Citizens with guns

steamboat28 wrote:

Brick wrote: I'd also point out that countries like the U.S. do have a much higher occurrence of mass shootings and the like.

Well, naturally. Just like countries with lemon orchards have a much higher occurrence of citrus fruit. Are we looking at raw numbers, or are we looking at proportions? Are there more shootings per gun in the US, or are we simply judging the base numbers?

My point was simply, that less guns equals less mass shootings. I think proportions etc. are irrelevant to that fact.

It doesn't matter whether you have the most or the least mass shootings per raw-number/gun/person/citrus-fruit, a lower number of them can only be a good thing

A gun can be a "defensive Weapon" just like a light saber can. There is no difference there except in how you consider your weapon. We don't need to take away guns, we need to add training. Make it a part of school just like sex ed is.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: just like a light saber

Key difference being we are not in the midst of a civil war, regularly fending off the attacks of murderous, pure-evil "bad guys".

Cue conspiracy theorists...

tzb wrote:

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: just like a light saber

Key difference being we are not in the midst of a civil war, regularly fending off the attacks of murderous, pure-evil "bad guys".

Cue conspiracy theorists...

Neither were Jedi for much of their history.

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk

My point was simply, that less guns equals less mass shootings

not necessarily true...

in my opinion it should be as difficult as possible for those bad people to have access to items that can potentially be used for bad deeds.

it is already very difficult to legally purchase a firearm...bad people don't legally aquire their firearms....heck here in florida during the past 3 years the police have had 4 cruisers stolen just so the weapons stored in the trunk can be taken....several assault style rifles, several tactical shotguns, and several handguns...all originally in the hands of trained law enforcement now in the hands of criminals...stricter laws only affect those that abide by them...it has no affect on those that don't care about the law....

I'd also point out that countries like the U.S. do have a much higher occurrence of mass shootings and the like.

again not necessarily true....we just have more press coverage of them....look at places in africa and the middle east where mass shootings and bombings occurs simply because you were born in the wrong village, or follow the wrong religion....there's an old slogan for the media: "if it bleeds, it leads"....they tend to sensationalize the negative and marginalize the positive....i saw a news story about how a violent crime was stopped by an honest citizen with a gun, the story received a passing mention, while earlier in the broadcast a home invasion in which the homeowner was unarmed, and shot/killed received nearly 20 minutes of coverage...

We don't need to take away guns, we need to add training. Make it a part of school just like sex ed is.

i could get behind this.....

tzb wrote:

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: just like a light saber

Key difference being we are not in the midst of a civil war, regularly fending off the attacks of murderous, pure-evil "bad guys".

LOL well neither were the Jedi for centuries. Besides I don't believe anything is "Pure Evil" but it is always possible that we may run into someone who is murderous.

Brick wrote:

steamboat28 wrote:

Brick wrote: I'd also point out that countries like the U.S. do have a much higher occurrence of mass shootings and the like.

Well, naturally. Just like countries with lemon orchards have a much higher occurrence of citrus fruit. Are we looking at raw numbers, or are we looking at proportions? Are there more shootings per gun in the US, or are we simply judging the base numbers?

My point was simply, that less guns equals less mass shootings. I think proportions etc. are irrelevant to that fact.

It doesn't matter whether you have the most or the least mass shootings per raw-number/gun/person/citrus-fruit, a lower number of them can only be a good thing

With all due respect, Brick, it's very easy to say that from the outside. It is much more difficult for non-Americans to understand the nature of US gun culture and how that affects and informs decision-making processes, both on a political and individual level.

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk

As an outsider who lives in a country with strict gun control laws (citizens are allowed no guns, ever, even if they work as security guards in private institutions), I acknowledge the risks of arming civilians: accidental shootings at home, criminals able to acquire guns via burglary, the possibility of mentally ill people using guns for mass shootings, etc.

However, I still believe the risks are worth it. In our country's history, we've had presidents who have taken over and established military dictatorships, and other democratically elected presidents who have been able to remain in power past their terms or even when the majority of the country wanted them out, only because they kept the Police and Military well paid, and as long as they kept "the guns" happy citizens could do nothing about it.

I realize for UK or US to imagine such a thing happening in your countries is unlikely, but if push comes to shove, I believe people should be able to defend themselves.

I am all for more training as a requirement for gun ownership.

RyuJin wrote:

My point was simply, that less guns equals less mass shootings

not necessarily true...

Fair enough, though I would say it's at least highly likely that less guns equal less mass shootings.

RyuJin wrote:

in my opinion it should be as difficult as possible for those bad people to have access to items that can potentially be used for bad deeds.

it is already very difficult to legally purchase a firearm...bad people don't legally aquire their firearms....heck here in florida during the past 3 years the police have had 4 cruisers stolen just so the weapons stored in the trunk can be taken....several assault style rifles, several tactical shotguns, and several handguns...all originally in the hands of trained law enforcement now in the hands of criminals...stricter laws only affect those that abide by them...it has no affect on those that don't care about the law....

Again, you are not wrong. But it would appear that in places where it is harder to get hold of guns legally, it is also harder to get hold of them illegally. Whilst we have issues with illegal guns in the UK, it appears to be much less of an issue here than in the U.S. (I'm dare not even mention that I don't think Police should have fire arms either...)

RyuJin wrote:

I'd also point out that countries like the U.S. do have a much higher occurrence of mass shootings and the like.

again not necessarily true....we just have more press coverage of them....look at places in africa and the middle east where mass shootings and bombings occurs simply because you were born in the wrong village, or follow the wrong religion....there's an old slogan for the media: "if it bleeds, it leads".

I was really referring to 1st World Countries that are a bit more stable, but I see the point you are making.

RyuJin wrote:

We don't need to take away guns, we need to add training. Make it a part of school just like sex ed is.

i could get behind this.....

Agreed! I did suggest better education as an alternative.


I would note that whilst I did say that I was against civilians having guns, I did not say that I was in favour of having them banned. I also said that I didn't think it would be realistic to impose a ban (especially in the U.S.). It would be like trying to ban tobacco or alcohol (prohibition didn't really work out too well after all). But I still feel that there must be some kind of middle ground that can be found, like education, like tighter regulation etc. that could help reduce the risk without impeaching on the right to own arms. (granted if it were that easy it would have been found already, but I don't think that means we should stop trying)

steamboat28 wrote: With all due respect, Brick, it's very easy to say that from the outside. It is much more difficult for non-Americans to understand the nature of US gun culture and how that affects and informs decision-making processes, both on a political and individual level.

Duly noted friend, I was just throwing my two cents in