[Closed] US gun violence

geetee1972 - Member

Shooting guns is fun. Simple as that. It's target practise and something we see worthy enough to include in the Olympics and celebrate when we win gold medals in shooting related events.

Unfortunately the liberal agenda has shafted that too as it's been left out of the 2022 Commonwealth Games at Birmingham and replaced with cricket!

Deker - a reasoned response.

I'm not against firearms, I grew up on a farm and handled shotguns from an early age. I now have no need for any firearm as I don't hunt or partake in pest control or do target shooting so why possess any? Even with them in a secure cabinet as required by law they are vulnerable to theft (I don't know how long the cabinets are required to resist attempts at opening). For the vast majority of people in this country this will be the case.

If I lived somewhere like Svarlbard or northern Canada then I'd certainly have a firearm, I think it's mandated in the former if you are a resident.

A lot of the illegal gun ownership in this country is about intimidation and control which isn't that different from the NRA's attitude in the States - "The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun".

In this country if there's a major arson incident we look at ways of reducing the possibility and risk of that happening again, making it harder to obtain the petrol and matches . In the States they'll sell you cheap gas and offer you a lighter because the matches aren't efficient.

Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership levels in the entire world, why is it then that they also have one of the lowest rates of gun violence/homicide in the world?

Because they receive military training (in the most part) and are issued with a firearm and a ammunition that is regularly audited by the government and other guns require proper licence and background checks etc. You can only buy ammo for a gun registered to you.

So basically people are taught how to use them and they are careful about who is allowed one and ammunition, as apposed to being able to buy a box of ammo with your cigarettes from the local convenience store...

I also imagine there is less social/economic problems than the USA

he liberal agenda

Wait, are you actually an american?

the liberal agenda

Junkyard - lazarus
the liberal agenda
??WTF are you one about?
Meanwhile back in the fact based world
1. Its an optional sport
2. no decision has been made yet
3. The real reason its at risk is the lack of appropriate facilities nearby to host it
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/commonwealth-games/42458483

It's never been an optional sport, Bisley is about the same distance as London and that's being used for the games! but never let facts get in the way of a good point

thanks for reading the link and googling the claim "its always been in" and providing the proof 🙄

never let facts get in the way of a good point

https://www.thecgf.com/sports/sports_index.asp#

click on shooting and let me know what you discover 😉

Junkyard - lazarus
thanks for reading the link and googling the claim "its always been in" and providing the proof

never let facts get in the way of a good point
Oh the irony
> https://www.thecgf.com/sports/sports_index.asp#

click on shooting and let me know what you discover

OK I hold my hand up, I honestly thought it was permanent after the break, must have read it wrong in the magazine, we have some VERY good clay guys over here and the related magazines have been busy with stories.

Regarding the original link I've come to be very wary of BBC reporting in the last year so I admit I didn't read it BUT I do stand behind the reasoning is rubbish, Bisley is world class and regularly holds international shooting competitions

Fair play lets move on
I agree that the BBC is getting poorer and if Birmingham can do the cycling in london then they could host the shooting - they dont want to for whatever reason

I get background checked every 5 years and I'd be the first to hand them in if I thought I was a risk or have I misunderstood and you referred to shooting game (if you're vegetarian then I understand)?

FWIW, I've been vegetarian for over 25 years and have no issues with you hunting so long as it's for food rather than teh lulz.

I have no plans to visit the good old US of A and have told my kids just don't bother. Let em get on.

You're missing out. America is a big place, and a lot of it is awesome.

Sure, it has its problems and areas that you wouldn't want to visit at night or indeed ever, but show me a country that doesn't. We're hardly poster children either.

I'm fairly sure there already are laws stopping you from carrying a knife around town and restricting their sale, but y'know, carry on with that argument if you want.

Cougar - Moderator
FWIW, I've been vegetarian for over 25 years and have no issues with you hunting so long as it's for food rather than teh lulz.

Definitely not for lulz, I don't do it that often but it's always for meat that will be used (this is controversial I know but I prefer to know that the animal has had a chance at being 'free' rather than in a barn-truck and then killed), paper targets are my main quarry 😀

just to add the vegetarian comment wasn't a dig (and hope you didn't take it as one), I appreciate people don't eat meat so that's why I added it.

replaced with cricket!

Ha, like cricket isn't also a form of target practise!

Because they receive military training (in the most part) ........

I also imagine there is less social/economic problems than the USA

To be honest I think that the only part of that answer that matters is the last part; the real issue the US has is the massive levels of wealth inequality.

I've just looked at the Wikipedia entry for gun ownership in Switzerland and there's no memntion of anything you've cited in your post; yes gun ownership is regulated but the regulations don't look massively different to those in a lot of US states. There isn't any mention of mandatory training though ofcourse they still have conscription. The problem is that military training probably isn't any protection against gun crime.

But that's less important because I asked the question, why does Switzterland not have the same problem and I think we have the answer to that with your last point.

I don't do it that often but it's always for meat that will be used (this is controversial I know

Dunno as it's particularly controversial in any sort of rational sense. Better that than having someone else do the wetwork for you, IMHO.

just to add the vegetarian comment wasn't a dig (and hope you didn't take it as one),

I didn't read it as a dig, rather as a generalisation, hence my reply. But that may well have been inference on my part.

whitestone - Member
Deker - a reasoned response.

I'm not against firearms, I grew up on a farm and handled shotguns from an early age. I now have no need for any firearm as I don't hunt or partake in pest control or do target shooting so why possess any? Even with them in a secure cabinet as required by law they are vulnerable to theft (I don't know how long the cabinets are required to resist attempts at opening). For the vast majority of people in this country this will be the case.

If I lived somewhere like Svarlbard or northern Canada then I'd certainly have a firearm, I think it's mandated in the former if you are a resident.

A lot of the illegal gun ownership in this country is about intimidation and control which isn't that different from the NRA's attitude in the States - "The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun".

In this country if there's a major arson incident we look at ways of reducing the possibility and risk of that happening again, making it harder to obtain the petrol and matches . In the States they'll sell you cheap gas and offer you a lighter because the matches aren't efficient.

I don't disagree with anything you've written there, I have just went through a renewal and up until last year I was going to sell what I had and not bother renewing my license as I had started to enjoy the hobby\sport less, after joining a different local club I started enjoying the target shooting a lot more than I had in the previous 3 years so I renewed, if I hadn't as you have I would have saw no reason to keep the firearms and in fact it would have been very difficult to justify my reasons to the police to actually qualify for the renewal.

I personally think we have the licensing pretty much spot on over here and actually think there are other areas that could do with tightening up (I wont mention them) but I think some of the UK press do too much scaremongering and make the none shooting public think that it's very easy to get a license and that very little in the way of checks happen (thus causing a bit of panic), yes a few people slip through BUT these people have generally been deceitful when applying and are probably the type who would go to equal extreme measures elsewhere to cause their damage.

Swiss gun ownership is massively regulated the figures are high because most Swiss adults serve in the army and are obliged to keep their guns but not ammo at home , they can buy keep their gun after discharge. To obtain a carry permit they need to pass written, practical and mental health tests . You can only transport a gun to and from the range otherwise. So a high level of massively supervised sometimes compulsory gun ownership the majority of whom are subject to military discipline , control of the ammo which for many is not stored at home with the gun.
Plus of course a particularly homogeneous healthy and wealthy population with a very law abiding population . Switzerland is the only country where I have been challenged by a policeman for riding on an otherwise deserted pavement.

sweeping generalisations

I make an exemption for the Americans because of their rampant exceptionalism. Most other countries on the planet recognise their problems, even corrupt narco states - whilst "Dope" perfectly highlights the way in which the Americans take pride in the way they do things - in the behaviour and policies that are undermining their own society.

And they think that they are the greatest country in the world.

They're not alone in that thought either.

but unlike us they are wrong 😉

Heh.

I just don't get, a few thousand die from drug over doses.... declare war on drugs.... tens of thousands die from guns..... lets buy more guns to protect ourselves and tool our police up like special forces.... but no war on guns.

Boggles my ****ing mind. It's a special kind of stupid, that I swear I've never seen outside of the US... even with Brexit.

I won't make any pronouncements on gun ownership, whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, I'll just ask why is there so much gun crime in the US?

Easy access, machismo culture, wealth disparity, hyper competitive culture, state sponsored violence (death penalty and wars) encourage population to solve issues with violence... and poor access to mental healthcare.

+ 1 to what Tom said above. Put simply: For many Americans, the gun is the solution to all their problems.

When making that argument, no one is saying that suicide 'doesn't matter', just that conflating two different data points to try add weight to a 'gun violence' debate is wrong. Suicide is tragic but it's not really 'gun violence' in the way that most people would understand it. There are plenty of countries with exceptionally high suicide rates that don't have gun control problems, Japan being one example.

Really? So, an armed intruder is threatening my children in my own home, and you think that adrenaline fuelled aggression using one of my bikes or my stamp collection is as dangerous (to everyone) as using my locked and loaded shotgun?

But to reinforce the point about why the US gets a tough ride is the way they just shrug off these things compared to say

Toyota “put sales over safety and profit over principle,” according to FBI Assistant Director George Venizelos.

Shooting intruders is a sticking plaster solution to the real problem, in reality it just means people will come to rob you better equipped for the job.

Very true, criminals dont care about the law or regulations but will adjust their MO to make sure they are protected/get what they want.

Supposedly after the great train robery (no guns used only koshs) when all the crims saw people got 30 years for robbery without a gun... they started carrying one as the only reason they didnt before was because if caught the sentence would generally be less

wiggles - Member

Supposedly after the great train robery (no guns used only koshs) when all the crims saw people got 30 years for robbery without a gun... they started carrying one as the only reason they didnt before was because if caught the sentence would generally be less

And 3 strikes your out caused no detectable reduction in repeat offending, but did cause an escalation in the seriousness of repeat offences- because if you're going down for that 3rd strike, might as well make it worthwhile- and if you know you'll go down if you're caught, you'll do more to avoid it.

I find it interesting that people seem to see a separation between legal and illegal gun ownership in the States, when of course one to a large degree fuels the other...

The vast majority of firearms purchased in the US are bought and registered legally, but the process of buying a gun is relatively quick and convenient (depending on the state) and of course that doesn't prevent them being stolen and then sold on the black market.

I do think that we in the UK have actually gotten the sale, licencing and control of firearms about right, you can purchase and own rifles and shotguns for genuine sporting/hunting use, the conditions for ownership in the UK exceed the EU Firearms Directive, we've one of the lowest gun crime rates in the world, our police do not need to carry firearms on a routine basis, and the number of mass shootings we've experienced can be counted on one hand... We've never "banned" guns we have simply "controlled" them, but even the idea of (relatively weak) enhancement of the control of firearms seems to get shouted down in America...

Culturally we are still miles apart in that respect it's one of the few positive things about the UK to perhaps be proud of; that we have actually managed to apply and maintain control of the risks posed by guns within our own borders so well without, resorting to an outright ban...

geetee1972 - Member

Suicide is tragic but it's not really 'gun violence' in the way that most people would understand it. There are plenty of countries with exceptionally high suicide rates that don't have gun control problems, Japan being one example.

I didn't say it's "gun violence"- but there's no question that it makes it easier and quicker to kill yourself, and that the easier it is the more likely it is that people do. The argument that "people will just find another method" or "people kill themselves in places that don't have guns" doesn't stand up- changes in drug availability prove that. (getting enough paracetemol to kill yourself is still just a case of visiting a few chemists- the pack size reduction only doubled that number, it didn't make it impossible. But it slashed the suicide and harm rate by almost half, just by making it [i]inconvenient[/i])

I know it's illogical. But then, hands up everyone who thinks people who commit suicide are always being logical. Making it a bit more inconvenient can be enough. Removing a preferred method can be enough- some people rather than saying "I will commit suicide by some method" think "I will commit suicide by this method"

I think that if there were as many guns in circulation and the purchasing was just as easy in the UK... We would have exactly the same hun problem here as America does for exactly the same reasons too.

oh and as I posted earlier

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/means-matter/risk/
Firearm Access is a Risk Factor for Suicide
[b]Every[/b] study that has examined the issue to date has found that within the U.S., [b]access to firearms is associated with increased suicide risk[/b].

I spend quite a bit of time over in the US. In Phoenix AZ today and back to Florida and Detroit later this month.

I don’t talk to Americans about gun ownership unless I know them and their gun ownership views well since British views are so far apart from the views of many Americans. The views of gun ownership aren’t going to change so why get het up about it?

Do I worry about gun ownership when I’m here? However you have to be careful about where you go, like traveling anywhere in the world.

However speak to many Americans and they think that we are all at high risk of Islamic terrorism here in the UK. It’s all down to media reporting.

Americans shoot other Americans, I have no problem with that.
unfortunately they keep invading other countries acting very much like the British in the 1800's now that's a big issue.

I don’t talk to Americans about gun ownership unless I know them and their gun ownership views well since British views are so far apart from the views of many Americans. The views of gun ownership aren’t going to change so why get het up about it?

Because they like to pretend that they're the best country on the planet, when it is demonstrably and objectively untrue.

And because they're ****ing up their smaller neighbour Mexico, by buying drugs off their gangs, then legally sell their own guns back to those gangs who use the money they gained from selling the drugs - those guns then get smuggled back into Mexico which are then used in gang wars that resemble Basra during the height of its shootyness. If Mexico was selling bombs that were killing the same amount of Americans, they'd declare Mexico a pariah state and invade it.

I make an exemption for the Americans

That makes you a bigot.

but there's no question that it makes it easier and quicker to kill yourself, and that the easier it is the more likely it is that people do.

I wouldn’t disagree with that. Vets have a higher rate of suicide than other professions for the same reason (access to powerful drugs). It’s just that it’s a different problem and a weak argument for gun control. Indeed many liberals argue for making suicide more accessible not less.

It’s just that it’s a different problem and a weak argument for gun control. Indeed many liberals argue for making suicide more accessible not less.

Total bollocks, from a public health perspective - this is patently untrue.

Also, "liberals" argue for making suicide easier through the use of doctors for those making objective decisions to end their lives - not emotional ones. Messy suicides usually indicate a lot of anger, using a gun in a suicide is about making a statement not ease of access or use.

Presumably all the hippies who can't do without their cannabis, will now be supporting the NRA and the second amendment as the federal government seeks to overturn individual states' legalisation of their favourite brain defenestrator.

Oh, the ironing.

deker - Member

ok so first, sporting pistols are banned now (you can legally get modified ones where they have a fixed stock and longer barrel so not sure if that's what you meant). Also with the exception of smallbore rifles (generally rimfire) we can only have bolt action rifles in this country (this never bothers me as it's all I've shot as a civilian).

Yep, I meant the stuff you see at the Olympics.

I have shotguns for both clay and game, clays ones are generally heavier as you may shoot at up to 200 in a day where game ones will be lighter as you could be walking miles and only firing 2 or 3 rounds (so less repetitive impact on your shoulder),I have rifles for both target and game, and again there are different weights and calibres depending on usage, shooting isn't as straight forward as people think (just like cycling) there are many different calibres and aren't always interchangeable ie you wouldn't want someone who does pest control to go out using a rifle designed for deer so you will find owners who have more than one, indeed 4 or 5 for multi-discipline, some ranges are indoor and under 50 yards and some outdoor are between 100 yards and 1000 yards so you would use whichever is more suitable to the discipline (hence the reason I have different calibres cost and accuracy).

At the risk of being hounded for both being a gun owner and admitting I shoot game (I have actually been confronted by people who think meat wasn't an animal) I'll leave what I have at that rather than go into detail of each individual rifle.

However one part of your statement is odd "and to be honest I find the latter two pretty difficult to objectively justify.", my question is why? why is me wanting to own guns and shoot responsibly any different to you wanting to ride a bike on or off the road and drivers\walkers thinking it should be banned (note I'm not comparing shooting to cycling just people wanting hobbies banned)? I get background checked every 5 years and I'd be the first to hand them in if I thought I was a risk or have I misunderstood and you referred to shooting game (if you're vegetarian then I understand)?

I have had a license long enough to have seen changes due to Michael Ryan (which didn't affect me) and Thomas Hamilton (which did affect me) and in all this time I have never had an accident or used them in any way that put others at risk yet I (and other shooters) are persecuted in the press. After Dunblane an MP was live on TV and actually accused the British olympic shooting squad of being murderers in waiting!

Deker

I just think there is no absolute "need" for guns to manage wildlife.

I'm not anti-shooting, or vegetarian, but I think there are a large number of people dressing up what is effectively people enjoying shooting stuff as "tradition" and "country pursuits" - as long as you wear funny trousers and tweed it's seen as a right, rather than people being honest about enjoying things that go "boom".

I get that it's a pastime and a hobby and if you enjoy it, more power to your elbow, but it's not a necessity in rural life any more than swanning around in a Range Rover is.

I just think there is no absolute "need" for guns to manage wildlife

That could be interpreted in many ways but having spent enough time on farms/smallholdings and been involved is some 'countryside pest control' I would say firearms are an essential part of agribusiness and selective species control in non-urban environments, especially where there is no known natural predator or to maintain crop yields or limit livestock loss.

MrSmith - Member
I just think there is no absolute "need" for guns to manage wildlife
That could be interpreted in many ways but having spent enough time on farms/smallholdings and been involved is some 'countryside pest control' I would say firearms are an essential part of agribusiness and selective species control in non-urban environments, especially where there is no known natural predator or to maintain crop yields or limit livestock loss.

That's interesting; I'm not a farmer though I do do a lot of work for farmers. From the people I know, I always got the impression that guns were used more for leisure (game shooting) that pest management, but entirely take the point that that is probably down to a lack of knowledge as much as anything.

from a public health perspective

Yeah but I wasn't talking from a public health perspective was I.

The vocal lobby for euthanasia tends to hail from the liberal end of the political spectrum, which is also the same end that tends to call for greater controls over gun ownership. I simply found that ironic (as did at least one other person above), and I'm certainly not criticising anyone for any perspective on euthansia - I'm on the fence about the subject - or for being liberal, which I am more likely (though not excluisively) likely to see as being a positive thing.

Just for clarity, I personally think most countries will be far better places to live when guns are not part of everyday life (or indeed any part of life). I think the US has a problem so endemic that it's easy to see it as an impossible problem to solve when it isn't, it's just incredibly difficult to solve.

The only time a problem becomes impossible to solve is when you give up trying.

geetee1972 - Member

It’s just that it’s a different problem and a weak argument for gun control.

Why is it weak? It's a strong argument for paracetemol control, why not guns? Especially recreational guns.

The other thing that always gets me is "home defence". Now home defence is actually not a bad rationale, though brings with it the risk of accidental discharge etc. But if you want a gun for home defence, you don't go and buy an assault rifle. And you probably shouldn't buy a 1911. What you want, is something very easy to use and low maintenance, low recoil, low penetration that you can use in a small space, fire accurately while half asleep and shiting it, access in a hurry, easily manage your shots, and not have any loose rounds kill a sleeping kid 2 streets away. The least possible gun, really.

So, basically, sensible pistol, G19 or something, or ugly scary shotgun. AR15? No. (OK, you can build a compact, low power, low penetration AR15 which would be more appropriate for home defence but... nobody does.)

So, take that to it's conclusion and either people who say they need a gun for home defence and then buy something unsuitable are ill-informed and irresponsible, or they're just using it as an excuse. America's most popular firearm is not the right tool for home defence.

That's without getting into the real vs perceived risk side of things.

Who was the comedian who was saying something along the lines of:

"there's pretty much just one argument for guns and it's "I like guns" it's a weak argument and it pretty much just boils down to that"

That's it really isn't it? lots of Americans want and like to have guns in a way that we just don't get, and many of them are prepared to accept that lots of innocent bystanders will be killed by that desire to have them. It seems so counter-intuitive to us that I don't think we can comprehend their views on it (in otherwise rational and intelligent people). I genuinely think that there are many Americans just don't think it's possible to change any longer.

cookeaa - Member

I find it interesting that people seem to see a separation between legal and illegal gun ownership in the States

Woah woah woah, are you trying to suggest that none of the gun toting two and three year olds were licensed? 😯
Maybe we need to encourage preschool gun training and ownership.

of course one to a large degree fuels the other

Hold on one cotton picking minute, that almost sounds like having more guns might not be a good thing. 😡

nickc - Member

Who was the comedian who was saying something along the lines of:

"there's pretty much just one argument for guns and it's "I like guns" it's a weak argument and it pretty much just boils down to that"

It was the aforelinked to Jim Jefferies.

Every argument the shouty minority pro gun lobby use is weak.

Why is it weak? It's a strong argument for paracetemol control, why not guns? Especially recreational guns.

Because suicide rates are suicide rates and sadly no cares about them very much unless they've been personally affected; they certainly don't factor in people's thinking when talking about 'gun violence'.

I'm not saying that's right or acceptable, actually far from it, given that suicide is an overwhelmingly male problem that is largely ignored as such (and yes I think men's issues need to be taken more seriously and I don't shy away from highlighting that).

"there's pretty much just one argument for guns and it's "I like guns" it's a weak argument and it pretty much just boils down to that"

It is precisely this and I honestly don't know why the gun lobby doesn't just come out and say it rather than spout all this nonsense about freedoms and the second amendment. That it's fun to do is a much more compelling argument if you think about it; there are any number of things that people enjoy doing that society has tried to ban for one reason or another without success (and again, for the record, I think all countries would be better places to live without guns being part of life).