When will they actually get it in their thick heads .....

[dingodan]

Are you suggesting that Britians crime rate would go down if gun laws were similar to the US?

NO

I am suggesting that gun laws do not prevent crime. Because that is what the evidence shows.

 

[BadFish]

NO

I am suggesting that gun laws do not prevent crime. Because that is what the evidence shows.

What about massacres? (which is what we are talking about).

 

[dingodan]

i asked you to prove otherwise, and apparently you cant. yes, im suggesting that there is a strong correlation between gun ownership and public massacres, as we see all too often in these stories from the US. is it a cause? no. does it facilitate a disturbed young man to carry out certain actions? evidently it does, a similar person in a similar state of mind here in the UK simply couldn't have availed themselves of such deadly arsenal. (this says nothing about the fact that weapons are available to criminals, the chap involved wasnt some gangland solider).

just reposting the same links doesn't make them become relevent btw. they are talking about general crime. the statistics on gun crime tell us that US has 60 time more then the UK.

You are making the assertion. The burden of proof is on you.

 

[BadFish]

You are making the assertion. The burden of proof is on you.

The US has far more massacres than other countries and far more guns. There is alos the link to the Australia test case where since the Port Philip massacres and the tightening up of the gun laws there have been no massacres. (the link is a few posts back).

Does this mean you are not making the assertion that ther is no coorelation between guns laws/access and massacres?

 

[dingodan]

Please enlighten me why I should give a rats arse whether you agree with me or not? This massacre highlights once again that America is a country full of idiots who have access to firearms, and idiots who continue to fight for the right to enable this to happen "because its in their constitution". More guns will mean more innocent people being shot.

You stated a matter of fact - Americans are stupid. Then said, it can't be wrong, because it is a matter of opinion.

Your new curtains look nice - that is a matter of opinion.

All Americans are stupid - that is a matter of fact (or not).

It annoys me when people make stupid factual statements and then claim they can't be wrong, because it's just their opinion. Drives me mad.

 

[beorhthelm]

What about massacres? (which is what we are talking about).

he's not interested in those cases, or wider gun crime. he wants to make a point that gun laws dont prevent general crime, which valid or not, doesnt say much for the impact of gun law on gun related crime.

 

[dingodan]

The US has far more massacres than other countries and far more guns. There is alos the link to the Australia test case where since the Port Philip massacres and the tightening up of the gun laws there have been no massacres. (the link is a few posts back).

Does this mean you are not making the assertion that ther is no coorelation between guns laws/access and massacres?

Correlation yes, causation no.

 

[BadFish]

Correlation yes, causation no.

You are saying that guns do not causue massacres? Like cars do not cause road accidents? or hounds do not cause fox hunting?

From what I can work out you are not really saying very much on this issue.

 

[BadFish]

Of course we mustn't forget that the NWO is responsible for these massacres so that the world will be disarmed when they launched their take over. our friend [MENTION=2850]brunswick[/MENTION] predicted that the US would be disarmed by Christmas.......is is a pity he wasn't right.

 

[dingodan]

he's not interested in those cases, or wider gun crime. he wants to make a point that gun laws dont prevent general crime, which valid or not, doesnt say much for the impact of gun law on gun related crime.

These cases are shocking and emotive, and they are rare. You don't legislate based on extreme and rare cases.

What you keep doing is suggesting that because there is more gun crime somewhere where firearms are legal, to make them illegal would reduce gun crime. That is not true.

When handguns were banned in this country in 1997, gun crime then increased by 40%.

 

[BadFish]

These cases are shocking and emotive, and they are rare. You don't legislate based on extreme and rare cases.

You have already stated that their is no link between gun laws and crime. If this is the case then there is no need for "the right to bear arms" as it doesn't lower crime. In which case I would say, given it has little or no baring on other crime, it would be a wonderful idea to legislate based on people getting massacred.

Australia did legislate based on rare cases and they became even rarer (non existent) and gun crime fell too.So maybe you can and should.

What you keep doing is suggesting that because there is more gun crime somewhere where firearms are legal, to make them illegal would reduce gun crime. That is not true.

It is alos not true that increasing access to guns lowers crime rate but it does reduce massacres.

When handguns were banned in this country in 1997, gun crime then increased by 40%.

We have already agreed that there is no link between gun crime and guin laws why are you rolling out this isolated statistic?

 

[beorhthelm]

What you keep doing is suggesting that because there is more gun crime somewhere where firearms are legal, to make them illegal would reduce gun crime. That is not true.

no you keep making this arguement. i'm saying that in the US there is a staggeringly higher rate of gun crime than the UK or anywhere else in the western world, which may include countries with high legal ownership. one can draw there own conclusions from this, one might conclude that americans are too stupid to be responsible with firearms, i wouldnt possibly comment. what's tragic is anyone should even try to pretend stricter gun control wouldn't have avoided this incident, rare or otherwise.

of course, if all the teachers and the children had been armed, as would be the logic followed by many on the pro-gun wing, they could have defended themselves. its clear that more guns would have avoided this tragedy.

 

[dingodan]

no you keep making this arguement. i'm saying that in the US there is a staggeringly higher rate of gun crime than the UK or anywhere else in the western world, which may include countries with high legal ownership. one can draw there own conclusions from this, one might conclude that americans are too stupid to be responsible with firearms, i wouldnt possibly comment. what's tragic is anyone should even try to pretend stricter gun control wouldn't have avoided this incident, rare or otherwise.

of course, if all the teachers and the children had been armed, as would be the logic followed by many on the pro-gun wing, they could have defended themselves. its clear that more guns would have avoided this tragedy.

Yes give the kids guns. That is what I am saying.

I can only tell you what the evidence shows. If you want to cling on to what you believe, despite the evidence, O.k.

Gun laws don't prevent gun crime (again). If someone wants to hurt people, they will find a way to do it. Do people go into their place of work, or into a school and start killing people because of guns? No. You are focusing on a symptom of a problem, and not the problem itself, which has more to do with culture and mental health than guns.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

 

[BadFish]

Yes give the kids guns. That is what I am saying.

I can only tell you what the evidence shows. If you want to cling on to what you believe, despite the evidence, O.k.

Gun laws don't prevent gun crime (again). If someone wants to hurt people, they will find a way to do it. Do people go into their place of work, or into a school and start killing people because of guns? No. You are focusing on a symptom of a problem, and not the problem itself, which has more to do with culture and mental health than guns.

The evidence says that the country with the most guns has the biggest problems with massacres.

People have mental health problems the world over. The difference in these cases is that when those people snap they can easily access gun, not just any kind of guns but guns designed for killing large numbers of people. If the people with mental health problems did not have easy access to these weapons then the carnage would be (and is in other countries) significantly reduced. I would suggest that often if someone wants to hurt a whole load of people then they will find a way but if that way is difficult and time consuming there is a better chance that the red mist will clear and the individual may reconsider his actions. the evidence bears this out.

We are discussing a particular type of gun crime here, and one that can easily be reduced by tighter control of gun laws. I see no positives in having such a large percentage of the population armed with weapons and many armed with weapons designed for mass killing. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

If, as you are suggesting, that the US need to treat the problem not the symptom. What are they doing to this end? I don't see the US doing either.

 

[Half Time Pies]

Yes give the kids guns. That is what I am saying.

I can only tell you what the evidence shows. If you want to cling on to what you believe, despite the evidence, O.k.

Gun laws don't prevent gun crime (again). If someone wants to hurt people, they will find a way to do it. Do people go into their place of work, or into a school and start killing people because of guns? No. You are focusing on a symptom of a problem, and not the problem itself, which has more to do with culture and mental health than guns.

Sorry that is rubbish, the problem is the access to the guns, there are always going to be people with mental health issues, what you dont do is allow them easy access to lethal weaponary.

About 3 quarters of the gunmen responsible for the last 60 mass murders in the US bought their guns legally, its quite clear that the laws therefore need to be tightened.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

This individual didn't own a gun, the weapons were his mothers. He didn't have a known history of mental health problems or anything else that would point to a high risk yet it still happened.

US school shooting: Profile of suspected gunman Adam Lanza
BBC News - US school shooting: Profile of suspected gunman Adam Lanza

Intelligent but shy and nervous were the most common memories of those who learnt beside him.

A former classmate, Olivia DeVivo, told the New York Times: "I never saw him with anyone. I can't even think of one person that was associated with him."

Another former classmate, Joshua Milas, described him as "probably one of the smartest kids I know. He was probably a genius".

A former school bus driver in the town, Marsha Moskowitz, said she remembered the Lanza boys.

"You know the trouble kids, and you figure, 'Pfft, that one's going to be trouble.' But I never would have thought that about them," she told the Hartford Courant newspaper.

His aunt, Marsha Lanza, told the Associated Press that he had been raised by kind, nurturing parents, who would not have hesitated to seek counselling for their son if he needed it.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

How will Newtown shootings change the US gun debate?
BBC News - How will Newtown shootings change the US gun debate?

The US system means that most gun legislation is set by states rather than the federal government. Connecticut has relatively tight firearms restrictions by US standards.

A whole range of legal loopholes would have to be unpicked, too. The Brady Act, signed by President Bill Clinton in 1993, requires federal background checks on firearm purchases by flagging up buyers with a criminal record or a history of mental health problems.

But 40% of gun sales are not affected by the legislation because they take place between private individuals - including at gun show stands or through the internet.

Even where checks are performed, they are not foolproof.

Jared Loughner, who wounded US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and killed six others during a 2011 shooting in Arizona, was sold a Glock 19 handgun despite having had several run-ins with the police hand having been thrown out of his college for erratic behaviour. But he had never been convicted of a crime nor assessed by mental health professionals.

 

[BadFish]

This individual didn't own a gun, the weapons were his mothers. He didn't have a known history of mental health problems or anything else that would point to a high risk yet it still happened.

US school shooting: Profile of suspected gunman Adam Lanza
BBC News - US school shooting: Profile of suspected gunman Adam Lanza

He had easy access to guns.