Dodgyknees Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 I don’t know how to comment on this. It’s so frustrating to know that kids who are aged the same as my oldest niece getting blasted with bullets, yet nothing will change. Shocks me to the core that a ‘progressive’ country can allow this, if it was happening in Iran the people of America would be going mad. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Hey, if I was getting paid millions of dollars to put up and shut up about guns, I'd say "**** the kids" too. Actually, no I wouldn't, because I have a soul. Stupid fat, white, middle to old aged idiots. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted February 16, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2018 20 minutes ago, lapal_fan said: Stupid fat, white, middle to old aged idiots. On this issue, I don't think you can tie it to age. The redneck kids (and, tbf, plenty of urban yoof) seem to be given guns as soon as they can walk. It's the old ones who run the guns industry though, I grant you. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrisp65 Posted February 16, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted February 16, 2018 7 minutes ago, lapal_fan said: Hey, if I was getting paid millions of dollars to put up and shut up about guns, I'd say "**** the kids" too. Actually, no I wouldn't, because I have a soul. Stupid fat, white, middle to old aged idiots. That's basically it, they've found the politicians that have a price point where they'll allow their children to be murdered. They've done the cost benefit calcs and the price of buying sufficient politicians is lower than the anticipated return on selling the weapons, so it happens. Incidentally, its 'the people' that can vote those politicians in or out. So I guess what we need is for a tipping point whereby sufficient kids are murdered so that sufficient parents are convinced to change their voting habits. To achieve this tipping point, the school shooters and the arms industry are really going to need to up their game, 'cos right now there's nowhere near enough slaughter for that tipping point to happen. --------- There are hundreds of millions of guns in circulation in america, so there is no quick fix here. I'd say that in the short term of the next few years / decade, a change in gun law is probably not going to help. Any whiff of a change in law causes sales to rise. So it's probably down to one of three options for the next few years: 1 set up security ring fences around all places where people gather, security checks at the mall, at kinder garden, baseball practise, i-phone stores on release days, cinemas on batman days etc.. This might also require security cordons around the queues to get in to the secure zones. See Afghanistan or Iraq for current best practise. 2 allow everyone to carry guns in all locations, so a shooter at the school or the pool or the gig is taken down before he gets too many kills, obviously there's a risk of every garden centre turning in to a kill zone as pensioners with one bad ear might mis hear where shots have come from and take out everyone in the herbs aisle, the herb aisle returns fire and now everyone buying a shed starts shooting. 3 hope it's a fashion that will naturally peek soon and then drop off. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daweii Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 12 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: the herb aisle returns fire and now everyone buying a shed starts shooting. I got a giggle from that, I just pictured some random herb pulling out a Glock to fight back against the rogue pensioner. Though in all seriousness your whole post outlines just how complicated a lock down on guns in the US would be. I mean even if they set up security ring fences everywhere then that only protects the people inside that location, but as we saw in Las Vegas a guy shooting down from an elevated position creates chaos. They can make individual locations safer, though they may just cause the tactics of gunmen to shift, I mean instead of taking the gun to the iPhone store, they may just hole up in a building down the street and shoot everyone queuing at the security checkpoint. I don't know how the US stops this. The Port Arthur Massacre is brought up a lot where guns were banned and Australians response was "yeah that's fair, I didn't really need guns anyway", but in the US they have been a Constitutional right for so long that I don't know how they start to reverse this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted February 16, 2018 Administrator Share Posted February 16, 2018 5 minutes ago, Daweii said: I don't know how the US stops this. The Port Arthur Massacre is brought up a lot where guns were banned and Australians response was "yeah that's fair, I didn't really need guns anyway", but in the US they have been a Constitutional right for so long that I don't know how they start to reverse this. We have the same constitutional right in the UK inherited from the same legal document. I suspect Oz does too but don't have time to check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Are there any senior Republican politicians that want tighter gun control? Is one of them becoming President the best/only chance for change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 16 minutes ago, Daweii said: in the US they have been a Constitutional right for so long that I don't know how they start to reverse this. 9 minutes ago, limpid said: We have the same constitutional right in the UK inherited from the same legal document. I suspect Oz does too but don't have time to check. If you want to spout old documents written back in history for different circumstances the the 2nd amendment over there or article 61 of the first version of magna carta over here does the job for you. I guess the main difference, is that over here we see the obligation to overthrow a ruling class if it goes rogue as more of a theoretical talking point for people that wear tinfoil hats. Rather than a direct instruction from a blood soaked god of vengeance and freedom fries. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted February 16, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2018 The NRA is not going to allow it. Their sole purpose is to prevent it and they spend all their time and all their effort and all their money ensuring it doesn't. Lobbying. It's great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted February 16, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2018 28 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said: Are there any senior Republican politicians that want tighter gun control? Is one of them becoming President the best/only chance for change? Would any Repub go against the wishes of their paymaster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villan_of_oz Posted February 16, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2018 30 minutes ago, limpid said: We have the same constitutional right in the UK inherited from the same legal document. I suspect Oz does too but don't have time to check. I'm not where near an expert on our Constitution but I'm very sure there is no provision for us to bear arms. It also seems from amendments made in my lifetime, that is seems a lot easier to make changes than in the US or UK. If you want to watch a very funny comedian rip Americas gun laws to shreds, watch Jim Jeffries 'guns'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post mjmooney Posted February 16, 2018 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted February 16, 2018 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amsterdam_Neil_D Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Villan_of_oz said: If you want to watch a very funny comedian rip Americas gun laws to shreds, watch Jim Jeffries 'guns'. Agreed. Takes the words removed and the guns, dismantles it completely on stage bit by bit & basically laughs and takes the pee out of them for it. They are so thick they don't even know he is making fun of everything they hold dear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 It does make me laugh. By laugh, I mean internally scream in rage. The same right wing commentators who mocked Sadiq khan after taking him out of context for his "armed police - don't be alarmed" comments, without irony are championing arming teachers. Gaslight Obstruct Project Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straggler Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, chrisp65 said: That's basically it, they've found the politicians that have a price point where they'll allow their children to be murdered. They've done the cost benefit calcs and the price of buying sufficient politicians is lower than the anticipated return on selling the weapons, so it happens. Incidentally, its 'the people' that can vote those politicians in or out. So I guess what we need is for a tipping point whereby sufficient kids are murdered so that sufficient parents are convinced to change their voting habits. To achieve this tipping point, the school shooters and the arms industry are really going to need to up their game, 'cos right now there's nowhere near enough slaughter for that tipping point to happen. --------- There are hundreds of millions of guns in circulation in america, so there is no quick fix here. I'd say that in the short term of the next few years / decade, a change in gun law is probably not going to help. Any whiff of a change in law causes sales to rise. So it's probably down to one of three options for the next few years: 1 set up security ring fences around all places where people gather, security checks at the mall, at kinder garden, baseball practise, i-phone stores on release days, cinemas on batman days etc.. This might also require security cordons around the queues to get in to the secure zones. See Afghanistan or Iraq for current best practise. 2 allow everyone to carry guns in all locations, so a shooter at the school or the pool or the gig is taken down before he gets too many kills, obviously there's a risk of every garden centre turning in to a kill zone as pensioners with one bad ear might mis hear where shots have come from and take out everyone in the herbs aisle, the herb aisle returns fire and now everyone buying a shed starts shooting. 3 hope it's a fashion that will naturally peek soon and then drop off. It will probably take a couple of generations to get the majority of guns out of circulation. Stopping them from being sold is a start, then you can at least stop the number from growing. Holding amnesties to get people to hand over their guns will get some, forcing additional licenses and obligations on gun owners will get others (inspections at home paid for by the home owner etc). A really big problem is the huge amount of money that some people have invested in their collections. Whilst getting rid of guns is the obvious right thing to do, asking people to just hand over many thousands of dollars worth of weapons for free when they were purchased perfectly legally isn't really fair. There would have to be tax payer money spent to effectively buy these guns back. You could also ban them from being inherited and ban them from being sold on the second hand market. This means gun owners can keep them all their lives, but then they come out of circulation effectively as an inheritance tax. All this only deals with the guns that are with owners that decent people. Getting all the guns out of criminal hands will just have to be a job for the police and it will not be a fun one. These ideas are just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are anti-gun lobbies that have thought this through in much more detail and can make more practical suggestions. Ok, I've been thinking as I type so this is turning into a bit of a stream of consciousness, but I would probably do the following Ban the sale of guns (there will be exceptions for a few niche people/employments there always are, but I shall talk generally) Make the ownership of guns illegal with an amnesty that lasts for a fixed period of time (year, two years, whatever is practical to deal with the numbers) During that amnesty guns handed in to the state will be purchased back at a fair price. After the amnesty the guns are illegal and if found will be confiscated and the owner fined. Its a big job and will cost a fortune, but is there something better to spend your money on than preventing school kids getting massacred a couple of times a month? I'm also aware that this framework will only get a proportion of guns out of circulation, but a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. Edited February 16, 2018 by Straggler spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyShears Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Having lived in Texas for almost 3 years I'd be very surprised if they agreed to give up their guns. They feel very very strongly about it, and do not know how we in the UK can possibly all live together in the UK without any guns. It was kind of nice knowing that I had an armed Police Officer at my back when dealing with a nutter in the ER though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 There is a really simple free market solution. Insurance. If you own a gun, then you must purchase an insurance policy, ACA has demonstrated that the government has the power to force this. The wonderful freedom and justice providing free market will ensure that the insurance companies have fair premiums and profit margins thus ensuring America, **** yeah!. Owns non-magazine fed rifle for hunting. Member of a club. Strong gun safe and regular training programs, e.g., NRA, $10 per year. Owns AR15 for "hunting". Rest as above, ~$10 per year. After the lawsuits resulting from the next shooting $10k per year. Handguns and other would quickly follow suit. For bonus points, this would also mean that only the rich could afford guns, 2nd amendment ftw! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted February 16, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted February 16, 2018 "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." (Upton Sinclair). 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 16, 2018 Moderator Share Posted February 16, 2018 This isn't an original point, I'm sure, but if they banned ammunition, people could keep their expensive guns..... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts