Sandy Hook Solution?

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by bpjimmy

I see. You have no solution other than insult.

You have already been given the solution. It's the same solution that has been successfully used in thousands of town and cities throughout the world...you just don't want to see it because, by your own admission, clearly stated in your post, Americans would rather become criminals than hand over their guns so as I said, it's not that it wouldn't work, it's that the people like you don't want it to work.

I am a "macho-cowboy" am I?

Clearly. If you want to play at being a soldier I suggest you try 'Paintball' or something similar.

And how would you know ANYTHING about me.

Well I read your posts and they told me what you are.

My Quote:
In the end you stop these mass shootings saving maybe 100 lives a year at the cost of 1000s of lives lost in individual crimes.[/i]

Your Response:
The verifiable evidence is against you.

What evidence? Verified where?

You see...this is the problem with jumping in and shouting your mouth off, as you did, before actually reading the whole thread and getting acquainted with what has gone before. Links have been given to scientific, peer reviewed studies that show that, contrary to your claim, gun deaths reduce dramatically when gun ownership is banned and the streets do not fill with vicious villains armed to the teeth who gun down unarmed members of the public.

I'm sure you think your being very smart by shooting off a load of pro-gun tripe but please, read the thread fully before mouthing off. You're just making yourself look foolish at the moment...mind you, I'm rather impressed with your ability to get your foot in your mouth and your head up your arse both at the same time. Very clever pal!

Oh, and much as this exchange with you is fun

Oh right! I'm surprised that you think such a serious subject should be treated in jest!!

Yes, in about 2 hours movers arrive and I will be very busy. I MUST GET BUSY NOW. And you aren't really interested in discussing the realities anyway.

...and there he goes...yet ANOTHER of the 'the whole fabric of society would collapse without guns' mob that has avoided the question I have put to each and every one of them (it's in the last paragraph of my post # 197 if you missed it....or perhaps you just can't answer it huh?)

You just want to try and feel superior to us poor Americans.

...but we are!

Perhaps a pint would do your ego more good than displaying ignorance of American society

I've actually spent more of my working life in the USA than I have in my own country of birth. That's how I know that too many of you are 'wannabe cowboys/soldiers.

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by DonH

I have seen the link to this article at the start of this thread. Would Harvard qualify as a credible source for intelligent analysis or have they been corrupted by the yahoo, gun toting,ignorant masses in the U.S. ?

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...useronline.pdf

Already addressed in post 142. There are blatant flaws in it regarding the position of the British police. Those statement are just not true.

...and the Harvard 'scholars' can't spell the word 'defence'.

[madmax]

Originally Posted by bpjimmy

With regard to your assertion it is easy to convert legal weapons to full auto -bullshit. Not one that works with out going runaway. For example you probably think Bushmaster AR15s (evil hiss) are simple to convert. Drop in parts right? Bzzzt. Wrong. Not without milling out part of the lower reciever and installing a full auto triger group and sear. Which BTW IS AGAINST THE LAW. So what is your suggestion? Pass another law? Oh, that one will work. Third, full autos aren't used by the mass shooters. You might find the gangbanger or two but NONE of the school shootings used a full auto.

No, according to a gun nut website you can convert an AR-15 to the equivalent of an M-16 for about $100 - that's chump change for a gun nut.
But you missed the point anyway: You said it "requires extensive effort" to own an automatic. Not true, just if you wanted to be legal... some don't care.

Originally Posted by bpjimmy

As to propagada your post to me is loaded with it. For example, our gun murder rates are orders of magnitude higher that any other country?

Interesting that you respond with your own propaganda below.... lol

Originally Posted by bpjimmy

Your source for that piece of misinformation please.

Don't have them at my fingertips since I have paid attention to research and articles over time.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...iolence-is-it/

Originally Posted by bpjimmy

And here is a quiz for you.

Jamaica
El Salvador
Brazil
South Africa
Russia
Mexico
Phillipines

What do they all have in common?

In common? They are all part of your misinformation propaganda!
Let's compare apples to apples and try to stick with developed countries with some semblance of law and order.

Originally Posted by bpjimmy

And denial about violence thwarted by private firearms ownership. You doubt it. Why? With 100 million owners of firearms in America, and an active criminal element you don't think ANY private citizens defend themselves using a firearm? That is head in the sand thinking.

Uh, hey Einstein.. I never said or denied anything like that. WTF is the matter with you?
There are no comprehensive statistics on that. But common sense tells anyone that the high death toll in this country shows that gun ownership is not THE answer to our problems.
Ms Lanza owning guns sure "thwarted" that one though, eh?

Originally Posted by bpjimmy

Oh, you think we should only count the times one is USED to KILL the criminal. It doesn't always work that way. Lots of times the criminal RUNS. And the potential rape/murder/assault victim goes home tonight.

Once again... don't assume what I think... you know nothing.
I am a gun owner. I believe in the right to own a firearm by responsible adults. I just think there are practical limits to these rights.

So get off your assuming high horse and get back to reality.

Originally Posted by bpjimmy

As to Lanza, you also seem ignorant about firearms. Any decent semiautomatic handgun that is mag fed would have sufficed for his plans. Mag changes are easy and fast so a single handgun would have worked.

Bullshit - My 9mm carries 10 rounds. You have to have multiple clips to get off all those shots. Reports have Lanza firing well over 100 rounds. His Bushmaster really helped to get his kill numbers up, way up. To think otherwise is just denial.

Originally Posted by bpjimmy

So please, what exactly would you DO. What law would you pass that would prevent future Sandy Hooks?

I don't pretend to have all the answers. But logically, no one needs an assault rifle with a high capacity magazine. I think we need better health care in this country, and better mental health care is part of that.
I'm not naive and think we can eliminate this kind of tragedy. But even eliminating a few of these tragedies would be a worthwhile goal.

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by madmax

Let's compare apples to apples and try to stick with developed countries with some semblance of law and order.

Exactly! The USA comes in at #4 but the countries that hold positions 1,2 and 3 - South Africa, Columbia and Thailand - are hardly what could be classed as '1st World'.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...-with-firearms

[DonH]

The school yard incidents are very tragic but they tend to garner most of the press. 20 times the numbers killed in Sandy Hook died in chicago this year. I doubt the thugs that committed the murders in Chicago really care about the legality of gun ownership. Just guessing, but I would also assume that the majority of these murders were committed with handguns. BTW, Chicago is known to be a city with tougher gun control laws than most.

We could take a hard look at assault weapons but dont pretend that its much more than a "feel good" solution.


http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...nal-gun-debate

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by DonH

BTW, Chicago is known to be a city with tougher gun control laws than most.

Well clearly, they are not effective gun laws and they need to be re-visited - because they are not working.

[Francoitalianarmy]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

Well clearly, they are not effective gun laws and they need to be re-visited - because they are not working.

Plad... the statistics on gun related deaths in the USA are kind of misleading in my opinion. Nearly HALF of the deaths are suicides and 2/3rds of the remaining are criminals shooting criminals in the commission of another crime.


Even in the UK, since the ban in 1998, the gun related deaths have nearly doubled and police are starting to go back to carrying guns as criminals and shooting violence is getting worse.

MAx ~ regarding the AR being able to fire automatic, this isn't as easy as it sounds as filing/milling needs to be done to precision or it doesn't work. (I was an armor for 6 years in the military)


Remember, the receiver is the "gun" and it is against the law to modify or manufacture. Between Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Virginia, the hunting licenses sold in those states combined and to assume each is for a gun would be the largest, armed military in the world. Hunting rifles are much more powerful than an AR or Ak47 and can have clips modified to carry/use larger magazines. If we start taking or making laws banning one type of weapon, then there is room to eliminate more... where is the line drawn?

I don't have the stats in front of me but I also read that 40% of assault weapons are owned by law enforcement/security that are active and retired.

Until the police forces can stop crime completely, folks just are not going to lay down their guns.

[madmax]

Originally Posted by Francoitalianarmy

MAx ~ regarding the AR being able to fire automatic, this isn't as easy as it sounds as filing/milling needs to be done to precision or it doesn't work. (I was an armor for 6 years in the military)


Remember, the receiver is the "gun" and it is against the law to modify or manufacture. .

But people do modify... just like people modify their cars illegally. I didn't say it was "easy" - I found a website that touted the conversion with "disclaimers" for making sure it was done legally.

And like I said, and I agreed with bpjimmy that automatics are not the weapon of choice. But that isn't the point anyway. Assault weapons with high capacity magazines are strictly mass killing weapons.

Fanatics will get weapons that are designed to kill. You can bet some of these lunatics get off on the fact that they have a "killing machine". Personally, I think that is a little sick. I have experienced some of these wackos in person.

BTW: I'm modifying my '69 Z/28 with a C4 Vette front suspension... now THAT is difficult!

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by Francoitalianarmy

Plad... the statistics on gun related deaths in the USA are kind of misleading in my opinion. Nearly HALF of the deaths are suicides ....

Not according to the figures here...

"12,664 murders in the US. Of those, 8,583 were caused by firearms."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datab...crime-us-state

....although it is good to see that the crime rates are going down in the USA.

Even in the UK, since the ban in 1998, the gun related deaths have nearly doubled

Not according to the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London. They say that the number of gun-related deaths is falling since reaching a peak in 2008 when there were 42 gun related deaths in the UK, in 2007 there were 51.

Britain records 18% fall in gun deaths
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...s-1232069.html

....and police are starting to go back to carrying guns as criminals and shooting violence is getting worse.

"going back to carrying guns"???? I don't know where you're getting your info bro but ordinary police officers in the UK have NEVER carried guns. The only members of the UK police that are armed are those belonging to special 'armed response groups' that attend situations where firearms might be used. Police officers that belong to the Diplomatic Protection Group will have guns of course as they have to protect the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers, embassies, diplomats and the heads of the UK secret service and the parasites in the Royal family have armed police in attendance of course. All those armed groups have special duties and do not openly patrol the streets. Other than in areas that are at high risk from terrorism such as airports and government buildings the regular police in the UK are not armed and never have been armed so it would be rather difficult to 'go back to carrying guns' as they didn't carry guns in the first place.

[Francoitalianarmy]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

Not according to the figures here...

"12,664 murders in the US. Of those, 8,583 were caused by firearms."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datab...crime-us-state

....although it is good to see that the crime rates are going down in the USA.


Not according to the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London. They say that the number of gun-related deaths is falling since reaching a peak in 2008 when there were 42 gun related deaths in the UK, in 2007 there were 51.

Britain records 18% fall in gun deaths
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...s-1232069.html

"going back to carrying guns"???? I don't know where you're getting your info bro but ordinary police officers in the UK have NEVER carried guns. The only members of the UK police that are armed are those belonging to special 'armed response groups' that attend situations where firearms might be used. Police officers that belong to the Diplomatic Protection Group will have guns of course as they have to protect the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers, embassies, diplomats and the heads of the UK secret service and the parasites in the Royal family have armed police in attendance of course. All those armed groups have special duties and do not openly patrol the streets. Other than in areas that are at high risk from terrorism such as airports and government buildings the regular police in the UK are not armed and never have been armed so it would be rather difficult to 'go back to carrying guns' as they didn't carry guns in the first place.

As of Dec 2012....

Since NBC sportscaster Bob Costas gave us an anti-gun lecture two weeks ago during Sunday Night Football, we've heard a lot from progressives like Juan Williams, Bob Beckel and anti-gun advocacy groups about how countries in Europe with strict gun control laws don't have problems with gun crime. We've also heard the reason the United States has a "gun crime problem" is because we allow citizens to own handguns however, the numbers on violent crime committed using a gun tell a different story.

New data out from the UK, where guns are banned, shows gun crime has soared by 35 percent.

The Government's latest crime figures were condemned as "truly terrible" by the Tories today as it emerged that gun crime in England and Wales soared by 35% last year.

Criminals used handguns in 46% more offences, Home Office statistics revealed.

Firearms were used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the 12 months to last April, up from 7,362.

It was the fourth consecutive year to see a rise and there were more than 2,200 more gun crimes last year than the previous peak in 1993.

Figures showed the number of crimes involving handguns had more than doubled since the post-Dunblane massacre ban on the weapons, from 2,636 in 1997-1998 to 5,871.

Unadjusted figures showed overall recorded crime in the 12 months to last September rose 9.3%, but the Home Office stressed that new procedures had skewed the figures.

Shadow home secretary Oliver Letwin said: "These figures are truly terrible.

"Despite the street crime initiative, robbery is massively up. So are gun-related crimes, domestic burglary, retail burglary, and drug offenses.

"The only word for this is failure: the Government's response of knee-jerk reactions, gimmicks and initiatives is not working and confused signals on sentences for burglary will not help either.

"The figures will continue to be dreadful until the Government produces a coherent long term strategy to attack crime at its roots and get police visibly back on our streets."

Gun crime would not be cracked until gangs were broken up and the streets "reclaimed for the honest citizen by proper neighborhood policing", he added.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...anned-n1464528

Still looking for the police to carry guns in the UK...I think it said for the FIRST time... not again, as I mis-read it.