Another shooting in america

[buckshot]

The weird thing is that I'm actually considering buying a gun now. I have a Grade-A crazy stalker who won't leave me alone and I know for a fact that she carries a gun. She's also made some veiled threats about my wife.

 

[DelToro]

From the Guardian....

An NRA public affairs spokeswoman, in response to a question about the Connecticut shooting, said: “Until the facts are thoroughly known, the NRA will not be making any comment.”

Well there's a surprise.

I would have thought that there were 3 obvious facts;

Man. Gun. Killings.

 

[Matty]

The police chief has comfirmed 20 dead children, 6 dead adults plus the shooter himself at the school. All in just 2 rooms. Given his mother was the kindergarten teacher it sounds very much like it's her class that have been massacred. Shocking. Also looks like the shooter's brother has been found dead at their house in New Jersey.

 

[SWP's back]

a very stupid argument.


If all zones were gun free then the perpetrators couldnt buy guns and travel to the gun free zone.
yes criminals dont obey the laws but it becomes harder to get illegal firearms if there are effectively no legal ones. Most illegal firearms start life as legal firemarms. I will grant you that the massive gun ownership in the US would mean that illegally available firearms wouldnt reduce for a generation after strict gun controls are introduced, but if you dont start it never happens

please expand your argument on fearful populations in england today. dont really follow it.

the last bit about the rule of law going missing, are you really arguing that the rule of law has gone missing in the states? That would indicate its no longer a civilised nation. You really want to argue that?

A gun free zone means you cannot carry your weapon there, eg. within a few hundred yards of a school. It has nothing to do with purchasing a gun.

"Without rule of law" can be a temporary situation, sometimes very localized. eg. the LA riots. eg. last summer, Reeves Corner in Croydon had their business burned to the ground. Looters raiding businesses and preying on the weak.

thanks for the put downs Pirate. I appreciate your characterisation of me and my thoughts.

they were not put downs they were responses to the points you've made, all part of the ebb and flow of democratic debate. Not trying to put you down fella trying to debate. hence these responses as well

I appreciate your clarification on the gun free zones. but it doesnt change the point. if everywhere is a gun free zone, you wouldnt be able to legally hold a gun to take to carryout the shootings, especially if it was illegal to buy guns as well.

OK, I agree localised breakdowns in the rule of law do not mean that a country is uncivilised, thanks for the clarification. However a localised breakdon in the rule of law would be made worse by widespread gun ownership and reduced with strict gun control. Supported by the figures from the london riots 2011 and LA riots in 1992. Virtually no firearms in London riots and 5 deaths. Lots of guns in LA and 53 deaths. To be fair the london riots only lasted three days and the LA 5 (or 6 depending on the source) but the difference is still stark.

I would also be very interested in the explanation of the fear in the english population you mentioned previously

UK riots was 5 nights mate.

 

[Lucky13]

From the Guardian....

An NRA public affairs spokeswoman, in response to a question about the Connecticut shooting, said: “Until the facts are thoroughly known, the NRA will not be making any comment.”

Well there's a surprise.

I would have thought that there were 3 obvious facts;

Man. Gun. Killings.

What the hell has this got to do with the NRA?

 

[BlueTG]

Its ridiculous, so sad for those involved and murdered. It happens way too much and gun ownership should be addressed.

 

[Essembe]

a very stupid argument.


If all zones were gun free then the perpetrators couldnt buy guns and travel to the gun free zone.
yes criminals dont obey the laws but it becomes harder to get illegal firearms if there are effectively no legal ones. Most illegal firearms start life as legal firemarms. I will grant you that the massive gun ownership in the US would mean that illegally available firearms wouldnt reduce for a generation after strict gun controls are introduced, but if you dont start it never happens

please expand your argument on fearful populations in england today. dont really follow it.

the last bit about the rule of law going missing, are you really arguing that the rule of law has gone missing in the states? That would indicate its no longer a civilised nation. You really want to argue that?

A gun free zone means you cannot carry your weapon there, eg. within a few hundred yards of a school. It has nothing to do with purchasing a gun.

"Without rule of law" can be a temporary situation, sometimes very localized. eg. the LA riots. eg. last summer, Reeves Corner in Croydon had their business burned to the ground. Looters raiding businesses and preying on the weak.

thanks for the put downs Pirate. I appreciate your characterisation of me and my thoughts.

And thank fuck we didn't have guns. We had looting, a few shops burnt. The shops were insured and many went to prison. What we didn't have was gun warfare on the streets and tens if not hundreds killed in gun battles.

Like you never have riots in the states.

You have 30,000 per year killed by guns, that is the old capacity of Maine Road, killed by guns. We have 100. Your population is 5 times ours, not 300 times.

Only a fucking idiot would still try and argue that guns make your country safer.

Oh my, another aggressive personal attack.

You asked and I quote

Only a fucking idiot would still try and argue that guns make your country safer.

My answer is Switzerland. No one invades that country as they know every adult has a gun.<br /><br />-- Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:51 pm --<br /><br />

I understand when something like this happens, emotions run high.

There are however a couple of things to consider. In this instance and in the movie theatre in Colorado shooting, both areas were labelled no gun zones. These crazies pick gun free zones. Often they are only stopped by someone else with a gun, or suicide like Dunblane.

Also, criminals don't abide by gun laws leaving the rest of the populace unable to defend themselves. Gun confiscation generally lead to a fearful populace and an increasingly threatening government. Eg. germany in the 1930's, or england today...

A gun can be a great equaliser for the old lady whose house is getting broken into. Or the female alone. Or the male against 2 or more who wish to do him harm.

I have been in situations and countries where the rule of law has gone missing and it is quite a scary place to be. One does feel more comfortable with an ability to defend ones self.

Again, what a tragedy today.....

a very stupid argument.


If all zones were gun free then the perpetrators couldnt buy guns and travel to the gun free zone.
yes criminals dont obey the laws but it becomes harder to get illegal firearms if there are effectively no legal ones. Most illegal firearms start life as legal firemarms. I will grant you that the massive gun ownership in the US would mean that illegally available firearms wouldnt reduce for a generation after strict gun controls are introduced, but if you dont start it never happens

please expand your argument on fearful populations in england today. dont really follow it.

the last bit about the rule of law going missing, are you really arguing that the rule of law has gone missing in the states? That would indicate its no longer a civilised nation. You really want to argue that?

I wouldn't even enter into dialogue with someone capable of such fucking appalling debate and reasoning mate.

Fucking right wing NRA apologist nut job.

These personal characterisations are becoming quite agressive. Perhaps you could refrain from these please.

 

[BulgarianPride]

You can't. But you can limit the facilitator of death. It is why you can't buy a fully functioning tank.

But if everyone had tanks, the nutjob driving the tank would of been neutralized before he does a lot of damage.

Then we need more tanks

Looks like a solution to the gun problem. One drawback is women driving tanks.

 

[pirate]

A gun free zone means you cannot carry your weapon there, eg. within a few hundred yards of a school. It has nothing to do with purchasing a gun.

"Without rule of law" can be a temporary situation, sometimes very localized. eg. the LA riots. eg. last summer, Reeves Corner in Croydon had their business burned to the ground. Looters raiding businesses and preying on the weak.

thanks for the put downs Pirate. I appreciate your characterisation of me and my thoughts.

they were not put downs they were responses to the points you've made, all part of the ebb and flow of democratic debate. Not trying to put you down fella trying to debate. hence these responses as well

I appreciate your clarification on the gun free zones. but it doesnt change the point. if everywhere is a gun free zone, you wouldnt be able to legally hold a gun to take to carryout the shootings, especially if it was illegal to buy guns as well.

OK, I agree localised breakdowns in the rule of law do not mean that a country is uncivilised, thanks for the clarification. However a localised breakdon in the rule of law would be made worse by widespread gun ownership and reduced with strict gun control. Supported by the figures from the london riots 2011 and LA riots in 1992. Virtually no firearms in London riots and 5 deaths. Lots of guns in LA and 53 deaths. To be fair the london riots only lasted three days and the LA 5 (or 6 depending on the source) but the difference is still stark.

I would also be very interested in the explanation of the fear in the english population you mentioned previously

UK riots was 5 nights mate.

really, the source i used (was the torygraph) said 3. either way it doesnt alter the argument in this case.

 

[i kne albert davy]

A gun free zone means you cannot carry your weapon there, eg. within a few hundred yards of a school. It has nothing to do with purchasing a gun.

"Without rule of law" can be a temporary situation, sometimes very localized. eg. the LA riots. eg. last summer, Reeves Corner in Croydon had their business burned to the ground. Looters raiding businesses and preying on the weak.

thanks for the put downs Pirate. I appreciate your characterisation of me and my thoughts.

they were not put downs they were responses to the points you've made, all part of the ebb and flow of democratic debate. Not trying to put you down fella trying to debate. hence these responses as well

I appreciate your clarification on the gun free zones. but it doesnt change the point. if everywhere is a gun free zone, you wouldnt be able to legally hold a gun to take to carryout the shootings, especially if it was illegal to buy guns as well.

OK, I agree localised breakdowns in the rule of law do not mean that a country is uncivilised, thanks for the clarification. However a localised breakdon in the rule of law would be made worse by widespread gun ownership and reduced with strict gun control. Supported by the figures from the london riots 2011 and LA riots in 1992. Virtually no firearms in London riots and 5 deaths. Lots of guns in LA and 53 deaths. To be fair the london riots only lasted three days and the LA 5 (or 6 depending on the source) but the difference is still stark.

I would also be very interested in the explanation of the fear in the english population you mentioned previously

UK riots was 5 nights mate.

And some nutter was shooting at Police and trying to bring down a helicopter if i remember right.