By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
130 times this year where 4 or more people have been killed in an incident.
I just can't understand why they like to target schools, Ok, the kids can't fight back but what the hell have they done to deserve being shot at their age?
Very interesting FBI Statistics on Murder in the USA, knives, blunt objects and hands/fists kill more people each year than Rifles. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-t
US mass shootings on 09:51 - Mar 29 by Dr_Parnassus
I didn’t say you had to.
I’m saying if you saw a gunman entering a school with your children inside, would you rather have a gun on you or not.
If you find that one too tough to answer, you can take yourself out of the scenario and it become “one of the other parents”, if you like.
The answer is incredibly easy, your clear difficultly in answering any of these scenarios shows that.
[Post edited 29 Mar 2023 9:55]
Of course in that situation I would rather have a gun. But the thought of me or anybody else having to carry a gun to the football or to drop children off for school just in case they witness someone getting shot is ludicrous. Can’t you see how ridiculous you sound?
US mass shootings on 11:59 - Mar 29 by Dr_Parnassus
I don’t understand your point at all here.
Even one person defending themselves against armed criminals is valid enough reasoning for the right to bear arms. Again, criminals aren’t going to hand back their guns, only law abiding citizens and there is 400 million in circulation.
So all you are doing is saying “sorry to the thousands who have saved their own lives and others, we are actually going to require you all to have died in those instances as I’m not happy that even more bad guys aren’t being killed”.
I can probably reel off 1000 links to incidents of the public defending themselves against armed attackers and not even scratch the surface. That’s only the ones reported.
That one incident in Indiana could have saved 100 lives in a single afternoon, he ended up “just” killing 3 in a packed food court.
Surely there should be a demonstrable net benefit in terms of lives saved by "a good guy shooting a bad guy"? There doesn't seem to be one.
[Post edited 29 Mar 2023 12:08]
0
US mass shootings on 12:09 - Mar 29 with 758 views
Of course in that situation I would rather have a gun. But the thought of me or anybody else having to carry a gun to the football or to drop children off for school just in case they witness someone getting shot is ludicrous. Can’t you see how ridiculous you sound?
So you are saying you would rather have a gun in that instance.
Yet think I sound ridiculous by telling you quite factually that it is due to that very reason that people want them?
If you would rather one in that instance, then why don’t you afford that same luxury to people in a country where that is a very real possibility for them?
What you seem to be doing is taking your British life and applying that logic to the logic of people who live under very different circumstances.
A bit like asking why the people of Ukraine want guns.. the answer is because there are armed people in their country intent on doing them and their family harm.
Using your own situation to put onto others is what sounds ridiculous in this discussion. You answered the question, you would prefer a gun.
So would they.
Swansea Independent Poster of the Year 2021 and 2022.
US mass shootings on 12:09 - Mar 29 by Dr_Parnassus
So you are saying you would rather have a gun in that instance.
Yet think I sound ridiculous by telling you quite factually that it is due to that very reason that people want them?
If you would rather one in that instance, then why don’t you afford that same luxury to people in a country where that is a very real possibility for them?
What you seem to be doing is taking your British life and applying that logic to the logic of people who live under very different circumstances.
A bit like asking why the people of Ukraine want guns.. the answer is because there are armed people in their country intent on doing them and their family harm.
Using your own situation to put onto others is what sounds ridiculous in this discussion. You answered the question, you would prefer a gun.
So would they.
What is the reason ppl in the UK don't need guns to defend themselves?
Surely there should be a demonstrable net benefit in terms of lives saved by "a good guy shooting a bad guy"? There doesn't seem to be one.
[Post edited 29 Mar 2023 12:08]
There is. What maths are you using?
If there are 20,000 people killed in a single year by murderers and criminals.
And there are 2000 incidents where the public have managed to save either themselves or others.
That’s a 10% decrease in fatalities, without the public arming themselves it would be 22,000 murders.
(That’s assuming that in each of those 2000 incidents, only 1 life is saved. So it may well be far higher than a 10% decrease).
Edit - that’s also not counting how many murders are prevented just from criminals knowing that individuals may be armed. I’d imagine it stops an awful lot of home invasions which would normally end up in deadly situations.
I’ll have to check the figures but I think an unhealthy amount of home invasions end up with a fatality to the victim. It’s common sense that these are kept lower than they would be with the fact that the home owner is fairly likely to be armed.
[Post edited 29 Mar 2023 12:34]
Swansea Independent Poster of the Year 2021 and 2022.
Those who use the second amendment (A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed) seem to get all hung about the ‘shall not be infringed’ bit, while ignoring the ‘well regulated’ bit.
Any way, a little light relief:
0
US mass shootings on 13:40 - Mar 29 with 697 views
US mass shootings on 12:09 - Mar 29 by Dr_Parnassus
So you are saying you would rather have a gun in that instance.
Yet think I sound ridiculous by telling you quite factually that it is due to that very reason that people want them?
If you would rather one in that instance, then why don’t you afford that same luxury to people in a country where that is a very real possibility for them?
What you seem to be doing is taking your British life and applying that logic to the logic of people who live under very different circumstances.
A bit like asking why the people of Ukraine want guns.. the answer is because there are armed people in their country intent on doing them and their family harm.
Using your own situation to put onto others is what sounds ridiculous in this discussion. You answered the question, you would prefer a gun.
So would they.
You’re becoming increasingly desperate and have completely missed the point anyway.
If I were a nice sensible American gun owner and had a nice shiny rifle to protect myself and my family from burglars or tyrannical governments or the British army or mountain lions or the odd grizzly bear I am not going to be taking it to the football or to the pub or to the nightclub or to the church. So if I am in the unfortunate situation of witnessing you being shot in any of these places there won’t be much I can do about it as my gun would be back at home and not on my person.
US mass shootings on 12:12 - Mar 29 by Dr_Parnassus
There is. What maths are you using?
If there are 20,000 people killed in a single year by murderers and criminals.
And there are 2000 incidents where the public have managed to save either themselves or others.
That’s a 10% decrease in fatalities, without the public arming themselves it would be 22,000 murders.
(That’s assuming that in each of those 2000 incidents, only 1 life is saved. So it may well be far higher than a 10% decrease).
Edit - that’s also not counting how many murders are prevented just from criminals knowing that individuals may be armed. I’d imagine it stops an awful lot of home invasions which would normally end up in deadly situations.
I’ll have to check the figures but I think an unhealthy amount of home invasions end up with a fatality to the victim. It’s common sense that these are kept lower than they would be with the fact that the home owner is fairly likely to be armed.
[Post edited 29 Mar 2023 12:34]
I'm not using any maths, I haven't got a clue what the figures are to be honest.
I'd really love to see a breakdown of those figures because there seems to be a lot of conclusions drawn from very incomplete stats there
It could be spun another way to demonstrate that 22000 people have been killed by firearms.
I'd also expect to see a direct relationship between a relaxation in gun ownership restrictions and an increase in actual lives saved. Not just criminals being shot, but an armed criminal intent on using his weapon being shot by a member of the public with a legally held weapon.
0
US mass shootings on 14:09 - Mar 29 with 680 views
US mass shootings on 09:54 - Mar 29 by Dr_Parnassus
That’s not true, assault weapons have nothing to do with accuracy.
An assault weapon has nothing to do with length of barrel, and that is not why they are deemed more dangerous.
Put me in a room with you armed with a long barrelled rifle or and handgun and if I was that way inclined - I’m shooting you first time regardless of length of gun, and I have barely shot a gun in my life.
Futile argument.
[Post edited 29 Mar 2023 10:07]
O yes it is my friend by quite margin as well and I'm speaking from experience, whereas you ?
"In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master."
0
US mass shootings on 16:27 - Mar 29 with 652 views
O yes it is my friend by quite margin as well and I'm speaking from experience, whereas you ?
I am not sure which point you are responding to, but barrel length has nothing to with the Assault weapon's various definitions. They all include Rate of fire and Magazine size with some including threading for a moderator. The original definition of Assault Rifle in the Encyclopedia Brittanica was that it was a rifle that can switch between semi-automatic , burst fire and fully automatic firing.
0
US mass shootings on 17:54 - Mar 29 with 632 views
I am not sure which point you are responding to, but barrel length has nothing to with the Assault weapon's various definitions. They all include Rate of fire and Magazine size with some including threading for a moderator. The original definition of Assault Rifle in the Encyclopedia Brittanica was that it was a rifle that can switch between semi-automatic , burst fire and fully automatic firing.
I was responding to rambling rose , when he stated that barrel length has no bearing on accuracy
"Put me in a room with you armed with a long barrelled rifle or and handgun and if I was that way inclined - I’m shooting you first time regardless of length of gun, and I have barely shot a gun in my life."
"In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master."
0
US mass shootings on 18:16 - Mar 29 with 612 views
I was responding to rambling rose , when he stated that barrel length has no bearing on accuracy
"Put me in a room with you armed with a long barrelled rifle or and handgun and if I was that way inclined - I’m shooting you first time regardless of length of gun, and I have barely shot a gun in my life."
Don't know why you bother Boundy, these types are experts on anything and everything, there's a few on this forum, you've been on here long enough to know that mun.
US mass shootings on 01:17 - Mar 29 by Dr_Parnassus
They aren’t assault rifles.
They want you to think they are, which is why they say “assault-style”.
Whenever media is trying to mislead, then you should be asking yourself why.
By muddying the waters, they can lay blame on Government by making people believe they are assault weapons. Their argument is to ban assault weapons (which I agree with), so attributing as many deaths as they can to assault weapons seems to be their goal - despite the fact it’s completely inaccurate.
People need to accept that guns are simply a way of life in America, there are far too many in circulation to simply tell people to not have one. Moaning about it and suggesting it not be the case is futile.
It’s the mental health epidemic I would be trying to tackle. This murderer was clearly not the full mental shilling.
If you were in the Apocalypse or walking dead scenario, you would be immediately reaching or wishing you had a gun. Well this is what it’s like for many people in America; not zombies of course but criminals armed to the teeth.
I’d suggest that in the current climate, it’s irresponsible to your family to NOT own one. But that’s just me.
[Post edited 25 Jun 2023 20:50]
The AR-15 is a semi automatic "self loading rifle" which is commonly described as an assault rifle.
As the story says, most mass killing involve multiple weapons, hand guns and rifles. As crazy as the situation is, nothing will change in the USA nt even if they criminalise gun ownership because there's just too many guns in circulation.
0
US mass shootings on 19:34 - Mar 29 with 584 views
I was responding to rambling rose , when he stated that barrel length has no bearing on accuracy
"Put me in a room with you armed with a long barrelled rifle or and handgun and if I was that way inclined - I’m shooting you first time regardless of length of gun, and I have barely shot a gun in my life."
I think you may be misunderstanding what he is saying, does he mean if you were a shooter in the room with either type of weapon and he had a gun he would shoot you first and ask afterwards? "I’m shooting you first time" I agree with you that long barrels are far more accurate, especially over distance, but rifles are a bit unwieldy indoors compared to an automatic pistol.
0
US mass shootings on 20:01 - Mar 29 with 578 views
"Controversial group behind 'Trans Day of Vengeance' raised money for firearms training - as other trans protestors pose with guns ahead of march in DC on Saturday
The protest was rebranded before the Nashville tragedy from 'visibility' to 'vengeance' by the Trans Radical Activist Network But some social media users appear to have taken the protest to another level and have posed with powerful firearms posted along with the hashtag Twitter has since removed more than 5,000 posts that have used the flyer for the event on April 1"
"But despite rising political tensions across the country, which saw a press secretary for Arizona Democrat Governor post a Tweet about shooting transphobes, the Trans Radical Activist Network (TRAN) is pushing forward with their protest in DC."
0
US mass shootings on 20:17 - Mar 29 with 560 views
As the story says, most mass killing involve multiple weapons, hand guns and rifles. As crazy as the situation is, nothing will change in the USA nt even if they criminalise gun ownership because there's just too many guns in circulation.
Good points IMO.
I think the reason that these fast firing weapons get the press is that they invariably involve innocent bystanders.
Australia managed to get rid of a load of weapons via banning but whether we like it or not the will isn’t there in the US, partly down to the NRA who are an incredibly powerful lobbying force.
0
US mass shootings on 20:22 - Mar 29 with 555 views
You’re becoming increasingly desperate and have completely missed the point anyway.
If I were a nice sensible American gun owner and had a nice shiny rifle to protect myself and my family from burglars or tyrannical governments or the British army or mountain lions or the odd grizzly bear I am not going to be taking it to the football or to the pub or to the nightclub or to the church. So if I am in the unfortunate situation of witnessing you being shot in any of these places there won’t be much I can do about it as my gun would be back at home and not on my person.
Desperate to do what?
I’m simply telling you that Americans want guns for the exact same reason you claimed to want them.
Except you don’t face the scenario I referenced, they do.
While you may not be able to help me in this situation as your gun would be at home, would it be safe to say if you were involved in such scenario, you would hope someone else would have theirs?
Again, the answer is obvious… isn’t it.
Swansea Independent Poster of the Year 2021 and 2022.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
