh. While its tragic, we can expect it to happen again and again and again. The past 2 years prove that.
 
Rowan said:
@George, you're barely literate response makes no sense!
Click to expand...
I'll type more s l o w l y next time so you can catch what I said! ;-)
There might be some validity to reducing the capacity of magazines, where a few shooters have been overcome while changing mags. But where gun control is lax in the US crime is lower than where gun controll is tough. Crime is lower in States with easily available carry permits, regardless of weather it makes sence, more legally possesed/carried guns the lower the crime rate. End the ban on guns in school. It's pathetic that Principle & Counselor had to charge the gunman with empty hands.
 
George said:
End the ban on guns in school. It's pathetic that Principle & Counselor had to charge the gunman with empty hands.
Click to expand...

Don't you think that there must be a big big problem with your country if schools and/or teaching staff need firearms?

I'd hate to have any of my young nieces and nephews going to a school that required the staff to have firearms. Crazy.
 
George said:
There might be some validity to reducing the capacity of magazines, where a few shooters have been overcome while changing mags.
Click to expand...

There's no "some" about it.

High-capacity magazines have been used in virtually every high-profile shooting in recent history. There is no viable civilian use for large-round magazines as it's rare that anyone has to fire more than 10 rounds in "self-defence". High-capacity magazines are not commonly used by hunters, as most states ban them from hunting reserves so why would civilians need them? High-capacity magazines pose a daily threat to police officers, who commonly carry 10 to 12 rounds in their handguns.

If you need a large mag to defend yourself, then I think you need to work on your aim a little bit more.
 
For those who say "guns don't kill people, people do".

"As with guns, some auto deaths are caused by people who break laws or behave irresponsibly," argues Kristof. "But we don't shrug and say, 'Cars don't kill people, drunks do.'"

"Instead, we have required seat belts, air bags, child seats and crash safety standards. We have introduced limited licenses for young drivers and tried to curb the use of mobile phones while driving. All this has reduced America's traffic fatality rate per mile driven by nearly 90% since the 1950s."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20755007
 
Some further statistics:

If people believe that "guns don't kill - people do" then the following may be of interest:
- 50% of the worlds guns are in the USA with 5% of the Worlds population
- in 2011 the German police fired 85 shots, 49 of which were warnings
- LA Police used 90 shots to kill a 19 year old after a high speed chase
- 94,388 people have been shot in the US so far this year (158 were shot yesterday)

Of course, there isn't a problem in the US with firearms. It's just "foreigners" not understanding US "culture". :roll:
6ca26fe237e5d4f0fa898c53adc0304f437d24a7.gif
 
Capt Frogman said:
I have no issue with legitimate reasons for a firearm such as hunting etc. Each to their own and all that. I fully understand that and don't have a problem with that approach.

But how many US firearms owners actually go hunting? I'll guess not many, especially when the weapons they have aren't suitable for hunting.
Click to expand...

But as long as you are going to let people own a weapon for hunting then what does it matter if they are allowed 1 or 100 as they already have the only item they need to shoot multiple people, the problem is not the number of guns people own but the mentality of those that own them.

I am still convinced that the key to this problem is in changing American attitudes rather than removing firearms, there is very clearly a social problem where people seem to think they should be afraid of their government and neighbours to the point that they need to be armed, in fact in most countries that level of paranoia alone would be enough to get your firearms license revoked.

Personally I think the key is just actively enforcing the rules they have and closing loop holes will improve the situation (it wont stop these things but nothing every will).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top