Gun violence in the USA

[Straggler]

25 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It's not as simple as this, is it? 

It'd need an amendment to the constitution, a simple majority in the house and senate isn't going to cut it.

There are loads of reforms they could do before a constitutional amendment would be required. Background check, licensing, banning certain types of weapons and ammo. All can be passed with a simple majority, but isn't.

[Straggler]

25 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

It absolutely is the public that is the reason for lack of reform. A majority of people might have an idea they they would prefer tighter gun laws but when they are alone in the voting booth their voting intention is obviously decided on other lines. Gun reform is not important enough for them to be the deciding factor when choosing who to vote for. 

It's not like people are voting for a candidate who campaigns on gun reform but once they are in office decide to become pro gun, against the wishes of those who voted for them. The pro gun candidates told everyone they were pro gun and then were duly elected and are carrying out the mandate they were elected on.

The majority of the public don't have the choice to vote for the gun reform candidate. Neither party will field one if they can help it. That is the point. The influx of money from special interest groups ensures that the system from both parties choose candidates that won't challenge the way things are today. Do you vote for the pro gun republican or the not anti gun democrat?  

Lest we forget, the pro gun republican party did actually lose the last election. Democratic voters are on average more pro some reform of gun laws yet none are forthcoming from their representatives. There is a massive gap between what the public want and what their political class are prepared to deliver.

[Genie]

You’d think an 18 year old would need an exceptionally good reason to have a firearm. Not just ‘cos he wanted one.

[villa4europe]

1 minute ago, Genie said:

You’d think an 18 year old would need an exceptionally good reason to have a firearm. Not just ‘cos he wanted one.

2 assault rifles and a pistol

Not sure what another example would be of something similar where there's a database of what you own and the seller has a responsibility to say nope you don't need that, I'd guess that's considered anti american

Not sure how the gun laws work in the UK and if there is a restriction on how many guns we can own as long as all the storage and permits and stuff is in place, can I own 20 shotguns if I feel like collecting them? 

[Sam-AVFC]

3 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

2 assault rifles and a pistol

Not sure what another example would be of something similar where there's a database of what you own and the seller has a responsibility to say nope you don't need that, I'd guess that's considered anti american

Not sure how the gun laws work in the UK and if there is a restriction on how many guns we can own as long as all the storage and permits and stuff is in place, can I own 20 shotguns if I feel like collecting them? 

From memory I think you can own up to 8 shotguns before the restrictions become tighter, at least in terms of storage.

No idea if it's the same with rifles.

[sharkyvilla]

10 minutes ago, Genie said:

You’d think an 18 year old would need an exceptionally good reason to have a firearm. Not just ‘cos he wanted one.

What's crazy is that is considered perfectly safe but he would need to wait another 3 years to be able to buy a beer.

[LondonLax]

32 minutes ago, Straggler said:

The majority of the public don't have the choice to vote for the gun reform candidate. Neither party will field one if they can help it. That is the point. The influx of money from special interest groups ensures that the system from both parties choose candidates that won't challenge the way things are today. Do you vote for the pro gun republican or the not anti gun democrat?  

Lest we forget, the pro gun republican party did actually lose the last election. Democratic voters are on average more pro some reform of gun laws yet none are forthcoming from their representatives. There is a massive gap between what the public want and what their political class are prepared to deliver.

America is a democracy. Candidates are chosen via a primary process and then voted on a second time in the final election. There are plenty of opportunities for voters to direct policy but their society votes the way it does and gets the result it deserves.

Just today was the Georgian Republican primary elections to decide their up coming representatives. Marjorie Taylor Greene was one under threat from being unseated, she was up against 5 other Republican candidates with various views and comfortably beat them all. She will most likely go on to retain her seat against which ever Democrat is chosen by their voters. It's the will of the people unfortunately... 

Edit: I had a look into the primary elections for Georgia in Greene's 14th District. There were six candidates on the ballot. From checking their campaign websites, five of them are staunchly pro gun but one candidate was pro gun reform, a guy called Charles Luton.

Luton finished second last gaining 2% of the vote. There was an option to vote for gun reform even among the Republican candidates but that's clearly not what is important to them. 

Edited May 25, 2022 by LondonLax

[Keyblade]

1 hour ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Saw a guy on Twitter earlier responding to someone asking for one good reason for the public to be able to own guns with something like 'because I want one and that's the only reason that matters'. I just can't get over that mindset. It makes me way angrier than I should allow it to.

It's American culture isn't it? Rugged individualism and selfishness. Nobody else matters but the individual.

[El Zen]

Quote

Just today was the Georgian Republican primary elections to decide their up coming representatives. Marjorie Taylor Greene was one under threat from being unseated, she was up against 5 other Republican candidates with various views and comfortably beat them all. She will most likely go on to retain her seat against which ever Democrat is chosen by their voters. It's the will of the people unfortunately... 

That Marjorie Taylor Greene is a candidate for anything more than a full lobotomy, let alone an actual Congresswoman, says all you need about the political climate in the US right now and why there will be no meaningful gun reform in the foreseeable future. 

Edited May 25, 2022 by El Zen

[Davkaus]

35 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said:

What's crazy is that is considered perfectly safe but he would need to wait another 3 years to be able to buy a beer.

Makes perfect sense. Do you want a bunch of pissed up 18 year olds running around with guns?  

[Daweii]

25 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Not sure how the gun laws work in the UK and if there is a restriction on how many guns we can own as long as all the storage and permits and stuff is in place, can I own 20 shotguns if I feel like collecting them? 

These are the steps required to get a gun in the UK;

You have to apply for a firearm or shotgun certificate.

You need a firearm certificate if you're after rifles (both single fire, or semi-automatic). While pistols/handguns are completely outlawed and cannot be bought even with a firearm certificate.

You need a shotgun certificate if you're after shotguns. The UK allows all forms of shotgun be that lever action, pump action, or semi-automatic.

To get either certificate you have to go through a multi stage process:

• Complete an application form.
• Provide a passport photo.
• Have 2 references if you're after a firearm certificate, or 1 reference if you're after a shotgun certificate.
• You also have to pay a fee for the certificate you're applying for.
  • The fee is given to you by your local police force.

You must also have a sit down meeting with the chief officer of police where they will ask why you want the gun, what you're planning to do with it and if you seem responsible enough, or of sound mind to own the gun. 

Once you have passed all the stages and have your certificate you are free to own as many guns within the certificate classification as you want. There is no legal limit on how many you can own, although every single gun you buy does have to registered to your name and your certificate. This certificate also has to be renewed every 5 years. 

That said even once you have everything squared away, and you're operating above board and you have your gun for whatever reason there are still heavy restrictions:

• If you own a semi-automatic rifle it is limited to .22 rimfire calibre ammunition meaning its potential to cause catastrophic harm in the wrong hands is greatly minimised. 
• If you own a shotgun it is limited to a capacity of no more than three cartridges.

It's hard to get a gun, but once you have it there are laws in place to make sure that if the gun is misused it's not catastrophic. 

[Straggler]

9 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

America is a democracy. Candidates are chosen via a primary process and then voted on a second time in the final election. There is plenty of opportunities for voters to direct policy but their society votes the way it does and gets the result it deserves.

Just today was the Georgian Republican primary elections to decide up coming representative. Marjorie Taylor Greene was one under threat from being unseated, she was up against 5 other Republican candidates with various views and comfortably beat them all. She will most likely go on to retain her seat against which ever Democrat is chosen by their voters. It's the will of the people unfortunately... 

America is a broken democracy. 88% favour the govt negotiating with the pharmaceutical industry to bring down the cost of prescription drugs. It's not happening. 60/70% want abortion to be legally available, it is getting banned. 52% want more gun control and that is going the other way too.

When a party puts its weight behind a candidate on average that candidate will win selection. For example Nancy Pelosi just endorsed Henry Cuellar for Congress. He is an anti abortion candidate with an A rating from the NRA. With that endorsement comes publicity, a stamp of approval from democratic leadership and a shed load of advertising money. Any candidate trying to fight that is starting the race with their shoes tied. It's not impossible, but it is so hard that it is very much the exception when it happens. The same thing happens with a Trump endorsement for the republicans.

The candidates are endorsed for the benefit of the party and the parties work for their donors. The system is rigged, whoever you vote for the money wins.

[Chindie]

There is extremely limited requirement for any private citizen to have a gun. 

There is no reason to have an assault rifle with extended magazines. You don't need to be able to massacre herds of deer.

[Mr_Dogg]

I don't get the cowardice of something like this. What is the point of it? All you can think is it's just evil so there is no sense to it.

[LondonLax]

5 minutes ago, Straggler said:

America is a broken democracy. 88% favour the govt negotiating with the pharmaceutical industry to bring down the cost of prescription drugs. It's not happening. 60/70% want abortion to be legally available, it is getting banned. 52% want more gun control and that is going the other way too.

When a party puts its weight behind a candidate on average that candidate will win selection. For example Nancy Pelosi just endorsed Henry Cuellar for Congress. He is an anti abortion candidate with an A rating from the NRA. With that endorsement comes publicity, a stamp of approval from democratic leadership and a shed load of advertising money. Any candidate trying to fight that is starting the race with their shoes tied. It's not impossible, but it is so hard that it is very much the exception when it happens. The same thing happens with a Trump endorsement for the republicans.

The candidates are endorsed for the benefit of the party and the parties work for their donors. The system is rigged, whoever you vote for the money wins.

The power still lies with the people. Stating a position in response to a survey call is one thing. Actually being interested enough find out a candidates position on a specific policy ahead of election day, going down to a poling booth and voting accordingly are obviously two very different things. 

[villa4europe]

7 minutes ago, Chindie said:

There is extremely limited requirement for any private citizen to have a gun. 

There is no reason to have an assault rifle with extended magazines. You don't need to be able to massacre herds of deer.

That's where the thing about being able to purchase the same weapons as the military (you know that one that they celebrate every morning as the best in the world...) so if they start stepping out of line the Chads and Bobby Joes of this world can march on Washington and sort them out

[Keyblade]

9 minutes ago, Chindie said:

There is extremely limited requirement for any private citizen to have a gun. 

There is no reason to have an assault rifle with extended magazines. You don't need to be able to massacre herds of deer.

Yeah but if the most powerful military in human history becomes uh tyrannical, it'll come in handy.

[Chindie]

UK gun laws are strict but it's surprising what you can have if you can convince the authorities you've got a valid reason to have it - you can own submachine guns, pump action shotguns with high ammo capacity, some large handguns... They would have to be in small calibre and you'd need special licenses to own some of them, but you could. IIRC you could theoretically be able to own an Uzi in the UK, legally, in a very specific configuration, if you can prove you need it.

And then of course Northern Ireland has its own gun laws.

In the US you go to Walmart and pick up some military equipment with your eggs.

[sparrow1988]

This is apparently the 27th school shooting, not mass public shooting, in the US this year. There hasn't even been 27 weeks this year. It's f***ing crazy.

[choffer]

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

It's not as simple as this, is it? 

It'd need an amendment to the constitution, a simple majority in the house and senate isn't going to cut it.

Slight tangent but it always amuses me when you hear the pro-gun lobby shouting "You can't change my second amendment rights. It's in the constitution" as if the word "Amendment" isn't staring them in the face.