BS: Guns in America

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: olddude
Date: 29 Apr 18 - 01:30 PM

Now as far as ar weapons I already said I agree. No good not needed

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: olddude
Date: 29 Apr 18 - 01:28 PM

You live in a country that isn’t as big as some of our counties. Guns are the preferred weapons of criminals, however us hunters will disagree with your other assertion. You cannot live in a state like Alaska without a firearm unless you don’t want to leave your house. You are not the top of the food chain there

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 Apr 18 - 12:47 PM

Kevin, I understand there's a culture-difference between the US and the UK, but what frustrates me - and drives my occasional perhaps OTT outbursts - is the way the US guys simply refuse point blank to accept, or even consider, that there is a clearly and undeniably demonstrable link between the availability of guns, gun-ownership regulation, and relative ratios of shooting deaths and injuries.

How difficult can it be to understand simple facts like:-

1) If you don't have a gun, you can't shoot someone else.

2) In a (comparatively) gun-free society like the UK, guys who come into your home to steal your TV don't come armed with guns, because (a) they know that the homeowner won't confront them with a gun, (b) our police are not routinely armed so they will not confront the burglar with a gun, and (c) the 'Aggravated' laws mean that, if they are caught with an offensive weapon whilst committing a crime, and they are prosecuted, there will be an automatic doubling of the sentence they receive for the original crime.

3) Because there are so few guns in circulation here, we are not conducting our lives in fear of being shot, we don't have the paranoia that someone is waiting around every corner to attack us and, very likely, shoot us. The minimal number of shootings we experience (averaging around 70 per year for the entire country) are mostly suicides or gangs/criminals shooting each other.

Why, when facts which you and I know are perfectly true are presented to them,do they try to introduce stuff about shootings in small Central African or Far Eastern countries which bear no relationship to the First-World countries such as the US, UK, Germany, Australia, etc.?

In 71 years on this planet, I've never seen a gun except in the hands of police armed-response officers, members of the armed forces, farmers, shooting-club members, or 'sport'-shooters. I've never been threatened by anyone with a gun (or any other weapon, for that matter), and I don't know anyone who has.

My wife has a theory that the vast majority of Americans are as mad as hatters. I'm beginning to think she may have a point.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Apr 18 - 03:01 PM

Surely the social climate is very much a reflection of a gun culture that doesn’t exist in the same way in other countries, and that is intimately tied up with the availability of guns.

Some kinds of freedoms don't seem to work in some societies sometimes, so you relinquish them.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 28 Apr 18 - 12:38 PM

As I said in my first post, and the subsequent exchanges bore out the truth, it's pointless trying to discuss with a Gun-Loony like Fuzz-Face. They simply poo-poo anything and everything that doesn't suit their crackpot, propagandised, paranoid agenda.

Save your energy, Don, and leave the crazy, brainwashed bastards to their fear and paranoia, and their stupid bang-bangs.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Donuel
Date: 28 Apr 18 - 10:57 AM

You call yourself a patriot? You have been emotionally suckered by Anti American forces. Mainly Russia , who uses the NRA, with their cooperation, to use destabilizing destructive tactics to harm America and Americans.

I realize this is like discovering your father was a serial rapist killer. As you move through the 5 stages beginning with denial, you will eventually learn the truth. https://www.npr.org/2018/03/01/590076949/depth-of-russian-politicians-cultivation-of-nra-ties-revealed

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 02:39 PM

" the case for reducing their access to such weapons is amplified rather than reduced."

I do not see that: IMO, the social climate, NOT the guns, is at fault.
As the figures above indicate, when the number of legal guns is reduced most effectively, the result is usually a high murder rate. When there are MORE legal guns, in general the murder rate is reduced.

The PROBLEM is ILLEGAL guns- which none of the proposed laws CAN deal with, not that they attempt to.



Obviously, anyone who disagrees with the "correct" side is either insincere or of evil intent, while those who support the "correct" side are well intentioned and sincere.

Just have to know what side you are on...

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 02:17 PM

Actually the logical conclusion from those statistics you quote is that the problem isn’t so much guns as it is Americans. Or rather USA Americans, since Canadians have quite a lot of guns, and less gun killings.

Which of course is a much bigger problem. But if it is the fact that there is something in American culture that makes Americans especially prone to using guns to kill themselves and other people, compared to others in comparable countries, the case for reducing their access to such weapons is amplified rather than reduced. There,s something the the saying "it,s not just guns that kill" - but perhaps that should continue "it's American people with guns".

However there isn't going to be a ban on guns in the USA, and everyone knows it. It's a convenient Aunt Sally used by those who would hold off reasonable restrictions, especially those running the NRA and their lobby, who claim to see such restrictions as the thin end of the wedge for a total ban, and may even be sincere in that belief.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 02:10 PM

murders per 100,000       guns per 100,000)
    Guatemala    ( 31.21                   / 13,100)
    South Africa ( 34.27                   / 12,700)
    Venezuela    ( 57.15                   / 10,700)
    Belize       ( 34.4                     / 10,000)
    Jamaica      ( 43.21                   / 8,100)
    UK          ( 0.92                     / 6,200)
    Honduras    ( 63.75                   / 6,200)
    El Savador   (108.64                   / 5,800)
    Bahamas      ( 29.81                   / 5,300)
    Lesotho      ( 38                      / 2,700)
    Trinidad    ( 30.88                   / 1,600)


By YOUR logic, ALL of these countries SHOULD have low murder rates than the US.

The countries that have been most successful at limiting private, legal gun ownership are 1. Ethiopia, 2. Eritrea, 3. Haiti, 4. North Korea, and 5. Rwanda. Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Haiti all have higher murder rates than that of the United States. North Korea and Rwanda have slightly lower murder rates (4.4 and 4.5 per 100,000 respectively versus the United States at 4.88).

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 12:59 PM

Nevertheless, it’s worth considering why so many countries that have relatively successful programs of limiting private lawful ownership of guns are so dangerous and why countries with such high rates of private gun ownership are relatively safe. Even in a place like the United Kingdom, where the gun control seems to be effective (with a low murder rate of .92 per 100,000), it’s arguable that the UK’s peer countries such as Germany and Austria have had more success controlling crime in spite of allowing greater freedom of gun ownership.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 12:58 PM

"The data also exposes some myths I have heard about gun control. For example, I’ve heard activists tout Australia, which supposedly banned all guns. Australia has advanced a number of gun control measures over the years. Nevertheless, according to the data, Australia has a rate of private ownership of guns of 13,100 per 100,000 and a murder rate of .98.

Australia has almost twice as many guns per capita as the United Kingdom, for example, and a comparable murder rate. New Zealand has almost twice as many guns per capita as Australia but a lower crime rate.

Countries with both a low rate of private gun ownership and a low murder rate exist, but they are clearly data outliers. These include the Netherlands (3,900 guns per 100,000, for a murder rate of .61) the United Kingdom (6,200 guns per 100,000, for a murder rate of .92), Japan, and Portugal. Places like Norway, Austria, Switzerland, and Germany overwhelm those examples because they all have high rates of gun ownership and enviable crime rates."

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 12:51 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------
The conclusion is inescapable: High concentrations of private, legal gun ownership do not correlate positively to increased murders. Indeed, you can look at almost any slice of data and conclude the opposite: Higher private ownership of guns can be strongly correlated to lower murder rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 12:50 PM

"The UK is just filled with a bunch of bloody murderers."
with 1/10 the guns, the UK has twice the murder rate of Norway.

So your ignorance is greater.



Guns per murder in those countries are,

    United States at 20,967,
    Uruguay at 3,777,
    Norway at 55,893,
    France at 19,747,
    Austria at 59,608,
    Germany at 35,647,
    Switzerland at 35,435,
    New Zealand at 24,835, and
    Greece at 26,471.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 12:35 PM

"The U.K. is filled with murderers who like to get blood on their hands by using knives"

"The UK is just filled with a bunch of bloody murderers."

And there, in two short sentences, you demonstrate both your foolishness and your ignorance of the world outside the US. You really do need to read a little wider than the gutter press.

Murder rates per annum per 100,000 inhabitants - US 4.88, UK 0.92

Educate yourself

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 12:13 PM

A licensee or other person may not sell, rent, or transfer a
regulated firearm to a firearm applicant whose firearm application is placed on hold because of an open
disposition of criminal proceedings against the firearm applicant or disapproved, u
nless the hold or
disapproval has been subsequently withdrawn by the Secretary or overruled by a court in accordance
with § 5
-
127 of this subtitle.
(d) Penalty.
--
A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject
to imprisonment not exceeding 3 years or a fine
not exceeding $ 5,000 or both.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 12:10 PM

Any person who wishes to purchase, rent, or transfer a regulated firearm must complete a MSP 77R Application and Affidavit to purchse a regulated firearm. This includes individuals acquiring a regulated firearm through a firearm dealer, secondary sale/private sale, gift, or a person who wishes to voluntarily register a regulated firearm shall complete a Maryland State Police Application and Affidavit to Purchase a Regulated Firearm (MSP 77R).


If you are considering the purchase of a firearm and are unsure if the firearm is banned, contact the Maryland Regulated Firearms Dealer you are utilizing for your purchase. Maryland regulated firearms dealers are best suited to answer questions about the various types of firearms available. If your regulated firea?rms dealer is unable to provide assistance, contact the firearms manufacturer to obtain additional information about the weapon.

Some examples of the questions to ask are listed below:

1) Is this weapon semi-automatic? If not, it is not banned and you do not need to continue.

2) If this is a rifle, is it centerfire? If not, then it is not banned and you do not need to continue.

3) Is this weapon considered to be a copy of a banned weapon? If so, then it is banned and may not be purchased, sold, or transferred.

4) If this is a semi-automatic centerfire rifle that can accept a detachable magazine, does it have any two of the following: a folding stock; a grenade launcher or flare launcher; or a flash suppressor; If so, then it is banned and may not be purchased, sold, or transferred.

5) If this is a rifle, does it have a fixed magazine that holds more than 10 rounds? If so, then it is banned and may not be purchased, sold, or transferred.

6) If this is a rifle, what is the overall length of the weapon? If the stock is fully extended and there are no removable additions to the barrel, is the weapon less than 29 inches? If so, then it is banned and may not be purchased, sold, or transferred.

7) If this is a semi-automatic shotgun, does the weapon have a revolving cylinder? If so, then it is banned and may not be purchased, sold, or transferred.

8) If this is a semi-automatic shotgun, does the weapon have a folding stock? If so, then it is banned and may not be purchased, sold, or transferred. ?

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 11:55 AM

McGrath,

How would you tell if someone is making a pipe or a gun-barrel?


You are right- I do consider this to be anti-gun propaganda.
"SOURCE: Mayors Against Illegal Guns"

1. Concealed carry reciprocity
As is being pushed BY THE ANTI-GUN GROUPS in regards to other gun legislation,, there is a need for nation-wide rules, so that one is not in jeopardy of committing a felony by crossing a state line as one is at this time. THAT is why the NRA is pushing this: How would YOU like it if each city you went to had different rules as to who could drive there?
2. Private gun sales loophole
There are NO unlicensed gun sellers. If one sells guns as a business, (ie, to make money) one is either a licensed FFL or an illegal straw-purchaser. All the proposed and existing laws have exemptions for in-family transfers- BUT the present rules ALSO require the background check of both the buyer AND recipient for new purchase of guns for a family member
3. Terror watch list
The NRA has strongly opposed legislation to prohibit the sale of guns to people on the federal government's terrorist watch list. Under current law, a suspected terrorist can be put on the no-fly list and be kept off a plane, but can't be prevented from buying a gun.
There being NO appeal process , and not way to even find out if one is on the list. There are known errors in the list. What if some future administration put all Moslims, or Jews, or redheads on that list?
4. Stand-your-ground laws
Shouldn’t the same laws apply nation-wide?
5. Guns on campuses
If one believes the facts, that having armed people deters shootings ( as shown by statistics) it would be saying “We want our kids in college to be more likely to be shot “ to NOT encourage these laws.
6. Guns in schools
See above
NOTE that ONLY those who LEGALLY can CARRY guns are legal to carry guns- seems like a non-sequitur, but that is the fact. We let GUARDS carry guns in prisons, too- Got a problem with that?
7. Guns in the workplace
For several years the NRA has pushed legislation prohibiting businesses and employers from banning guns in locked cars in parking lots. It has been successful in several states, including Florida and Utah, and is currently pushing for passage in Tennessee. Indiana and North Dakota have enacted laws allowing employees to sue if they are asked about gun possession at work.
And this is a problem HOW?
8. Guns in bars and restaurants
See 5
9. Tracing guns used in shootings
In 2004, a Republican congressman from Kansas, Todd Tiahrt, a long-time ally of the NRA, added an amendment to bill regarding the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives (ATF). Until that point, data had been kept on the history of guns used in murders and shootings, which allowed police and policymakers to trace them back to corrupt dealerships and other holes in the system. The rule change, known as the Tiahrt amendment, made this data much harder to acquire.
How did it make them harder to acquire? “guns used in murders and shootings, which allowed police and policymakers to trace them back to corrupt dealerships and other holes in the system.” ARE NOT removed from the records EXCEPT BY COURT ORDER.
It also forced the justice department to destroy within 24 hours the records of any gun buyer whose background check was approved. The overall impact of the amendments was to make it much harder for police to clamp down on illegally distributed guns.
The CONCERN is that the government would be developing a database of LEGALLY obtained weapons ( NOT THOSE PURCHASED BY CRIMINALS) that could be used ( as done in other countries ) to then change the law and confiscate them.
10. Revoking licences from corrupt dealers
The NRA has made several attempts to usher through Congress an "ATF reform bill" that would make it much harder – some say virtually impossible – to revoke the gun-selling licenses of crooked dealers. If the bill passed – and the NRA is expected to try again soon – the ATF would have to prove the dealer's state of mind, in terms of his or her premeditated intention to break the law.

I believe that this is an mis-interpretation of the proposed bill- The one I recall protected dealers that sold guns legally, to legal buyers, with approved background checks. If the Government tells a dealer that the person has the right to buy a gun, should the dealer get to decided otherwise? What if he doesn’t want to sell to Blacks, or Jews, or Moslims? Are you OK with that?



I hope I have addressed your questions. You may well disagree with my opinions, but to dismiss my comments out of hand as so many here do, believing in the tyranny of the majority, is unreasonable. I thank you for at least having a conversation about it, rather than a lecture about how I have to agree with you because you say so.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 11:11 AM

BY LAW, they are NOT firearms, and cannot be controlled. At SOME point in the manufacturing process, they become controlled items- Just stop ONE step short and finish it up by hand.

How does it work that because something isn’t a firearm it can't be controlled? If stopping one step short isn't enough, stop two steps short. There are always going to be some people who can hack their way round anything, but not too many.
............
Anti-gun propaganda? Well, where I live we've a culture which is decidedly suspicious of guns,so if I take in our mainstream broadcast or print media it all probably would count as that. So here’s a specimen challenging the notion n that the NRA is other than hostile to sensible reforms, including some you indicate you'd like to see, Bruce - From The Guardian

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 10:36 AM

"technical solution could reduce this risk, so that any attempt to make an illegal weapon alerted the authorities, and the equipment would cease to function"

No way to do so.

The 80% completed receivers are the example of that. BY LAW, they are NOT firearms, and cannot be controlled. At SOME point in the manufacturing process, they become controlled items- Just stop ONE step short and finish it up by hand.

I think that the criminals who would make illegal firearms are as smart ( or smarter) than the ones proposing the laws about them

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 10:31 AM

Not a member of the NRA, never have been.

BUT:
As for the NRA
http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/19/want-gun-control-stop-calling-nra-terrorist-organization/

Try reading something other than the anti-gun propaganda.



"where I live the organisations for drivers don’t campaign to abolish speed limits and driving tests and seat belts and annual checks on the safety of our vehicles. "

IF there was public outcry to limit the power of automobiles to 6 horse power ( a stagecoach only had 4 horses - certainly no need for more than that.) there might well be a hue and cry from those organizations. That is what the limits on guns being proposed look like.


I am IN FAVOR of background checks.
I am in favor of removing guns from people who are a danger- PROVIDED there is an appeal process to prevent it from becoming a political means to disarm one's opponents- say, Blacks or Moslims, or Jews.

Yet I am accused of " more obfuscation and Whataboutery" when I ask the simple question:

Is the goal to reduce deaths, or limit the ownership of firearms? I do NOT consider that these are the same point.

Nor have I seen any effort by any here to show that , given the points I have presented with NO factual argument against ( "I don't like what you say" is NOT a valid point), I need to reconsider my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 10:19 AM

"COCONUT CREEK, Fla. (AP) — The Latest on the commission investigating the Florida high school massacre (all times local):

1:45 p.m.

A father whose daughter died in the Florida high school massacre said an investigative commission will discover the deaths could have been avoided it weren't for egregious errors made by law enforcement and school officials.

Andrew Pollack is one of three victims' fathers appointed to the 16-member commission investigating the Feb. 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that left 17 dead, including his 18-year-old daughter, Meadow. The commission held its first meeting Tuesday, hearing from a Broward Sheriff's Office detective who laid out the gunman's actions during the shootings.

Pollack told reporters that the commission would unearth "how much incompetency there was that led to my daughter and the other 16 victims being murdered."

He pointed to the FBI, whose officials have acknowledged they failed to follow up on a warning call about Cruz. In addition, the sheriff's office said Tuesday that deputies had 18 contacts with Cruz before the shooting, but that he never did anything he could be arrested for.

___

11:15 a.m.

A commission investigating the Florida high school massacre has learned that faulty classroom designs and police radio and 911 systems contributed to the chaos and possibly to some of the 17 deaths.

The Broward Sheriff's Office told the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission at its first meeting Tuesday that teachers couldn't lock their classroom doors from the inside as they tried to lock down their students Feb. 14. They had to open their doors and use a key to lock them from the outside.

The doors also had small windows, allowing the gunman to fire into the locked classrooms.

Broward sheriff's radios were not on the same channel as Coral Springs police, the two primary agencies that responded. Attempts to merge the radio channels failed, preventing the two departments from sharing information. Coral Springs and Broward are also on separate 911 systems. Calls were coming into both."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/latest-multiple-failures-played-part-school-massacre-151914544.html

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in Americaft
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 10:09 AM

If you have a method of removing "Ghost kits" without the wholesale restriction of 3-d printers, more power to you.

That does seem to imply that enabling this technology now is premature, and maybe needs to be restricted. There is nothing inevitable about the introduction of a new technology into society. So far as I understand there's nothing in your constitution about a right to bear 3D printers...

Perhaps some technical solution could reduce this risk, so that any attempt to make an illegal weapon alerted the authorities, and the equipment would cease to function. In the meantime we can do without them, as we have till now. As you said, Bruce, and I agreed with you, liberty has its limits.
.................
Clearly there isn't going to be an overall ban on guns in the US in this age of society at least. Arguing about it either way is a bit irrelevant, and diverts people from addressing what you need to address. Far better to talk about things that could be done and whether they should be done, and how. To get them done.

There are plenty of ideas that sound very sensible - however it appears that the NRA is strongly opposing most of them, presenting sensible ideas as the thin end of the wedge". And also that in doing so it may not acting in accordance with what most gun owners actually wish. The first thing your sensible gun owners surely need to do is to take over the NRA.

I don't know about the USA, but where I live the organisations for drivers don’t campaign to abolish speed limits and driving tests and seat belts and annual checks on the safety of our vehicles. If they did members would seek to change that, where they didn’t transfer to other organisations with sensible people in charge.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 09:05 AM

And we KNOW we can trust the police to protect us....

https://nypost.com/2018/04/25/cop-charged-with-murdering-bride-to-be-will-argue-self-defense/

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 08:26 AM

Yeah, lets restrict firearms to police and ex-police. They will always protect us from anyone with an illegal gun...



https://www.yahoo.com/gma/suspect-arrested-golden-state-killer-case-sources-165903122--abc-news-topstories.html


"After about 30 minutes, when their roommate's screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: "For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers."
(This was DC, where gun ownership was prohibited until a recent court decision.)

Tell me more about how safe we will be when you take all the guns from LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 08:20 AM

A REASONABLE piece of gun legislation.

http://legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=26339

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 08:13 AM

'Plastic in a 3d printer will never hold up. You run the risk of the slide inside your face "

And present generation 3-d printers are restricted to plastic how?

Epoxy/resin of various types is the preferred material- it will "only" last a few hundred rounds fired, but that should satisfy the mass shooter- the proposed laws are restricting the magazines ( which CAN be made of plastic) to 10 rounds or less, remember?

After you shoot the one person in the school with that, you can take his gun and use it. And NONE of the restrictions proposed have restricted police or security guard weapon types- there are specific exemptions to allow possession and use of even fully automatic weapons by police- so they will ALWAYS be available to the dedicated terrorist/mass shooter.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 08:06 AM

"As I expected, no answers to the two simple questions I put, just more obfuscation and Whataboutery"

Seems like proving you wrong just gets me ignored. Why bother replying to anything you say if you ignore what I post?

--------
The countries that have been most successful at limiting private, legal gun ownership are 1. Ethiopia, 2. Eritrea, 3. Haiti, 4. North Korea, and 5. Rwanda. Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Haiti all have higher murder rates than that of the United States. North Korea and Rwanda have slightly lower murder rates (4.4 and 4.5 per 100,000 respectively versus the United States at 4.88).

Let’s look at the countries with the highest concentrations of gun ownership (excluding Yemen and Iraq as active war zones). Guns per murder in those countries are,

    United States at 20,967,
    Uruguay at 3,777,
    Norway at 55,893,
    France at 19,747,
    Austria at 59,608,
    Germany at 35,647,
    Switzerland at 35,435,
    New Zealand at 24,835, and
    Greece at 26,471.

Norway is a particularly interesting example. It has 10 times the gun ownership rate of the United Kingdom, but only half the murder rate.

When one excludes Iraq and Yemen, not one of the countries on the list of the 10 highest rates of gun ownership also appears on the list of the top ten highest murder rates. In fact, the countries with the highest murder rates have markedly low gun ownership rates.

    El Savador (108.64 murders per 100,000/5800 guns per 100,000)
    Honduras (63.75/6200)
    Venezuela (57.15/10,700)
    Jamaica (43.21/8,100)
    Lesotho (38/2,700)
    Belize (34.4/10,000)
    South Africa (34.27/12,700)
    Guatemala (31.21/13,100)
    Trinidad (30.88/1,600)
    Bahamas (29.81/5,300)

It really doesn’t matter how you slice this data. The conclusion is inescapable: High concentrations of private, legal gun ownership do not correlate positively to increased murders. Indeed, you can look at almost any slice of data and conclude the opposite: Higher private ownership of guns can be strongly correlated to lower murder rates. ------------


To repeat:Norway is a particularly interesting example. It has 10 times the gun ownership rate of the United Kingdom, but only half the murder rate.

So the UK is obviously filled with murderous killers ( 20 times as many murders per gun owned.) It is now up to you to explain this- are UK citizens really such lawless murderers?

The POINT is that
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The conclusion is inescapable: High concentrations of private, legal gun ownership do not correlate positively to increased murders. Indeed, you can look at almost any slice of data and conclude the opposite: Higher private ownership of guns can be strongly correlated to lower murder rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------


"if, as you propose, fewer guns in circulation and strict controls would result in more shooting-deaths, please explain why the UK, with strict gun-controls, has <100 shooting-deaths per annum (<1 per 650k head of population), yet the US has 30,000 per annum (1 per 12k head of population) - a death-rate in the US which is 54 times greater than in the UK. "

1. The UK is filled with murderers who like to get blood on their hands by using knives?
2. The UK is NOT the US, and has a more homogeneous culture. The increasing murder rate there may be due to the culture becoming more mixed. Is that what you want to say? You prefer having a WASP only society? Mixing of ANY cultures, even racially similar ones, is a cause of societal friction.


FACT: Norway disproves your point- unless there is some reason that with 1/10 the guns, the UK has twice the murder rate of Norway. yet you do not consider other reasons for the US, so I will NOT allow you to claim other reasons for the UK.

The UK is just filled with a bunch of bloody murderers.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: olddude
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 06:01 PM

https://youtu.be/64jdRiXfqfw

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: olddude
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 05:21 PM

Woman of my dreams US champion
https://youtu.be/XPXIZa8Kevw

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: olddude
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 05:01 PM

Frame of a glock is not plastic, it’s a composite stronger than steel

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: olddude
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 05:00 PM

Plastic in a 3d printer will never hold up. You run the risk of the slide inside your face

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 04:59 PM

As I expected, no answers to the two simple questions I put, just more obfuscation and Whataboutery - the tactics of the brainwashed.

I'll try one last time, although I don't expect The Professor to give the straight answer I asked for, because that would blow a big hole in his brainwashed argument :-

(1) if, as you propose, fewer guns in circulation and strict controls would result in more shooting-deaths, please explain why the UK, with strict gun-controls, has <100 shooting-deaths per annum (<1 per 650k head of population), yet the US has 30,000 per annum (1 per 12k head of population) - a death-rate in the US which is 54 times greater than in the UK.

(2) if, as you propose, fewer guns in circulation and strict controls would result in more shooting-deaths, please explain why, following the UK's first school-massacre in 1996 and the resulting immediate action by the UK government to strengthen firearm regulations and reduce the number of handguns (the type of firearm used in the attack) in circulation, there have been no further shootings of that kind here whilst, in the US over the same period, there have been 450.

Two straight questions. Two straight answers please. No links to skewed-logic on fear-mongering pro-gun sites, no cut-and-pastes, no bullshit - just your own words please, backed up by actual verifiable facts rather than NRA and gun-nut horse-puckey.

Now, Professor, answer the damn questions.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 04:05 PM

"I wish the Powers to be would consult those in the know before doing knee jerk do nothing laws "

Which is EXACTLY what I have stated- The laws being pushed do not address the problem, nor will they produce the results that the anti-gun people seem to ( or say that they) want.

Gun shows are NOT the problem, if the present FFL laws are followed. If you have a method of removing "Ghost kits" without the wholesale restriction of 3-d printers, more power to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: olddude
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 03:58 PM

I have carried a firearm since I was 21 legally never had to fire it but did need to draw it twice to thwart an attack on others. Unless someone is extraordinarily trained it is not a good idea. However if one is vetted and trained it’s just one more cop out there and that’s fine with me. We talked before how some states are too easy for Carr we need federal standards and better revisions to the existing laws to keep them from crazies or bad guys. However every good law is negated by guns shows or ghost kits making them ineffective. I wish the Powers to be would consult those in the know before doing knee jerk do nothing laws

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 03:39 PM

McGrath,

" You seem to imply an automatic alignment between those who tend to be hostile to guns and those who feel happy about abortion, and the reverse, and that's not a safe assumption. I imagine my views about abortion are not too unlike yours. "

Hence my question as to the intent of those on this thread:
Is the goal to reduce deaths, or limit the ownership of firearms? I do NOT consider that these are the same point.

Nor have I seen any effort by any here to show that , given the points I have presented with NO factual argument against ( I don't like what you say is NOT a valid point), I need to reconsider my opinion.



I have noticed "That toddler would have grown up to be another gun-toting bigot like her mother" and "except in the tiny, brainwashed minds of gun-nutcases." being presented by the anti-gun folks.



"After about 30 minutes, when their roommate's screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: "For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers."
(This was DC, where gun ownership was prohibited until a recent court decision.)

Tell me more about how safe we will be when you take all the guns from LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 02:34 PM

Jack is fine with dead babies, as long as there is a possibility they might have disagreed with him.



From 1973 through 2011, nearly 53 million legal abortions occurred in the U.S

572 is the average number of children (not including educators and other people) who are killed each year in automobile accidents
Number of Lightning Deaths in the United States, 1990 to 2003             United States Total 756

The Washington Post has determined that since the Columbine High shooting in 1999, 131 children, educators and other people have been killed (and another 254 injured) in assaults at schools

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Jack Campin
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 01:05 PM

Another Darwin Award winner

Count me out of all the crocodile tears. That toddler would have grown up to be another gun-toting bigot like her mother.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 12:40 PM

Sorry if I do not go along with your anti-gun propaganda, but as someone with a fully-operating, un-indoctrinated brain I have looked at the numbers, and see that the laws being proposed do not accomplish the intent stated by those proposing them.

I have to look at what reasons there are for disarming the legal citizens, while leaving the guns in criminal hands alone.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Mrrzy
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 12:31 PM

Sigh.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 12:17 PM

Now, how about actual verifiable facts rather than anti-gun-nut horse-puckey from those here that disagree with me? Is it too much to get YOU to provide what has been demanded of me?


If you cared about reducing the killing RATHER than reducing the guns, you would be working to prevent teenagers from driving, drinking alcohol, having abortions, using drugs, and being hit by lightning.

ALL of which kill more than rifles do in a given year.




present law is that ANY child can be disposed of until it is of a certain age. ( see Roe vs. Wade)
"Based on available state-level data, approximately 893,000 abortions took place in the United States in 2016—down from approximately 914,000 abortions in 2015.
In 2014, an estimated 926,240 abortions took place in the United States—down from 1.06 million in 2011, 1.21 million abortions in 2008, 1.2 million in 2005, 1.29 million in 2002, 1.31 million in 2000 and 1.36 million in 1996. From 1973 through 2011, nearly 53 million legal abortions occurred in the U.S (AGI).
In 2014, approximately 19% of U.S. pregnancies (excluding spontaneous miscarriages) ended in abortion.1
According to the United Nations' 2013 report, only nine countries in the world have a higher reported abortion rate than the United States. They are: Bulgaria, Cuba, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Romania, Russia, Sweden, and Ukraine.*

*Though the UN lists China's official abortion rate at 19.2, China's actual abortion rate is likely much higher. According to China's 2010 census, there were approximately 310 million women of reproductive age in the country. An estimated 13-23 million abortions happen annually in China, resulting in an adjusted abortion rate of 41.9-74.2. The abortion rate is the number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 15-44.
In 2014, the highest percentage of pregnancies were aborted in the District of Columbia (38%), New York (33%), and New Jersey (30%). The lowest percentage of pregnancies were aborted in Utah (5%), South Dakota (4%), and Wyoming (<2%). (AGI abortion data + CDC birth data).
In 2014, approximately 37% of all pregnancies in New York City (excluding spontaneous miscarriages) ended in abortion (CDC)."


So, far more lives at risk- ready to overturn Roe v. Wade?


But if your intent is to REMOVE GUNS FROM LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS, a few million dead each year don't matter at all- it doesn't address what YOU want.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 11:44 AM

"The Washington Post has determined that since the Columbine High shooting in 1999, 131 children, educators and other people have been killed (and another 254 injured) in assaults at schools. Oddly — but not surprisingly? — the Post doesn’t break down the number: lumping “educators and other people” into the count makes it larger.

Now, 131 is not a large number in a country of 350 million people; even so, inserting “only” before it would be considered callous; and of course people have also been injured in the attacks as well as killed. Nevertheless, as perhaps a few students educated in America’s public school system (which is run by and for the teachers unions), may be able determine, 131 is a far smaller number than 572; (Yale snowflake alert!) 572 is the average number of children (not including educators and other people) who are killed each year in automobile accidents, raising the question: Why isn’t 17-year-old Brianna Lee skipping school to demand safer driving in America?"

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 11:37 AM

BTW, we are not talking about the UK here- we are talking about the US, with 350,000,000 guns already out there, and effectively unlimited numbers of potential guns that can be made with a 3-d printer.


If you think the police can go through peoples' homes looking for guns, you have never read the US constitution. A warrant for each location is required, specifying the evidence that a cause for such search exists.

And there would be riots and thousands killed.


When one excludes Iraq and Yemen, not one of the countries on the list of the 10 highest rates of gun ownership also appears on the list of the top ten highest murder rates. In fact, the countries with the highest murder rates have markedly low gun ownership rates.

    El Savador (108.64 murders per 100,000/5800 guns per 100,000)
    Honduras (63.75/6200)
    Venezuela (57.15/10,700)
    Jamaica (43.21/8,100)
    Lesotho (38/2,700)
    Belize (34.4/10,000)
    South Africa (34.27/12,700)
    Guatemala (31.21/13,100)
    Trinidad (30.88/1,600)
    Bahamas (29.81/5,300)

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 11:23 AM

"OK genius, explain to us how someone without a gun can shoot someone else."

OJ,SFB,explain to us how someone without a car can drive over someone else.


You miss the point.

Explain how someone can defend herself from someone larger and stronger when the attacker doesn't wait for the police to arrive?

Two women were upstairs in a townhouse when they heard their roommate, a third woman, being attacked downstairs by intruders. They phoned the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After about 30 minutes, when their roommate's screams had stopped, they assumed the police had finally arrived. When the two women went downstairs they saw that in fact the police never came, but the intruders were still there. As the Warren court graphically states in the opinion: "For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers."


"away-with-the-fairies theories" are what YOU have presented: WHEN DO CRIMINALS OBEY THE LAW???


1- see my clicky- and learn some statistics:

The countries that have been most successful at limiting private, legal gun ownership are 1. Ethiopia, 2. Eritrea, 3. Haiti, 4. North Korea, and 5. Rwanda. Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Haiti all have higher murder rates than that of the United States. North Korea and Rwanda have slightly lower murder rates (4.4 and 4.5 per 100,000 respectively versus the United States at 4.88).

Let’s look at the countries with the highest concentrations of gun ownership (excluding Yemen and Iraq as active war zones). Guns per murder in those countries are,

    United States at 20,967,
    Uruguay at 3,777,
    Norway at 55,893,
    France at 19,747,
    Austria at 59,608,
    Germany at 35,647,
    Switzerland at 35,435,
    New Zealand at 24,835, and
    Greece at 26,471.

Norway is a particularly interesting example. It has 10 times the gun ownership rate of the United Kingdom, but only half the murder rate.

When one excludes Iraq and Yemen, not one of the countries on the list of the 10 highest rates of gun ownership also appears on the list of the top ten highest murder rates. In fact, the countries with the highest murder rates have markedly low gun ownership rates.

    El Savador (108.64 murders per 100,000/5800 guns per 100,000)
    Honduras (63.75/6200)
    Venezuela (57.15/10,700)
    Jamaica (43.21/8,100)
    Lesotho (38/2,700)
    Belize (34.4/10,000)
    South Africa (34.27/12,700)
    Guatemala (31.21/13,100)
    Trinidad (30.88/1,600)
    Bahamas (29.81/5,300)

It really doesn’t matter how you slice this data. The conclusion is inescapable: High concentrations of private, legal gun ownership do not correlate positively to increased murders. Indeed, you can look at almost any slice of data and conclude the opposite: Higher private ownership of guns can be strongly correlated to lower murder rates.


2. And how many crimes, such as knifings and other murders, have been PREVENTED in the UK by the presence of guns?   ZERO- so take that into account.

Which facts that I have posted do you think are false, and why?

**I** have provided my supporting facts- YOU have not shown any to be false.



And NO-ONE has posted anything that says they want to reduce illegal killings EXCEPT ME- The ONLY posts have been to restrict LEGAL LAW_ABIDING CITIZENS from having access to some ( or all) firearms.




To repeat:Norway is a particularly interesting example. It has 10 times the gun ownership rate of the United Kingdom, but only half the murder rate.

So the UK is obviously filled with murderous killers ( 20 times as many murders per gun owned.)

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 11:09 AM

OK genius, explain to us how someone without a gun can shoot someone else. Of course guns are the problem, except in the tiny, brainwashed minds of gun-nutcases.

The hatred and fear that those of us with a fully-operating, un-indoctrinated brain see is on the part of those who value their pro-gun stance above human life.

You didn't answer my earlier question, Professor - You simply bombard us with a great deal of skewed 'logic' and 'evidence' supporting the away-with-the-fairies theories that the pro-gun propagandists have implanted in your brain but, as is always the case when gun-nuts try to 'prove' their argument, whilst proposing categorically their theory (and that's all it is - a theory, unproven) that fewer guns would result in even more shooting-casualties, you carefully sidestep the hard evidence of the actual, real-life experience of other countries where strict gun-controls and a reduction in the number of guns in circulation has produced precisely the opposite effect, and resulted in considerably fewer deaths.

So, I'll ask you again, Professor -

(1) if, as you propose, fewer guns in circulation and strict controls would result in more shooting-deaths, please explain why the UK, with strict gun-controls, has <100 shooting-deaths per annum (<1 per 650k head of population), yet the US has 30,000 per annum (1 per 12k head of population) - a death-rate in the US which is 54 times greater than in the UK.

(2) if, as you propose, fewer guns in circulation and strict controls would result in more shooting-deaths, please explain why, following the UK's first school-massacre in 1996 and the resulting immediate action by the UK government to strengthen firearm regulations and reduce the number of handguns (the type of firearm used in the attack) in circulation, there have been no further shootings of that kind here whilst, in the US over the same period, there have been 450.

Two straight questions. Two straight answers please. No links to skewed-logic on fear-mongering pro-gun sites, no cut-and-pastes, no bullshit - just your own words please, backed up by actual verifiable facts rather than NRA and gun-nut horse-puckey.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 08:28 AM

The hatred and fear that I see is on the part of those who value their anti-gun stance above human life. They would rather have more illegal killings than admit that guns are NOT the problem.

Lack of enforcement of the existing laws and Liberal attitudes that do not provide for that enforcement ARE the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Jack Campin
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 08:19 AM

guns are for killing

That's not their main purpose at all. Their function in contemporary America is to instil hatred and fear in their owners, turning them into suckers for ideologues who validate hatred and fear.

Own a gun and you spend a large fraction of your life thinking about who you might kill with it, how and why. Your own infant children become deadly enemies who you have to fend off with locks and hiding places. And ultimately none of this helps since the person you're most likely to kill with it is yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 08:04 AM

And I disagree with YOUR opinions.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Mrrzy
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 07:18 AM

I never said target-shooting was a valid sport. I never said people should not own guns. I have addressed your post. All I have said, repeatedly, is that guns are for killing (which is why they could deter) and not to pretend otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: Jack Campin
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 05:14 AM

Some figures on the trend in mass school shootings:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/04/180419131025.htm

OK, school shootings are pretty trivial as a risk to life (handguns are much more significant) but this sort of statistic does make the gun-nuts look even nuttier.

In fact the number of people killed by guns in the US is hardly significant at all. The real damage is to the people who own the guns - they're an instrument of political indoctrination.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns in America
From: olddude
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 07:42 PM

Thank you for not posting how in America we have enough of the craziest