The Virginia Shooting, Gun Rights, and Revolutions (Split from News thread)

[Ironwolf85]

*Nods* But again, they're a direct counter to the extreme left on this.  Every time someone says Ban, another NRA member gets their plaid jacket and gun rack.

There's the trick, the extreme left (as in actual extremist, not what fox news calls extremist... which is basically anything left of Regan) has basically no chance of accomplishing a firearm ban. Logistically and Politically it's impossible.
I know a few guys who actually quit the NRA over this, they don't care about hunting, or hunters, just guns. I'm just... fucking sick of being shouted down by the same slogans and never making any progress.
*shakes head*

At least most people on the "left" of the conversation are willing to sit down and have a serious talk about some sort of solution without shutting me down... yet...

I'm at a loss as to why has the NRA become such poison to the debate. it only hurts their cause in the long run.

[TheGlyphstone]

Money. About half of their monthly publication is advertisements and catalogues for gun paraphernalia, plus online ad revenue, sponsorships, etc. - and membership fees as well. If they dared to drift towards the center, it could be financially catastrophic.

[Ironwolf85]

Money. About half of their monthly publication is advertisements and catalogs for gun paraphernalia, plus online ad revenue, sponsorships, etc. - and membership fees as well. If they dared to drift towards the center, it could be financially catastrophic.

So basically they're howling at the dawn to prevent the sun from rising because doing otherwise would be financially catastrophic?

[Tairis]

Like almost every political organization the NRA is simply a vessel for pushing special interests, in this case firearm manufacturers that are worried that any restricts will harm their profits.

[TheGlyphstone]

So basically they're howling at the dawn to prevent the sun from rising because doing otherwise would be financially catastrophic?

That's a somewhat provocative way of putting it, but I guess? It's sound financial sense, regardless of how inevitable the outcome is. The longer they hold their line, the longer they can keep raking in that cash.

[Oniya]

At least most people on the "left" of the conversation are willing to sit down and have a serious talk about some sort of solution without shutting me down... yet...

I would much rather talk and sort out some kind of solution.  Shutting people down doesn't solve anything.

[Tairis]

There are plenty of fanatics on both sides. Try talking to people from the Brady campaign. It's like talking to PETA.

Which is the point I made the first time around in this thread. We can have this discussion until we are blue in the face. But it's irrelevant because our politicians are incapable of compromise anymore as they go to further and further extremes to pander to their power bases. Which is only exacerbated by our media empire that only wants to focus on whatever candidates are in their pockets and get them more ratings.

No matter what you put forward, you're going to get a rabid backlash against it based on whatever side you're betting against. If you propose universal background checks the Republicans will snap like rabid dogs parroting the NRA's 'The liberals want to take your guns' spiel. By the same virtue if you implemented something like I proposed above (allowing teachers to take an armed security class to carry their personal weapon at school) you'd have the Democrats gnashing their teeth and spewing the Brady Campaign's nonsense and talking about how they're just trying to curtail violence (because hint hint if you don't vote for them the crazy Republicans are going to give missile launchers too psychopaths and let them goto your schools!).

The only way you're going to get real action is if, by some miracle, you get a genuine moderate into the White House that decides to make their stamp on history by executive ordering something into existence that then forces both sides to compromise.

[Ironwolf85]

one can hope.

still, I suppose one of the reasons I'm pissed at the NRA is it treats weaponry that should be respected as a pornographic toy. >.>

A friend once told me blaming guns for violence is like blaming spoons for making you fat.

I've thought about it and it seems people are screaming about the restriction of/freedom of spoons, when what we all really want is for people to stop using those spoons to eat mayo deep fried in butter topped with sugar frosted sprinkles.

[Oniya]

A friend once told me blaming guns for violence is like blaming spoons for making you fat.

An amusing comeback that I've seen for that line:  I'll believe that when a man with a spoon runs into a classroom and makes everyone in there obese.

[Cycle]

Shooting at Tennessee State University. 

[Cycle]

Roadrage shooting kills 4 year old.

[Tairis]

I find this both the height of irony and the perfect example of why no progress is going to ever get made:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/10/hillary_clinton_is_smearing_bernie_sanders_as_a_sexist_it_s_an_insult_to.html

Basically Bernie Sanders has stated exactly what we've said in this thread: two sides screaming at each other is never going to accomplish anything and unless people are willing to compromise on what they can agree on nothing will get done.

Hillary's response to this? Try and spin it to imply that Bernie Sanders is sexist because he's implying that a woman is 'yelling' if she states an opinion and that she of course 'won't be silenced'.

Disgusting. The perfect example of American politics in motion. Care about making real change, actually preventing violence, helping the people you claim to be doing this for? Nah, lie, twist, and misrepresent whatever you have to do to get elected. That's the American way.

[Ironwolf85]

*FACEDESK*
*FACEDESK*
*FACEDESK*
*FACEDESK*
my face is going to hurt before this is over
*FACEDESK*

[Oniya]

I agree.  Newsflash:  If both sides are described as 'screaming', neither one is being lauded over the other - whether or not they are different genders, races, or rival kindergarten classes.

[Cycle]

Shooter kills 3 in Colorado Springs.

[Vergil Tanner]

I just want to chime in here and point out something, partly in response to a point I saw earlier about "most gun crime being committed with handguns:"

I live in the UK. In England, members of the public may own certain types of firearms - sporting rifles and shotguns, for example - but only under heavy regulation. Members of the public used to be allowed handguns and easily concealable weapons....until 1996, when Thomas Hamilton committed the UK's first mass school shooting at Dunblane School, killing 16 children and one teacher, before committing suicide. The public reaction? Mass outrage, and a lot of public-created petitions to tighten gun laws to try and prevent it from happening again. Following the massive public push and the media coverage, a pair of Gun Law Reform Acts were passed by Parliament that effectively made private ownership of handguns in the UK illegal. Firearms can still be owned under regulation and if you have the correct licence, but almost nobody has a "real" handgun any more.

Do you want to know the result of that law?

The Dunblane School Massacre is both the first and - to date - only school shooting in the UK, at least to my knowledge.

Do you know what the gap between that and the next Gun Massacre was? Sure, gun crime happened in isolated cases, but the next mass shooting was in 2010; The Cumbria Shootings. That's a 14 year gap between Gun Massacres, whereas the US has one every few months. Does nobody see a problem there?

The UK, which has made private handgun ownership illegal - but NOT sporting rifles and shotguns, which are used for private sports, pest control, gun shows, etc etc, which are usually the uses cited by anti-gun-controllers - has a gun homicide rate of 2.4%. It has one of the lowest rates of gun crime worldwide, and has only 0.5 - 1 death on average per 100,000 that was as a result of gun crime. Most of our police force aren't armed with guns, which also means that we have one of the lowest rates of "Suicide By Cop" and Police Shootings in the world as well. It happens, but much, much less often and in more extreme circumstances which are dragged through the news for months. Further, less police are killed as well; from 2000 - 2011, only THREE police officers were killed by firearms in the whole of the UK. Even allowing for the difference in size of the population of the UK and the USA, that's a HUGE difference. Further, we have a specific armed response unit that is routinely trained and drilled in proper gun use and gun safety, which results in far less cases of "shoot first, ask questions later" type responses.

And before anybody says "Oh, but they can just get the guns illegally," it's estimate that only - on average - 0.1 people per 100,000 are killed by illegal firearms per year (though those stats are from 2011 and 2012, I doubt they've changed overly much in the last few years).


Let me put it this way:

The UK has among the strictest gun laws in the world, and has one of the lowest gun crime rates in the world.

Go figure.

Now, I know how the Americans love their guns and I doubt any politician is gonna have the stones to say "No, you obviously can't be trusted with concealed weapons so you're not allowed them any more," but anybody who says that tighter gun laws won't reduce gun crime is demonstrably wrong.
And just to be clear; despite me arguing about it earlier, I don't care what your Constitution says. It's a document, written by men. Documents written by men can be wrong, and they can be flawed and they can be - as in this case - outdated, since back when it was written, guns were a lot less practical and a lot more cumbersome and inaccurate than they are today.

Can anybody actually give me a reason besides "It's in the constitution! It's my right!" to not tighten gun laws to try and curb your frankly absurd levels of gun crime? Is anybody really arguing that America shouldn't be stricter on gun ownership when it's pretty obvious that it's the availability of the things that's causing all these issues?

Two or three more numbers:

In 2013, there were 30 gun deaths in the UK.

Per year in America at that time, it was - on average - 32,000 a year.

In 2013, the UK population was about 64.1 million, and the US population was about 316.5 million.

0.00005% of the UK populace per year will die from gun violence.

0.01% of the American populace will die from gun violence.

Those statistics don't look that bad when made into a percentage (just remember, 32,000 is still a LOT of people that die from ONE SINGLE type of crime in only a year), but I worked them out to illustrate a point; even when allowing for population size difference, the USA gun death rate is still MASSIVELY higher than the UK's by  20,000% when talking about percentage difference alone.
I mean, come on. That's more than just a coincidence.

American Gun Law needs to be tighter, or this sorta shit will keep happening to you. It's just a fact.

[Lustful Bride]

American Gun Law needs to be tighter, or this sorta shit will keep happening to you. It's just a fact.

As a gun owner I agree. There are many people out there who should not be allowed anywhere near a weapon. Hell id compromise to give up semi autos for bigger caliber weapons, high cap mags and etc. But that would require an intelligent conversation with politicians who don't care enough to actually learn/research enough about guns and the culture to make proper laws*, and who are too busy being on their high horse to actually do something as plebian as 'Compromise'.  :P

*Example of why AWB (At least the old 2013 version) was a joke.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide

As dad said if you want to hate something you must first understand it. Pfftt but who am I to question the silver spoons up on capitol hill? :P

[Vergil Tanner]

I agree....but the thing is, after looking heavily into these stats, I have to say that I'm now a supporter of just saying "You're not allowed a concealable weapon." You can have shotguns and assault rifles and sport rifles and all that Jazz because they're hard to hide and can't be taken into public without drawing attention to yourself and - as somebody helpfully pointed out - they make up the minority of weapon crimes. The UK took away handguns, and our gun crime in terms of percentage of crime and population dropped to practically 0. Best case scenario for me? Take away handguns and handgun-sized automatic weapons and the like, and let you keep the bigger guns and see what happens. If America instituted similar gun laws to the UK, started a "buy back" system and actually enforced those laws, I bet you every GB Pound Sterling I have that gun crime would drop dramatically. Maybe not to 0, but the amount of school shootings would be reduced for absolute damn certain. It may not be popular, but...well, you have a right granted by your constitution to own firearms. Ok. Well, little Timmy has the right to not get shot in the face because Joe hates his life. Just saying. :P

[TheGlyphstone]

Not to make unnecessary light of the topic, but Americans do have a tradition of being somewhat irrational with regards to things we consider our 'rights' - something an Englishman, in particular, should be aware of. ;D

[Vergil Tanner]

You could have just stopped at "somewhat irrational." You're like the moody teenager that stomps its foot when told it's grounded, then sneaks out of its window to go to its boyfriend Syria's house. ;) :P

[ Love you guys really! :P :P ]

[Lustful Bride]

I agree....but the thing is, after looking heavily into these stats, I have to say that I'm now a supporter of just saying "You're not allowed a concealable weapon."

eehhh *moves hands in air as if to weight them* I am on the fence on that. I would like to see some intelligent conversation and stuff on that before I can really make a decision. Cause it actually does help people sometimes.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/police-concealed-carry-license-holder-kills-gunman/ar-BBmH2ym?li=BBieTUX&ocid=iehp

http://controversialtimes.com/news/remember-this-sc-concealed-carrier-stops-mass-shooting-during-church-service-zero-casualties/

Plus I think this is a state matter not 100% federal government.

Not to make unnecessary light of the topic, but Americans do have a tradition of being somewhat irrational with regards to things we consider our 'rights' - something an Englishman, in particular, should be aware of. ;D

I remember a saying I once heard in a gunstore from a vet who came back from the middle east, he was chatting with the guys and my dad there and im paraphrasing here.

"If given a choice between having to actually use my guns to protect my rights or fight some invaders, and giving them up for a world where such a situation would never happen and the police guarantee my safety 100% of the time. I'd give em up. but since that will never happen they wont take em from me." He might have said it better but this is as best as I can remember him saying it.

Edit: Added in second link since one is never enough :P

[Vergil Tanner]

Well....in that case, if the gun laws had been tighter, the gunman wouldn't have had the firearm in the first place, so a brave bystander wouldn't have been needed. Remember, if handguns have been banned, the gunman likely wouldn't have had a handgun either, so the whole thing would have been moot. :P



Well, that might just be down to English police being - as far as I can tell - better than American police. :P Of course, I'm massively biased in this case. ;)

[TheGlyphstone]

Bobbies are certainly more stylish, at least.

[Vergil Tanner]

Oh Gods, now I'm imagining a Bobby Catwalk. I hope you're proud of yourself. -__-

[Lustful Bride]

Well....in that case, if the gun laws had been tighter, the gunman wouldn't have had the firearm in the first place, so a brave bystander wouldn't have been needed. Remember, if handguns have been banned, the gunman likely wouldn't have had a handgun either, so the whole thing would have been moot. :P

Or he would have attacked the place with a knife since mass stabbings are also a thing as well. As well as people attacking places with hatchets, machetes, axes. *shrug* :/

Hell if a madman is really dead set on killing he might just make a homemade bomb. Killers don't care how its done, they just want the death and chaos.

Oh Gods, now I'm imagining a Bobby Catwalk. I hope you're proud of yourself. -__-

That does not arouse me in any way.....>3>........ <3<....yyeaahhhh