Jump to content
LOTROCommunity
Doro

The Rage Corner

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, cossieuk said:

There has been 353 mass shootings in the US this year alone (mass shooting being where 4 or more people are injured or kill), yet the last mass shooting in the UK was in 2010.  

Gun laws here are so much better and it does work.  No law will ever stop all shootings but lets not make it easy.  In the US you cant buy a Kinder Surprise yet you can buy a AR 15 in a Super Market.  It is crazy.  When it is easier to get a gun then a chocolate egg there is something wrong with your country.

You dont have to register the sale of your gun in the US (at least in most states), but you have to register your car if you sell that.  It is just silly to me that guns can be bought and sold and there is no record of them.  Making it so all guns have to be registered and if you sell it you must notify the relevant authorities is not much to ask.  Ensuring that the person you are selling to has a licence would be a start.  There is so much that the US could do that would not infringe on the 2nd amendment, sadly too many nutters are in positions of power and will not let that happen.

The comparison is a little off, though (plus, the vast number of 'mass shootings' are gang related, i.e. criminals shooting other criminals). Let's say guns are banned in the US. Well that only restricts legal suppliers. It's harder to import guns into our country than the US, which is bordered by a country infamous for gangs and cartels that can smuggle in anything. As we all know, they've not been very successful at stopping these guys in the whole 'war on drugs'.

If you think about it for us, we've got problems with knives. They took away guns, now only criminals have them (and, again, mostly on other criminals), so people turned instead to using knives. They just changed what they were using to kill and threaten people. Now I'm not legally allowed to carry a weapon to defend myself, but law isn't exactly the strong suit of people I'd need to defend myself from. So I have to deal with the risk of being stopped and searched, then going to prison for daring to want to even the odds. As if I should have just said 'there is a law against your knife' and it will magically disappear.

I'm definitely with you on the Kinder thing. And the registering of weapons, that should be a given. Shit, they don't even require training for their weapons but they do for cars... and they don't even drive manuals! But if they can make it so that licences are required (with tests to pass for it), weapons and users are registered, and only certain kinds of guns are permitted, then I can't see a problem with it. I think the chance to survive an unbalanced situation is more important than trying to make guns less accessible to criminals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me see:

Guns are not for sale in supermarkets, at least not in any I've ever seen or heard of and I've lived in 4 States and spent time in all of the lower 48.

Gang gun violence is not the majority of mass shootings here. To the best of my knowledge the majority are domestic violence in a home. Gang shootings are typically less than 4 persons.

Training is required though only for a licence to carry, not to own.

We actually do drive manual as well as automatics.

Types of guns available to the public are limited, though special licences and permits can allow collectors some access to some banned weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Up until very recently you could buy an AR 15 in Walmart, which we in the UK would refer to as a supermarket.  Now they are focusing on guns for hunting and shooting sporting clays.  

http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/26/news/companies/walmart-ar-15-guns/ 

Here is a list of each mass shooting in the US in 2015.  In most cases the gunman is unknown, so my bet is most mass shootings are not domestic situations.  Most non mass shootings will most likely be domestic violence related

http://www.shootingtracker.com/wiki/Mass_Shootings_in_2015

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter your view of the "right" or perhaps the "wrong" of Americans having constitutionally blessed weapons.... for lack of a better description.... what I find massively idiotic about the article I linked is that in the current climate of mass paranoia and hatred already climbing on a daily basis in THIS country (something which you may think you are already aware of...), it is completely irresponsible to encourage people in this way at this of all times. 

The huge amount of conflict currently happening seemingly everywhere with police killings in nearly every major city in the US, the coverage on the Planned Parenthood shooting, Black Lives demonstrations and occupations everywhere, now this in San Bernardino (in the wake of over-saturation of media coverage about Paris), ISIS, etc., the freaking nut job TRUMP comments every day.... the LAST thing we need to be doing here, especially if you are in LAW ENFORCEMENT, is to encourage the people to carry their god-given firearms  - considering the very obvious mindset of the vast majority of people who carry them, let alone the ones who are only too happy to use them....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the "very obvious mindset of the vast majority of the people who carry them"? I would submit the vast majority of the people who carry them have no intention to use them on anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, FundinStrongarm said:

What is the "very obvious mindset of the vast majority of the people who carry them"? I would submit the vast majority of the people who carry them have no intention to use them on anyone.

There would not be enough time to explain it to you.  And saying that people who carry guns have no intention of using them is an oxymoronic rationalization the NRA is only all too fond of shoving down people's throats here.  In my nearly 30 years of working in social services in this country, often in collaboration with law enforcement and community based agencies, I have never once met a "responsible gun owner" as the NRA likes to call them, let alone someone with a CCDW license in particular who wasn't perfectly comfortable with idea of blowing any one, any where, away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So your contention is you've never met a person with a carry/conceal who wasn't ok with the idea of walking into a church, or mall or any public area and just start shooting people. Also that you've never met anyone that handles their gun responsibly.

Sorry, I call bullshit.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Spiteful said:

So your contention is you've never met a person with a carry/conceal who wasn't ok with the idea of walking into a church, or mall or any public area and just start shooting people. Also that you've never met anyone that handles their gun responsibly.

Sorry, I call bullshit.

 

Call it BS all you like.  That is my experience on the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, mtones said:

There would not be enough time to explain it to you.  And saying that people who carry guns have no intention of using them is an oxymoronic rationalization the NRA is only all too fond of shoving down people's throats here.  In my nearly 30 years of working in social services in this country, often in collaboration with law enforcement and community based agencies, I have never once met a "responsible gun owner" as the NRA likes to call them, let alone someone with a CCDW license in particular who wasn't perfectly comfortable with idea of blowing any one, any where, away.

Shouldn't you be dead according to your own statement?

The law enforcement you collaborated with were unarmed? Or responsible?

Since there are many millions of gun owners and you have never met one who is responsible you either lead a very lucky life or these people were in fact responsible and simply didn't act as you have expected...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, fittybolger said:

Shouldn't you be dead according to your own statement?

The law enforcement you collaborated with were unarmed? Or responsible?

Since there are many millions of gun owners and you have never met one who is responsible you either lead a very lucky life or these people were in fact responsible and simply didn't act as you have expected...

 

Heh. Yes actually, I should be dead considering I have been shot on the job, but was fortunate enough to have not been fatally injured.    As for the rest of your comments, they are off the mark.  If you have not worked in a field where you have to deal with these types of people on a regular basis, you won't exactly have the same frame of reference.   Disagree if you will.  Doesn't change anything for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mtones said:

In my nearly 30 years of working in social services in this country... I have never once met a "responsible gun owner" as the NRA likes to call them...

Shouldn't that be the case? Surely responsibly gun owners don't require social services?

4 hours ago, mtones said:

... but was fortunate enough to have not been fatally injured.

For a minute, I was slightly concerned that this site had become an ouija board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mtones said:

There would not be enough time to explain it to you.  And saying that people who carry guns have no intention of using them is an oxymoronic rationalization the NRA is only all too fond of shoving down people's throats here.  In my nearly 30 years of working in social services in this country, often in collaboration with law enforcement and community based agencies, I have never once met a "responsible gun owner" as the NRA likes to call them, let alone someone with a CCDW license in particular who wasn't perfectly comfortable with idea of blowing any one, any where, away.

There's between 100-150 million gun owners in America, depending on if you look at individual gun owners or households with guns. I do not think a 'vast majority have a very obvious mindset' like you say. Or, at least, have the mindset that they are comfortable with the idea of blowing anyone anywhere away. I don't doubt a certain criminal element has that mindset but the "vast majority"? Sorry, calling bullshit as well. Of the gun owners I know (and I'm Canadian so don't know all that many but have some US friends that own guns) none of them have the mindset you attribute to the vast majority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So your issue is my using the terms " vast majority" because you have "some US friends that own guns."  Call BS all you like.  Doesn't change my experience over this many years or my view.  That you seem so offended by it is your problem.  Fact remains, encouraging people to use their guns in this country IS NOT the answer to an already huge gun problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, mtones said:

So your issue is my using the terms " vast majority" because you have "some US friends that own guns."  Call BS all you like.  Doesn't change my experience over this many years or my view.  That you seem so offended by it is your problem.  Fact remains, encouraging people to use their guns in this country IS NOT the answer to an already huge gun problem.

Surely if the vast majority have such a mindset, the rate of shootings would be much higher?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure I get the ouija board reference exactly.... also not sure how social services work in UK, as here it is a pretty broad range of work.  Mine has been limited in child and adult protective services, drug rehabilitation programs, and victim services advocacy through the district attorney's office.  The jurisdiction for all these programs cross with law enforcement collaboration, and yes do frequently mean we are talking about dealing people that have been abused or injured by others that have engaged in illegal and criminal behavior.  There are many other areas of services.  To assume gun owners do not need the services themselves is rather short sighted however.  I have worked with many a family who lost a child for example, to a father or mother that owned a gun.  That parent was also in need of help, despite believing themselves "responsible." Such people rarely ever assume s/he has done anything wrong or other than exercising his/her constitutional right, so the issue is not what you or I or the NRA deem responsible, but how the owner him/herself thinks of it - which is what is at the heart of the problem with the idea of owning and using guns as a private citizen in the first place here, an attitude in Americans you yourself above basically discussed as being problematic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Doro said:

Surely if the vast majority have such a mindset, the rate of shootings would be much higher?

I think the rate of shootings in this country speaks for itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is because California is like "Escape from New York"....all the responsible people left along time ago.....:P

As a Idaho resident and gun owner I have never once had the urge to shoot up a church or school.
Add me to the list of "responsible" gun owners that you have never met.....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Spiteful said:

You said Super Markets, Wal-Mart is not a super market, My reply to what you wrote is correct, you didn't mention Dept. Stores or "Big Box" dtores which are different.

 

Here's a study that looks at 2006/2011

53% of mass shooting incidents began as a domestic issue.

A supermarket is a large self serving store that sell food and house hold goods, that is what Wal-Mart does, there for it is a supermarket.  You can call it a hypermarket or superstore but that is just the same thing.

That report is on mass killing, not mass shooting.  While many of the cases are shooting, not all were.  Also a mass shooting does not mean any deaths have occurred, only that 4 or more people have been injured or killed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mtones said:

Not sure I get the ouija board reference exactly.... also not sure how social services work in UK, as here it is a pretty broad range of work.  Mine has been limited in child and adult protective services, drug rehabilitation programs, and victim services advocacy through the district attorney's office.  The jurisdiction for all these programs cross with law enforcement collaboration, and yes do frequently mean we are talking about dealing people that have been abused or injured by others that have engaged in illegal and criminal behavior.  There are many other areas of services.  To assume gun owners do not need the services themselves is rather short sighted however.  I have worked with many a family who lost a child for example, to a father or mother that owned a gun.  That parent was also in need of help, despite believing themselves "responsible." Such people rarely ever assume s/he has done anything wrong or other than exercising his/her constitutional right, so the issue is not what you or I or the NRA deem responsible, but how the owner him/herself thinks of it - which is what is at the heart of the problem with the idea of owning and using guns as a private citizen in the first place here, an attitude in Americans you yourself above basically discussed as being problematic.

The Ouija board thing was just a joke. You said your injury was non fatal, which would mean if it weren't then you were typing 'from the other side'.

Yeah... it seems your work does limit you in regards to the sort of gun owners you're going to meet. I wasn't assuming gun owners don't use it, I was saying responsible ones probably don't because of the very nature of the services involved. I suspect prison wardens also encounter more criminals than most, it doesn't make the majority of people criminals either.

1 hour ago, mtones said:

I think the rate of shootings in this country speaks for itself.

Well from what I've seen, there's about 90 million gun owners in the US. There are 30,000 deaths by firearms and about 85,000 injuries by firearms per year (so let's say 115,000 incidents). That includes the suicides, the accidents, the suspect shootings by cops (though cop killings are excluded, not sure why). Even assuming that's a different gun owner for every incident, that's only 0.1% of gun owners using their weapons to injure or kill someone a year. And the likelihood is they aren't all separate individuals.

So your claim doesn't really hold much weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mtones said:

I think the rate of shootings in this country speaks for itself.

Naw, it really doesn't, as Doro mentions. The vast vast majority of gun owners don't go around blowing away anyone anywhere like you think they do or have that as their motive.

I used the example of people I know who have guns not having that mindset as a counterpoint to your example that you'd never once met a responsible gun owner and then going on to say a vast majority have a certain "obvious" mindset of wanting to blow away anyone anywhere. I don't doubt it will not change your experience or your view.

Just pointing out that your claims are pure bullshit. If even 10% of gun owners (let alone a vast majority like you claim) shot and killed someone once per year there'd be 25,000 gun deaths a day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the biggest problem is the large number of people that cant see the link between more guns and more gun deaths.  Just listen to the NRA after every mass shooting, they always say if only the victims had guns they would of been safe.  If only teachers had guns they could stop the children being murdered.  

If you look at other countries that increased restrictions on guns and seen a fall in gun deaths surely it must be clear that is the way to go.

Anyway the solution is simple let people have as many gins as they want just ban the sale or ammunition.  That way people can still bare arms but the general public is a lot safer.  Or perhaps the right to bare arms is just the right to ware sleeveless clothes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, FundinStrongarm said:

Naw, it really doesn't, as Doro mentions. The vast vast majority of gun owners don't go around blowing away anyone anywhere like you think they do or have that as their motive.

I used the example of people I know who have guns not having that mindset as a counterpoint to your example that you'd never once met a responsible gun owner and then going on to say a vast majority have a certain "obvious" mindset of wanting to blow away anyone anywhere. I don't doubt it will not change your experience or your view.

Just pointing out that your claims are pure bullshit. If even 10% of gun owners (let alone a vast majority like you claim) shot and killed someone once per year there'd be 25,000 gun deaths a day.

You seem to be confusing my views and then accusing me of claiming something I did not.  I never said the vast majority of gun owners blow people away.  I said very clearly I believe the vast majority hold a certain mindset.  You got issues with me making a generalization based on my experience with criminals.  Yet just like you, criminals are not the only people I know with guns.  That aside, to further clarify, it is my view that people who buy, own, and especially the ones with CCDW rights to carry them do so because they predicate the need to have them to begin with on a certain set of beliefs in the first place --- beliefs which when put to the test, have proven all too often lead to deaths.  You call all that bullshit. OK.  No worries, that makes little difference to me.  I know what I see, and what I see is people in this country sticking their heads up their asses on this issue because they are so busy upholding their "god given right" to be Johnny-Law when it suits them.  Call it bullshit again.  Stats DO speak for themselves - this country has more shootings on a given day that any nation in the world, it doesn't need to be 25K a day for my point to be made.

Furthermore, considering the government ban making it illegal for the CDC to even research the impact of gun violence on communities for well over a decade now, fuck knows what the numbers really are at this point.  You cannot limit gun violence to just death from guns, which are bad enough.  There are a plethora of other issues at work around this, which represent a systemic problem in all communities where guns surface.

All this said, nice chatting with ya'll I am outta here for holiday trip.  Be well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cossieuk said:

A supermarket is a large self serving store that sell food and house hold goods, that is what Wal-Mart does, there for it is a supermarket.  You can call it a hypermarket or superstore but that is just the same thing.

That report is on mass killing, not mass shooting.  While many of the cases are shooting, not all were.  Also a mass shooting does not mean any deaths have occurred, only that 4 or more people have been injured or killed.  

No one calls Wal-Mart a super market. A super market is a grocery store that will have an aisle dedicated to house hold cleaners etc. Stores like Wal-Mart are considered discount, department, big box, etc type stores where there is no focus on a class of items like groceries. Since the advent of Wal-Mart's super centers they really have just become Wal-Mart as they've become more expansive than say like a JC Penny or Target.

It's all semantics I suppose but if you are in America and say your going to the super market to buy a gun people are gonna look at you funny and have no idea what you're talking about.

Obviously you didn't read through the study because it has the tools to pull out gun numbers and type of shooting such as Public, Family etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, mtones said:

You seem to be confusing my views and then accusing me of claiming something I did not.  I never said the vast majority of gun owners blow people away.  I said very clearly I believe the vast majority hold a certain mindset.  You got issues with me making a generalization based on my experience with criminals.  Yet just like you, criminals are not the only people I know with guns.  That aside, to further clarify, it is my view that people who buy, own, and especially the ones with CCDW rights to carry them do so because they predicate the need to have them to begin with on a certain set of beliefs in the first place --- beliefs which when put to the test, have proven all too often lead to deaths.  You call all that bullshit. OK.  No worries, that makes little difference to me.  I know what I see, and what I see is people in this country sticking their heads up their asses on this issue because they are so busy upholding their "god given right" to be Johnny-Law when it suits them.  Call it bullshit again.  Stats DO speak for themselves - this country has more shootings on a given day that any nation in the world, it doesn't need to be 25K a day for my point to be made.

Furthermore, considering the government ban making it illegal for the CDC to even research the impact of gun violence on communities for well over a decade now, fuck knows what the numbers really are at this point.  You cannot limit gun violence to just death from guns, which are bad enough.  There are a plethora of other issues at work around this, which represent a systemic problem in all communities where guns surface.

All this said, nice chatting with ya'll I am outta here for holiday trip.  Be well.

These are your words:

the LAST thing we need to be doing here, especially if you are in LAW ENFORCEMENT, is to encourage the people to carry their god-given firearms  - considering the very obvious mindset of the vast majority of people who carry them, let alone the ones who are only too happy to use them....

When challenged on that claim you said:

I have never once met a "responsible gun owner" as the NRA likes to call them, let alone someone with a CCDW license in particular who wasn't perfectly comfortable with idea of blowing any one, any where, away.

And further said the following that supposedly supported your claims:

I think the rate of shootings in this country speaks for itself.

If you want to talk about rate of gun deaths or whether the CDC should investigate certain issues, go for it. Sounds like maybe an interesting discussion. I just think the obvious super-hyperbole on what the vast majority of gun owners have as a mindset - a mindset where you claim they're willing to blow anyone anywhere away - ain't gonna cut it when it is so obviously and completely wrong. If you want to fall back on this being your own experience that's fine but sweeping generalizations won't get you far.

The vast majority of gun owners in the US are law abiding people with no overriding urge to do anything more than be left alone, just like most people.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×