O/T they clearly need to step up gun production in the states

The problem with America is that there are loopholes to all the laws designed to make it more difficult to buy a gun.

For example, you can go to a 'gun show' and purchase an automatic rifle without so much as a proof of identification.

They also have AK-47 style guns for sale in supermarkets. That's where I'd start. Make it so that guns can only be sold by licensed retailers (retailers who's sole purpose is selling guns, not in a supermarket), with a mandatory 14 day waiting period. All guns registered to an owner, like you do a car.

I know people in America who would hate me for even suggesting that. I know people that think it's a ridiculous notion that you would have to file paperwork to, for example, give a gun to a family member as a gift.

This simple change would stop any gun attack which is a spur of the moment thing, where someone is disgruntled and goes and buys a weapon from the supermarket and comes and opens fire.

 

Fully agree. Everybody in the US knows the loopholes though. They know full well how to start tackling the problem. They're just hamstrung by the portion of the population that would rather see thousands of people die on the streets every year than have their YOUESSAY gun rights taken away and by the NRA whose fingers of corruption and malign influence are spread throughout the members of the Senate and Congress.

At the end of the day too many of them don't give a s**t.

 

It's not really illogical at all. You might be mistakenly thinking that I am advocating gun ownership - but I'm not. I'm just saying why someone might consider it illogical not to own one. You can't quote all the stats you want about the number of deaths etc etc and they are truly horrific. However, as you have correctly pointed out, gun ownership is deeply entrenched in the American psyche. Bandying stats around about the damage guns do isn't going to change that. I have no idea how you change that because any attempts to bring in gun control is political suicide.

Now, if you live in a society where guns are so prevalent, you can bet your ******** that nasty Mr Criminal when he comes to burgle, mug or carjack you, is packing heat. So if people want to think they are safer if they don't carry guns because they are educated, progressive and above that sort of thing, well that's not reality. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary.

 

/www.bing.com/videos/search?q=jim+jeffries+guns&view=detail&mid=D822D0CF77EE33C4FC5FD822D0CF77EE33C4FC5F&FORM=VIRE



/www.bing.com/videos/search?q=jim+jeffries+guns&view=detail&mid=D822D0CF77EE33C4FC5FD822D0CF77EE33C4FC5F&FORM=VIRE

 

Stopped reading at Jim Jeffries. Can you give me a brief synopsis?

 

Yo

Your sophistry is no longer entertaining. Watch it and learn, and be entertained because it is genuinely funny and no doubt you are one of the few he refers to at the end.

 

Think of it as driving a car. If you are both speeding and crash more chance of fatalities. If one of you isn't, the impact lessens By all means you may feel safer if you too have a gun but the reality doesn't bear this out

 

That analogy doesn't work. A better analogy would be you come face to face with a grizzly bear and he won't bite you because your teeth aren't as powerful. Anyway, we've reached an impasse. You giving your opinions is not reality and I have no interest or need of a gun as I don't live in North America.

 

If someone is of that mind it doesnt matter if they can get hold of a gun or not.

They can do enough damage with say ... a truck.

 

Is this tongue in cheek? Cannot fathom a previously genial poster holding this view point.

 

A truck? Maybe if they want to run over a random group of people but the guy who just shot everyone at his work couldn’t have done that with a truck? People who fall out with their family aren’t going to go and buy/hire/learn to drive a truck. And even if they do, it still takes time to plan which might give them a chance to calm down first. They’ll always be people who want to kill a bunch of people for no reason but thankfully they are rare, and as you say, could probably find a way no matter what. Banning guns wouldn’t really be about stopping those people, it would hugely help stop all the other deaths caused by them being easily available though.

 

In a ideal world we wouldn't need any guns. But in certain circumstances a person in a high position needs one. The job of security is to feel secure in their presence. When the shooter went into the French music concert those there wouldn't have felt secure at all. But had there been armed security on the premises then maybe lives could have been saved by security getting to the terrorist before the waste of even more innocent lives.

 

Sorry but if this held water there would be very few mass shootings in America.
They have one virtually every week.