oh and as I posted earlier

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

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 **** 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).

given that suicide is an overwhelmingly male problem that is largely ignored as such

I had wondered when.

I had wondered when.

Well now you can stop wondering…..

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’.

The question is why not. As opposed to casually dismissing it.
I would have thought it rather relevant if someone is talking about owning firearms for self defence to point out the increased risk to their health.

given that suicide is an overwhelmingly male problem

And I would take a guess that owning guns is overwhelmingly a male problem too. So suicide by using your gun is more likely a male option. Anyway,, back to the point…

geetee1972 – Member

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’.

Ah gotcha, I misunderstood what you meant- thought you were saying the argument itself was weak, but I see you meant that it lacks impact/effect because despite being a good argument, nobody cares.

And actually, you’re totally right. If people aren’t convinced by mass murders or “accidents” where kids shoot their siblings, then they’re definitely not going to care about suicides. What a shitty state of affairs.

Northwind – Member

If people aren’t convinced by mass murders or “accidents” where kids shoot their siblings, then they’re definitely not going to care about suicides. What a shitty state of affairs.

It’s not that they aren’t convinced of the tragedy of an accident or the lethality of mass shootings. In my opinion Americans’ seem very capable of detaching patriotism from the debate and viewing it as separate regional issues. On forums with lots of Americans I’ve noticed a a detachment or apathy based on distance/percieved culture in a given state or city. So a mass shooting in Texas – what do you expect, it’s Texas. Gang violence in Detroit, well that’s a Detroit thing…and so on.

We tend to think of it as one country, but it’s also a giant continent with 10% of the population density of the UK. A farmer in rural Oregon isn’t going to relate to, or be worried by violence in inner city Detroit 2500 miles away. Not to say that they don’t care but they are probably no more worried about it than people in the Scottish Highlands are worried about knife crime in inner city London. Do people in Paris worry about the heavily armed population in Switzerland?

I think U.S gun laws are absolutely insane, but if I moved there I would certainly own a gun.

I think U.S gun laws are absolutely insane, but if I moved there I would certainly own a gun.

And do what with it, most people don’t have the stomach to actually use one – and in that time you froze you get shot. It takes months and months of training to desensitise soldiers enough to do it and even some of those will hesitate the first time it gets close and personal. Better to just avoid bad areas.

Shoot empty beer cans out of trees, obvs.

And do what with it,

have fun

and why the hell not?

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unN-Fp-wuMM[/video]

Tom_W1987 – Member

And do what with it,

At a time (pre kids) I genuinely considered moving to British Columbia or Washington State. My wife was all for it too. My friend actually went, and now lives in BC. He has a rifle and a revolver. The rifle he uses for hunting, and to deter bears from stealing his pets (and children). He fishes in Alaska and that’s the main reason for the revolver but it’s also for home defense as they are many miles away from any kind of police force.

Were I to move, I’d want to live somewhere rural and I would enjoy hunting ( I’ve been on a few deer stalking days and would like to do more). The idea of hunting for my food really appeals to me.

With regard to home defence and killing other people – it works both ways. The country is awash with guns. The idea of being helpless and at the mercy of someone because they have a gun and I don’t does not appeal to me. After the thread on here about the weapons people keep under their bed for home defence I don’t think it’s an unnatural or weird attidtude to have. It seems that plenty of people on STW keep some kind of bat or kosh close to hand to protect their loved ones from the tiny likelihood of a malevolent intruder. Sensible rational Americans buy guns motivated by the same concerns, however a cricket bat isn’t much use against a glock.

Cougar – Moderator

Shoot empty beer cans out of trees, obvs.

That too. Obvs

than people in the Scottish Highlands are worried about knife crime in inner city London.

As I recall, there were quite a few changes to gun laws made by a Tory government, despite plenty of pro-gun Tory MPs because of the weight of public opinion after a shooting in Scotland. Back in the day when people had to physically sign petitions, three quarters of million signed that one.

Anyway that’s by-the-by now and I’m glad that weirdos who like guns find it more difficult to own one legally post-Dunblane. If it causes the likes of swivel-eyed right wing loons like Zulu who likes to “have fun” with guns to shit their pants – then there’s an added bonus for you. I’d happily see them [all guns] banned outright, but I understand a compromise is needed with the loons, and presently, that compromise is heavily weighted in favour of the anti-gun lobby, and that’s about fine with me.

I realise it’s a cliché by now, but after Sandy Hook, if they didn’t want to change something, anything, then that was the moment. And I don’t believe that “good” people in Texas or New Mexico or Alabama don’t give a shit about kids at school in Connecticut being massacred.

They (the pro gun-lobby) just like guns. They can wither on with whatever excuses they like, but we all know, they just like guns.

They’re fetishised through history in American culture from the thought that if the local militia wasn’t armed, they wouldn’t have ever won independence right through to westerns on TV, where good guys (sheriffs, quiet strangers seeking justice, the “posse”) always sorted out the bad guys with guns through to most cop/crime/spy/military drama produced nowadays, where again, bad guys are quickly dispatched by sharpshooting good guys who always take crims down with one perfect shot, while they’re running, out of breath, stressed, sometimes even shot themselves – which seems unrealistic to me, but then I know nothing about how easy it is to take down bad guys with a gun – I can hardly even use a second fix nailer without messing it up. 🙂

deadlydarcy – Member

As I recall, there were quite a few changes to gun laws made by a Tory government, despite plenty of pro-gun Tory MPs because of the weight of public opinion after a shooting in Scotland.

Point missed.

Anyway that’s by-the-by now and I’m glad that weirdos who like guns

Why does liking guns make you a weirdo? Does liking cars or motor bikes or even push bikes make you a weirdo? (obviously liking push bikes makes you a weirdo).

They (the pro gun-lobby) just like guns. They can wither on with whatever excuses they like, but we all know, they just like guns.

They sure do like guns, but to say they “just like guns” is a gross oversimplification. Every time there’s a thread here about gun violence or gun control I say the same thing – go and read an American forum. You will actually see well reasoned, well thought out and informed arguments from gun owners who aren’t murderers or swivel eyed loons.

The problem with owning a gun for home/family (blah blah) protection is that it can’t be kept in a safe place, it has to be kept easily to hand, such as under the bed or down the side of the sofa or under the baby’s pillow or behind the cornflakes. That immediately makes it far more dangerous, if there was a sodding cleaver hidden in my Weetabix ‘just in case’ then I’d lose a finger every morning.

There was an example a couple of pages back where someone’s (grenosteve?) cousin was tied up by an intruder. So she’s out of the way and the baddie can nick her VCR or whatever, why would they return to harm her further? (Apart from all men being rapists) Instead, armed and emboldened with a gun in her hand she shot someone dead, someone who at that point had threatened her / tied her and was in the process of stealing something of minimal worth.

There’s so many questions

Can I shoot a mugger in the states?
What if he’s got a knife?
How about if I’m just feeling a bit scared and intimidated by some black or Hispanic people?
Do all gun-toting yanks shoot to kill?
Is it ok to shoot an escaping thief in the back (Tony Martin?)
Do all criminals deserve to be killed without trial?
Better to be robbed (or raped) or become a murderer?

Put it this way Jimjam, if a hardened Mexican criminal broke into your house with an AK47 – I doubt you’d have time to get a shot off. Youd be had, within seconds before you knew what was happening.

Ontop of that, for the weapon not to pose a greater statistical threat to your children and wife – through accidental discharge or you going wife beatery…. it would have to be locked in a cabinet… unloaded… unopenable unless both you and your wifes key are used.

If I was living somewhere I needed a gun, Id have steel armoured doors, laminated armoured windows, a panic room and an armoured car.

I’m saying that, having won a few competitions target shooting and having two snipers in the family.

The problem with owning a gun for home/family (blah blah) protection is that it can’t be kept in a safe place, it has to be kept easily to hand, such as under the bed or down the side of the sofa or under the baby’s pillow or behind the cornflakes. That immediately makes it far more dangerous, if there was a sodding cleaver hidden in my Weetabix ‘just in case’ then I’d lose a finger every morning.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1EuvPzHYDI[/video]

The damage has already been done, with regards home defence.

Criminals are now expecting homeowners to have guns, so they get guns – and vice versa. Criminals are now expecting to be shot at, so their first idea is to take out the homeowner. But what’s more likely is homeowners now expect every drunk/stoned/lost person late at night to be a criminal about to shoot them and fire first. Or every black man shouting or waving something in the air.

The problem has already created itself. In this country, if someone breaks into your house it’s to steal your bikes or telly, and they don’t want to kill you. So because you probably haven’t got a gun, they probably won’t. More bikes might get nicked, but fewer people get shot.

It’s already escalated beyond the point where I can imagine it de-escalating.

Not to mention the fact that any intruders in the US are likely to be a wearing kevlar and carrying out robberies in groups. Unless its just a smackhead with a pistol.

Fancy defending your kids with pistol rounds that don’t go through armour… in the dark…. whilst high calibre rounds tear through the plasterboard into your kids rooms….

are likely to be a wearing kevlar and carrying out robberies in groups.

Any statistics on that?

Depends on how rich you are, like in SA… the big houses in rich areas tend to get hit by organised gangs…. poorer people tend to get hit by roving smackheads…..

this is stw…. so going with the former scenario

either way, fortifying your house gives the cops time to show up in scenario 1 and will likely totally deter junkies in scenario 2.

Not sure I’d entrust my life to a biometric scanner either lol.

the big houses in rich areas tend to get hit by organised gangs

Do they now…

Interesting that US burglary rates are lower than UK though, isnt it?

Gang members suspected of 5,000 burglaries arrested in Torrance-led police raids

Im guessing US buglarys are more violent though….. unless you think thousands dying are worth a decrease in burglary rates.

Not read all the thread but to add my tupence, the US military bloggers I follow and they’re US following really do have a different mindset to a a typical Brit. Guns are part of them, and they really do think along the lines of owning them in case the government goes wrong or they are invaded.

I follow them for their critique of our military’s and the rising threat of our Chinese Lizard Overlords.

I must add that I abhor guns, I remember Michael Ryan going “falling down” in Hungerford and the pitiful response by the Police due to poor comms, equipment and training.

the rising threat of our Chinese Lizard Overlords.

Who have yet to engage in anywhere near the same kind of violence towards neighbours that americans have. Even with Tibet.

But yes, the Chinese are totes evil for wanting to boot out western imperialism from Asia.

Tom_W1987 – Member

Put it this way Jimjam, if a hardened Mexican criminal

Why so racist?

broke into your house with an AK47

..wouldn’t be my first choice for a home invasion but whatever.

I doubt you’d have time to get a shot off. Youd be had, within seconds before you knew what was happening.

So with all of your firearms experience you know that there’s almost no way anyone can legally own an AK-47 in the states? In most states they can own generic semi automatic AK lookalike variants but almost no one can legally own a full auto 7.62 AK-47 without extensive FBI and ATF background checks…..? You can legally own something similar in the UK albeit in a smaller calibre.

If I was living somewhere I needed a gun,

What about if you were living somewhere you could actually use a gun? IE you lived somewhere you could legally hunt to provide your family with meat for the year?