Hmmm. Hard to know where to start with the irony of The Guardian publishing a piece

whining about discussion of the issues being shut down in the wake of a mass killing. :snakehead:

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ng-gun-control

This from the home of such classic apologist articles as 'Don't look back in anger', 'We must carry on as normal', 'It's the victims of the forthcoming anti-muslim backlash we should really be worrying about' and, of course 'Very sad, but we basically deserve it because Iraq/Afghanistan/Israel/Empire/Thatcher (delete as appropriate)'.

Jaw-dropping hypocrisy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

whining about discussion of the issues being shut down in the wake of a mass killing. :snakehead:

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ng-gun-control

This from the home of such classic apologist articles as 'Don't look back in anger', 'We must carry on as normal', 'It's the victims of the forthcoming anti-muslim backlash we should really be worrying about' and, of course 'Very sad, but we basically deserve it because Iraq/Afghanistan/Israel/Empire/Thatcher (delete as appropriate)'.

Jaw-dropping hypocrisy.

---

Its a house with many rooms, b. There is staggering idiocy on all sides when it comes to gun control.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

Its a house with many rooms, b. There is staggering idiocy on all sides when it comes to gun control.

---

It's a house full of ****s is what it is, p.

The really staggering idiocy on gun control in America is to imagine it's still possible. That horse has not merely bolted, it fúcked off decades ago and lived a long, happy and fulfilling new life before eventually dying at a ripe old age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

It's a house full of ****s is what it is, p.

The really staggering idiocy on gun control in America is to imagine it's still possible. That horse has not merely bolted, it fúcked off decades ago and lived a long, happy and fulfilling new life before eventually dying at a ripe old age.

---

Yes and no. Yes if you are looking to ensure that nobody owns a gun. There are plenty of other restrictions one could consider to try and minimise the impact. For instance, at a stroke you could remove the right to carry a concealed weapon, or indeed to carry any weapon. By all means have a gun but leave it at home.

You can also restrict the guns people buy.

I always find it rather funny when the gun lobby say that making something illegal doesnt stop people doing it. What a logic that is!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

whining about discussion of the issues being shut down in the wake of a mass killing. :snakehead:

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ng-gun-control

This from the home of such classic apologist articles as 'Don't look back in anger', 'We must carry on as normal', 'It's the victims of the forthcoming anti-muslim backlash we should really be worrying about' and, of course 'Very sad, but we basically deserve it because Iraq/Afghanistan/Israel/Empire/Thatcher (delete as appropriate)'.

Jaw-dropping hypocrisy.

---

Surely the elephant in the room here is Switzerland, where every **** and his dog owns a rifle but few are moved to use them to mow down a bunch of innocent schmoes.

The answer is, clearly, that the problem isn't the guns, it's the mental fúcker pulling the trigger, so as long as these mental septics stick to taking out other septics, the problem is self-resolving. No more septics, no more massacres. :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

Surely the elephant in the room here is Switzerland, where every **** and his dog owns a rifle but few are moved to use them to mow down a bunch of innocent schmoes.

The answer is, clearly, that the problem isn't the guns, it's the mental fúcker pulling the trigger, so as long as these mental septics stick to taking out other septics, the problem is self-resolving. No more septics, no more massacres. :shrug:

---

A nation born of violence, Sir C, conceived at the barrel of a shotgun.

Look at how they have collectively defined the notion of freedom. Weirdos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

Yes and no. Yes if you are looking to ensure that nobody owns a gun. There are plenty of other restrictions one could consider to try and minimise the impact. For instance, at a stroke you could remove the right to carry a concealed weapon, or indeed to carry any weapon. By all means have a gun but leave it at home.

You can also restrict the guns people buy.

I always find it rather funny when the gun lobby say that making something illegal doesnt stop people doing it. What a logic that is!

---

Yes, but what do you do about all the guns that are going to continue to be in people's hands? Because if you think people will simply hand them back (assuming you can get past the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution - which you can't) you're wrong.

You then have the prospect of a country absolutely packed with illegal guns and a large part of the otherwise law-abiding population criminalised overnight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

A nation born of violence, Sir C, conceived at the barrel of a shotgun.

Look at how they have collectively defined the notion of freedom. Weirdos.

---

Look, if this look were a part of my nation's history, you wouldn't ever see me without a stetson and a six gun. I mean, it's cool, man.

Attachment 755

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

Yes, but what do you do about all the guns that are going to continue to be in people's hands? Because if you think people will simply hand them back (assuming you can get past the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution - which you can't) you're wrong.

You then have the prospect of a country absolutely packed with illegal guns and a large part of the otherwise law-abiding population criminalised overnight.

---

You cant take the guns but you can make it illegal to carry them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

You cant take the guns but you can make it illegal to carry them.

---

First 9 months of 2017:
-11,572 gun deaths
-23,365 gun injuries
-271 mass shootings (more than four victims)
-1,508 unintentional shootings
-2,971 kids/teens shot

The country that believes it has the moral right to rule the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

You cant take the guns but you can make it illegal to carry them.

---

Which will do absolutely nothing to stop someone who wants to kill large numbers of people, of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

Surely the elephant in the room here is Switzerland, where every **** and his dog owns a rifle but few are moved to use them to mow down a bunch of innocent schmoes.

The answer is, clearly, that the problem isn't the guns, it's the mental fúcker pulling the trigger, so as long as these mental septics stick to taking out other septics, the problem is self-resolving. No more septics, no more massacres. :shrug:

---

All the more remarkable when you consider that they're surrounded by other Swiss people. If I had to live in Switzerland, I'd go on a gun rampage within a few weeks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

Which will do absolutely nothing to stop someone who wants to kill large numbers of people, of course.

---

Of course not. Just as making drugs illegal doesnt stop people taking them; just as making murder illegal doesnt stop it happening.

It would, however, mean the individual is breaking the law the moment he leaves the house with the weapons. It would also prevent many of the shootings that are accidental or circumstantial and that arise simply because people have guns on them when an incident occurs.

In the broader sense, it means people would not be routinely walking round with concealed weapons. I think that would be a good thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

Of course not. Just as making drugs illegal doesnt stop people taking them; just as making murder illegal doesnt stop it happening.

It would, however, mean the individual is breaking the law the moment he leaves the house with the weapons. It would also prevent many of the shootings that are accidental or circumstantial and that arise simply because people have guns on them when an incident occurs.

In the broader sense, it means people would not be routinely walking round with concealed weapons. I think that would be a good thing.

---

Missing one key point here though..its not what Americans want . Now you might show me a poll that says otherwise , but i would have no faith in it . Totally different culture when it comes to guns here and it takes some getting used to

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

Of course not. Just as making drugs illegal doesnt stop people taking them; just as making murder illegal doesnt stop it happening.

It would, however, mean the individual is breaking the law the moment he leaves the house with the weapons. It would also prevent many of the shootings that are accidental or circumstantial and that arise simply because people have guns on them when an incident occurs.

In the broader sense, it means people would not be routinely walking round with concealed weapons. I think that would be a good thing.

---

I don’t disagree, but the fact remains that legally-held and concealed firearms really aren’t a very big problem. Most of America’s gun deaths involve domestics, street crime using illegal firearms, mass killings such as this one or accidents on private land. None of them would be notably affected by what you propose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bbrian

Missing one key point here though..its not what Americans want . Now you might show me a poll that says otherwise , but i would have no faith in it . Totally different culture when it comes to guns here and it takes some getting used to

---

Oh I know that. They love their guns. My point was only that it is possible to take some action on it, short of marching into everyone's house and nicking their gun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

I don’t disagree, but the fact remains that legally-held and concealed firearms really aren’t a very big problem. Most of America’s gun deaths involve domestics, street crime using illegal firearms, mass killings such as this one or accidents on private land. None of them would be notably affected by what you propose.

---

It may not. The point would be to try and move away from this 'gun culture', if you can call it that.

If you look at it another way, they only kill each other with guns because everyone has got one. If they didnt have guns they would use something else. Either way, they are still going to kill each other.

We may be rightly proud of how few gun deaths we have here but people do still get killed. A ban on guns is good news for your knife salesman.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

It may not. The point would be to try and move away from this 'gun culture', if you can call it that.

If you look at it another way, they only kill each other with guns because everyone has got one. If they didnt have guns they would use something else. Either way, they are still going to kill each other.

We may be rightly proud of how few gun deaths we have here but people do still get killed. A ban on guns is good news for your knife salesman.....

---

I think this is akin to the argument that you'll change the UK's drinking culture by preventing people drinking on the street. You won't because such cultures really aren't that malleable. They will merely adapt.

Clearly America's gun laws fail miserably to acknowledge the fact that Americans want to kill one another in large numbers. That is their failing: they are inappropriate to their society from a public health perspective. I suspect things wouldn't be much different over here were we to have the same laws.

I heard on the radio earlier that the killer dude had 40 guns/weapons to his name. An impressive figure I am sure you will agree.

Now I assume a fair number of these were illegal as surely to God it is not legal for a normal chap to own 40 guns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

I think this is akin to the argument that you'll change the UK's drinking culture by preventing people drinking on the street. You won't because such cultures really aren't that malleable. They will merely adapt.

Clearly America's gun laws fail miserably to acknowledge the fact that Americans want to kill one another in large numbers. That is their failing: they are inappropriate to their society from a public health perspective. I suspect things wouldn't be much different over here were we to have the same laws.

---

Their problem is that they don't fight. They'll happily hurl insults at each other whilst crossing the road, but lack the masculine qualities of decent English gentlemen and the cojones to throw a punch. Instead, they bottle it all up until, eventually, the inevitable happens.

Wánkers to a man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

I heard on the radio earlier that the killer dude had 40 guns/weapons to his name. An impressive figure I am sure you will agree.

Now I assume a fair number of these were illegal as surely to God it is not legal for a normal chap to own 40 guns?

---

I don't think there's a limit. Some people are gun collectors same as others are car collectors or whatever.

He wouldn't have needed more than a couple to do what he did anyway. The only issue would be the barrel getting too hot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

I heard on the radio earlier that the killer dude had 40 guns/weapons to his name. An impressive figure I am sure you will agree.

Now I assume a fair number of these were illegal as surely to God it is not legal for a normal chap to own 40 guns?

---

I had an uncle who shot himself in the face because he was suspected of the theft of a bicycle #irish

One day I'd like to find out whether he was guilty of the bicycle theft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

I heard on the radio earlier that the killer dude had 40 guns/weapons to his name. An impressive figure I am sure you will agree.

Now I assume a fair number of these were illegal as surely to God it is not legal for a normal chap to own 40 guns?

---

I think all the weapons were purchased legally... some of the "upgrades" he carried out weren't

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

Their problem is that they don't fight. They'll happily hurl insults at each other whilst crossing the road, but lack the masculine qualities of decent English gentlemen and the cojones to throw a punch. Instead, they bottle it all up until, eventually, the inevitable happens.

Wánkers to a man.

---

It's just too easy to kill someone with a gun, though, isn't it? Impersonal. You don't have to look them in the eye, hear their bones crack or feel their blood running over your hand. Just squeeze a trigger and off you pop. It lacks application.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

I had an uncle who shot himself in the face because he was suspected of the theft of a bicycle #irish

One day I'd like to find out whether he was guilty of the bicycle theft.

---

A family of thieves eh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

I had an uncle who shot himself in the face because he was suspected of the theft of a bicycle #irish

One day I'd like to find out whether he was guilty of the bicycle theft.

---

Oddly symmetrical that you also had a grandfather who had his bicycle stolen, really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

A family of thieves eh.

---

:nod: Irish, you see?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pokster

I think all the weapons were purchased legally... some of the "upgrades" he carried out weren't

---

Legal to purchase, but not to apply to the weapon. Ludicrous, really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

Oddly symmetrical that you also had a grandfather who had his bicycle stolen, really.

---

So true, b. One wonders whether Uncle JJ ever served with the Wehrmacht in the Netherlands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

A family of thieves eh.

---

In civilised countries, sw, a chap is innocent until proven otherwise. Of course, one wouldn't expect the pseudo-human inhabitants of Her Majesty's Western Isle to understand concepts like justice and fair play, so your gross calumny is forgiven.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

So true, b. One wonders whether Uncle JJ ever served with the Wehrmacht in the Netherlands.

---

I'm just struck by the significance of bicycle theft in your family history. Have you ever had a bike stolen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

In civilised countries, sw, a chap is innocent until proven otherwise. Of course, one wouldn't expect the pseudo-human inhabitants of Her Majesty's Western Isle to understand concepts like justice and fair play, so your gross calumny is forgiven.

---

I suggest his action of shooting himself in the face is all the evidence of guilt we need.

The thick!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

I think this is akin to the argument that you'll change the UK's drinking culture by preventing people drinking on the street. You won't because such cultures really aren't that malleable. They will merely adapt.

Clearly America's gun laws fail miserably to acknowledge the fact that Americans want to kill one another in large numbers. That is their failing: they are inappropriate to their society from a public health perspective. I suspect things wouldn't be much different over here were we to have the same laws.

---

We often make these arguments to suggest that laws wont make any difference because you cant change how people feel. You only have to change how they behave. So the seat belt law did work; banning smoking in pubs was enforced properly (even in Ireland) and people did eventually get used to decimalisation.

It doesnt change overnight but it does change. If there is a genuine homocidal tendency within the average american then it wont change that. After all, if you are willing to break the law by killing someone you are unlikely to be concerned at breaking the law by leaving house with a weapon.

As someone else said, americans dont want it. THey love their guns. I suppose it is none of our business really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

I'm just struck by the significance of bicycle theft in your family history. Have you ever had a bike stolen?

---

Not yet; nor have I stolen one. I think we both know what the future holds though, don't we? :-(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

I suggest his action of shooting himself in the face is all the evidence of guilt we need.

The thick!

---

Might have been a mistake.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

I suggest his action of shooting himself in the face is all the evidence of guilt we need.

The thick!

---

Maybe he was upset by the slur to his honour? Maybe he was hounded into it by the inhabitants of the village shunning him (as is the wont of backward, rural types)? Perhaps local children were throwing stones at the poor chap? He may well just have despaired. :-(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SWv2

I suggest his action of shooting himself in the face is all the evidence of guilt we need.

The thick!

---

The faceshooting was as a result of the shame of being suspected, sw, not the shame of his guilt.

What sort of fúcking kangaroo court is this, for Christ's sake?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir C

Not yet; nor have I stolen one. I think we both know what the future holds though, don't we? :-(

---

Bike theft and suicide? :-(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

We often make these arguments to suggest that laws wont make any difference because you cant change how people feel. You only have to change how they behave. So the seat belt law did work; banning smoking in pubs was enforced properly (even in Ireland) and people did eventually get used to decimalisation.

It doesnt change overnight but it does change. If there is a genuine homocidal tendency within the average american then it wont change that. After all, if you are willing to break the law by killing someone you are unlikely to be concerned at breaking the law by leaving house with a weapon.

As someone else said, americans dont want it. THey love their guns. I suppose it is none of our business really.

---

We were the first people in the world to put this ban in place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

Might have been a mistake.

---

Oh what a surprise, along comes the bleeding heart liberal to side with criminal :rolleyes:

Not a thought for the victim, I note.