Americans and guns

Bob · April 18, 2007, 11:36:52 AM

I was reading in a Norwegian news paper about the school massacre in Virginia a couple of days ago. Even though it is a totally terrible thing that happened, it is too far away (and scarily enough, also almost getting kind of "normal" over there) to affect me in any significant way. What really shocked me though was what I read at the end of the article:

Many over there thinks that the massacre at Virginia Tech shows that students should be allowed to carry arms at the campus area, in order to be able to defend their selves :blink:
A guy named John Velleco from the interest group Gun Owners of America even said to ABC News that "It is tragic to disarm the citizens and make these weapon free zones mandatory. It only means a way to give these crazy persons numerous easy targets." :blink::blink:

I barely have words when I hear statements such as that. Just imagine how it would be if every student and teacher would carry a gun in their rucksack together with their books, pens and pencils and packed lunch :wacko:

delanvital · April 18, 2007, 12:08:39 PM

Quote from: Bob;185721I barely have words when I hear statements such as that. Just imagine how it would be if every student and teacher would carry a gun in their rucksack together with their books, pens and pencils and packed lunch :wacko:

But, I wonder, is this the view of the extreme? Is this the concensus? How many people support the gun owners etc? I know the south is more gun-happy than the north, but say a large minority actually was in favour of reducing gun-free zones I would be really shocked. I hope this is just spokesperson from GOoA making the best of a situation.

Bastet · April 18, 2007, 12:29:48 PM

Quote from: delanvital;185722I know the south is more gun-happy than the north, but say a large minority actually was in favour of reducing gun-free zones I would be really shocked.

This horrible incident happend in a state where any kid over the age of 12 with enough money can legaly buy rifles upto a M14 w/o consent of its perants.

Tbh, the fact that this **** happens almost yearly now in the states and not at all everywhere else (in holland we had one kid shoot a single teacher a few years back as only gun incident in school in known history) should be proof enough that the current system in the USA really doesnt work.

Then again, USA aint doing too badly for a 3th world country.

Doorman · April 18, 2007, 12:32:15 PM

In essence I agree with you Bob. But... What the guy says is true. If everyone had been carrying a gun would the shooter have killed so many? I think not. He would have been cut down in a trice!
Let me make it clear that I DO NOT condone the use of guns, and here's another 'but', an American was speaking on British radio and stated that in the U.S. they have nothing like the amount of 'hot' burglaries as we do in UK.('hot' as in a buglary where the householders are at home) Burglars don't enter houses with people in them because they're likely to get wasted!
In the UK things are no better. We had a situation where a guy went on the rampage and killed lots (shamefully, I've forgotten how many) of kids and teachers at a school in Dunblane. Knee jerk politics deprived thousands of law abiding members of gun clubs all over the country, of their hobby and gunshop owners of their livelihood and yet it seems to be easier to get hold of a gun now that ever it was. Shootings are two a penny these days and yet guns have been banned! :g:

Tough call.

delanvital · April 18, 2007, 01:14:20 PM

Quote from: Doorman;185728In essence I agree with you Bob. But... What the guy says is true. If everyone had been carrying a gun would the shooter have killed so many? I think not. He would have been cut down in a trice!
Let me make it clear that I DO NOT condone the use of guns, and here's another 'but', an American was speaking on British radio and stated that in the U.S. they have nothing like the amount of 'hot' burglaries as we do in UK.('hot' as in a buglary where the householders are at home) Burglars don't enter houses with people in them because they're likely to get wasted!
In the UK things are no better. We had a situation where a guy went on the rampage and killed lots (shamefully, I've forgotten how many) of kids and teachers at a school in Dunblane. Knee jerk politics deprived thousands of law abiding members of gun clubs all over the country, of their hobby and gunshop owners of their livelihood and yet it seems to be easier to get hold of a gun now that ever it was. Shootings are two a penny these days and yet guns have been banned! :g:

Tough call.

I cannot help but see fighting hard with hard as a bad choice. The classical stuff, i.e. if you then have guns in the houses, so will the 'hot' burglars. You will then have an armed guard patrolling the neighbourhood. They will come in large numbers.. or something.. you get my point.

I think a much tougher attitude on who can carry guns could make the circle go the right way. Make carrying a gun not worth the punishment.

Dr Sadako · April 18, 2007, 01:17:06 PM

Quote from: Doorman;185728In essence I agree with you Bob. But... What the guy says is true. If everyone had been carrying a gun would the shooter have killed so many? I think not. He would have been cut down in a trice!

Yes more guns is the right solution! Why don't we equip everyone with a M16. No lets give them a howitzer each at birth! What the heck ... everyone should have their own tactical nuke! The world will be a much safer place with more guns around ... :eyebrow:

Benny · April 18, 2007, 02:08:56 PM

In days gone by, I would have happily argued in our dirty step sisters forum....here

http://www.tacticalgamer.com/sandbox/89439-more-guns-less-safe-2.html

but I'm not sure I can be bothered this time. For what it's worth I agree with you. I may come back later...

delanvital · April 18, 2007, 02:36:09 PM

Quote from: Benny;185752In days gone by, I would have happily argued in our dirty step sisters forum....here

http://www.tacticalgamer.com/sandbox/89439-more-guns-less-safe-2.html

but I'm not sure I can be bothered this time. For what it's worth I agree with you. I may come back later...

Why'd you have to show that link...

sheepy · April 18, 2007, 03:41:57 PM

probably to show some opinions from those "over the pond"

Apophis · April 18, 2007, 04:12:11 PM

Quote from: Benny;185752In days gone by, I would have happily argued in our dirty step sisters forum....here

http://www.tacticalgamer.com/sandbox/89439-more-guns-less-safe-2.html

but I'm not sure I can be bothered this time. For what it's worth I agree with you. I may come back later...

Dirty step sister?!? :byebye:

This incident is surely a terrible tragedy. Personally, I own several firearms and keep them secured at all times. I think on the whole America has a problem with violent crime, I'm not sure the problem is with firearms themselves though.

I do think our gun laws need some revision, but the problem is the two camps seem to refuse a compromise which makes things difficult with our political structure. In some areas of the country the ability to carry a firearm is a necessity of life (such as in the high desert in Oregon where my brother lives).

Doorman · April 18, 2007, 04:23:06 PM

Quote from: Dr Sadako;185737Yes more guns is the right solution! Why don't we equip everyone with a M16. No lets give them a howitzer each at birth! What the heck ... everyone should have their own tactical nuke! The world will be a much safer place with more guns around ... :eyebrow:

Well done Mats.

First you ignore my disclaimer. Then turn up the wick. Great for discussions, kinda kills it stone dead doesn't it? The point was, IF everyone else was armed would he have killed 32 people? The answer must be NO. :angry:

Benny · April 18, 2007, 04:41:55 PM

Hi Apo, long time....

I'll work up to heading over later, I'm only on page 3 of your thread over there. Although the gun thing has been done to death in that forum in the days of Turtle, Hollywood and Cing.

Off topic. Hope all is well over there? And there are 2 meanings to the word dirty...I meant the Christina version

Dr Sadako · April 18, 2007, 04:49:52 PM

Quote from: Doorman;185765Well done Mats. First you ignore my disclaimer. Then turn up the wick. Great for discussions, kinda kills it stone dead doesn't it?

From your last post I got the feeling that you didn't condone the use of guns? Was that a misunderstanding?

Quote from: Doorman;185728Let me make it clear that I DO NOT condone the use of guns,

Quote from: Doorman;185765The point was, IF everyone else was armed
would he have killed 32 people? The answer must be NO. :angry:

The point is, IF no one at all was armed
would he have killed 32 people? The answer must be NO.

Apophis · April 18, 2007, 04:54:25 PM

Quote from: Benny;185773Hi Apo, long time....

I'll work up to heading over later, I'm only on page 3 of your thread over there. Although the gun thing has been done to death in that forum in the days of Turtle, Hollywood and Cing.

Off topic. Hope all is well over there? And there are 2 meanings to the word dirty...I meant the Christina version

Yeah, we've seen the whole gun control thing time and time again. This new incarnation is a bit of a mess considering all the "academic" controls applied to the discussion, but it's no less frustrating than ever!

All is well on our side of the pond. I keep meaning to get over here more often to see what you good folks are up to, but something always ends up distracting me!

DogMeat · April 18, 2007, 07:06:30 PM

There has to be a compromise between a total gun ban (like the UK) and the Wild West throwback that is (some states of) the US.

You need to pass a proficiency test to obtain a licence to a) drive a car (lethal weapon) or b) ride a motorcycle (instrument of Satan), c) fly a plane (9/11 anyone?) and d) run a mobile burger van(a & b), so why not test people's proficiency and psychological aptitude before allowing them to own a firearm?

I doubt there's anyone in the UK who couldn't procure a (illegal) handgun within a couple of weeks if they really wanted to...