Another mass shooting in the U.S

MadsL

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

On that point I think you get to a stage where it becomes irrelevant - 30 minutes or 3 hours, you're still dead inside 2 minutes if that's the intention of the person on your property. Furthermore more remote countries like Oz don't have the associated issues of the US. I think you're right in that there are systemic issues that need to be addressed. I think it's probably better to compare the US with South Africa - I'd want to be armed wandering around SA so I suppose I do see your point to a certain extent.

Oddly enough, I've wandered down Long St in Cape Town late at night with no issues at all, I'd be more concerned hanging out in parts of downtown Phoenix.

But that said, if I had property in SA. Absolutely.

IM0

they should probbly edit title to include dates in these kinda threads

SuzieQZ

It's just crazy over there, why do they feel the need to have guns?? I think even if they change the licencing policy for obtaining guns in the states it could limit the control a little, it could be a step towards banning their precious gun control. Disgrace to say the least.

LowKeyReturn

SuzieQZ wrote: »

It's just crazy over there, why do they feel the need to have guns??

There's been a discussion about that for the last few pages.

SuzieQZ wrote: »

I think even if they change the licencing policy for obtaining guns in the states it could limit the control a little, it could be a step towards banning their precious gun control. Disgrace to say the least.

Banning gun control doesn't really seem to be the answer. The issue is that many people feel it's a necessary protection. The underlying issues need to be addressed.

MadsL

SuzieQZ wrote: »

Disgrace to say the least.

I suggest you ask a friend of mine who was almost raped in her own bed, and defended herself with a firearm, who in that scenario behaved "disgracefully".

StinkyMunkey

MadsL wrote: »

Wait a second. A moment ago you were suggesting gun owners should give up their guns because it might save one life, you no longer driving has the the same potential saving of one life. If you would give up guns in a heartbeat, why not give up your car? Please post the ad of you selling it.

Wrong, i said id give up "my" right to own a gun. Unfortunately i cant speak for all of America. Id give the car up if a Firearm could get me to work, bring the kids to school, do the weeks shopping and the likes! I need a car to go about my daily life, i dont need a firearm. Unless ofc you want me to give up my job and taking the kids to school. And no the buses wont get me home from work. But then again why ban just cars, why not ban all modes of transport. We could go back to the horse and cart. Wait, people could get run over by the horses. So we just ban them as well. So why dont we just walk everywhere, damn we could trip and bang our heads.

Its ok ive got it, why not ban everything but guns.

Sparks

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

I need a car to go about my daily life

No you don't. You've got two legs and buses and trains. The car just makes it easier on you. Ban all cars tomorrow and the kids can walk to school - we did it ourselves for how many decades? We only avoid it now because there are so many cars on the road...

But then again why ban just cars, why not ban all modes of transport.

Because the analogy is to private ownership of firearms. If people don't mind the army and police having firearms but object to private ownership; the analogous comparison is to banning private cars and allowing buses, trains, ambulances, taxis and other "professional" drivers on the road. Who could possibly object to that? :rolleyes:

Its ok ive got it, why not ban everything but guns.

How about we just ban murder and suicide instead, that'd be a lot simpler...

Witcher

SuzieQZ wrote: »

It's just crazy over there, why do they feel the need to have guns?? I think even if they change the licencing policy for obtaining guns in the states it could limit the control a little, it could be a step towards banning their precious gun control. Disgrace to say the least.

'Banning gun control':pac:

StinkyMunkey

Sparks wrote: »

No you don't. You've got two legs and buses and trains. The car just makes it easier on you. Ban all cars tomorrow and the kids can walk to school - we did it ourselves for how many decades? We only avoid it now because there are so many cars on the road...

Because the analogy is to private ownership of firearms. If people don't mind the army and police having firearms but object to private ownership; the analogous comparison is to banning private cars and allowing buses, trains, ambulances, taxis and other "professional" drivers on the road. Who could possibly object to that? :rolleyes:


How about we just ban murder and suicide instead, that'd be a lot simpler...

Does a firearm help me during my day to day life? eh no it doesnt. Does a car help me with my day to day life? yes it does.

My 7 year old is a little young to be walking 3 miles to school, i suppose i could always ask the wife to give up her job, but then how do i pay for my house and bills?

If your argument is ban cars because of road accidents as opposed to stricter gun control, your either pulling my leg or not half as intelligent as you think you are (and im no genius).

Firearms are your passion, what harm can come from stricter guns controls, you have no intention to go out and kill someone. So how would making it harder for the wrong type to get guns harm your passion.

Why is it every time i mention stricter gun control, you say ban all cars. I just cant get my head around it. Im not making any analogy, im lmfao at the absurdity of your argument and using not so subtle sarcasm.

Witcher

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Firearms are your passion, what harm can come from stricter guns controls, you have no intention to go out and kill someone. So how would making it harder for the wrong type to get guns harm your passion.
.

Laws here could hardly get any stricter. You need a licence to buy an air rifle as it is.

Sparks

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Does a firearm help me during my day to day life? eh no it doesnt

Helps farmers, hunters, vets and target shooters though; and in the US, it helps somewhere around 90,000 ordinary people a year who are targeted by criminals.

My 7 year old is a little young to be walking 3 miles to school

I walked further than that every day when I was six, so please don't tell me it can't be done.

If your argument is ban cars because of road accidents as opposed to stricter gun control, your either pulling my leg or not half as intelligent as you think you are (and im no genius).

My argument is that if we're going to ban things to save lives, we have to ban the things that kill people instead of saying "oh, yes, we know most people die from X, but we dislike Y so we'll ban that instead even though it kills far, far, far, far fewer (or no) people".

In other words, if you're making the argument, be consistent.

what harm can come from stricter guns controls

What good could come from it?
You want to introduce something new, something which will make our lives more awkward or reduce our rights (no, not the right to have a gun, things like the right to medical confidentiality or the right to privacy), then please - show me proof that it's going to measurably make things better.
It's only fair.

Why is it every time i mention stricter gun control, you say ban all cars.

Because I'm trying to point out to you that what you're doing is proposing a measure that (a) doesn't address the problem, (b) is group punishment of innocent people, (c) has no basis in the facts, and (d) is how we got all of the last few rewrites of the firearms acts in Ireland, leaving us with shoddy disfunctional legislation.

Suryavarman

StinkyMunkey wrote: »

Does a firearm help me during my day to day life? eh no it doesnt. Does a car help me with my day to day life? yes it does.

Firearms help plenty of people in their day to day lives. They allow people to relax in their spare time by going hunting or target shooting. They provide a means of self defence for the weak and vulnerable.

My 7 year old is a little young to be walking 3 miles to school, i suppose i could always ask the wife to give up her job, but then how do i pay for my house and bills?

Are you trying to suggest that your wife's job is more important than human lives? How selfish of you.

If your argument is ban cars because of road accidents as opposed to stricter gun control, your either pulling my leg or not half as intelligent as you think you are (and im no genius).

Cars are far more deadly than guns. The only good reason for more gun control is that it will save lives. If you support gun control then you want to save lives. And the easiest way to save lives is to ban cars.

Firearms are your passion, what harm can come from stricter guns controls, you have no intention to go out and kill someone. So how would making it harder for the wrong type to get guns harm your passion.

Because stricter gun laws make it harder and more expensive to participate in gun sports.

How do you propose making it harder for the "wrong types" to get guns?

Why is it every time i mention stricter gun control, you say ban all cars. I just cant get my head around it. Im not making any analogy, im lmfao at the absurdity of your argument and using not so subtle sarcasm.

Because cars kill more people than guns. And unlike guns, there's a very strong chance that if we ban cars, deaths from car accidents won't be replaced by another form of death.

BattleCorp

Originally Posted by StinkyMunkey

Firearms are your passion, what harm can come from stricter guns controls, you have no intention to go out and kill someone. So how would making it harder for the wrong type to get guns harm your passion.

I've no problem with strict gun controls. We should do our best to ensure that guns are in the hands of safe, responsible law abiding citizens. If the authorities put rules in place to ensure compliance, then I'll follow the rules.

What would you suggest are good rules for being allowed to licence a gun?

I'm not making fun, it's an honest question.

LowKeyReturn

I find it a bit of a ridiculous argument to argue against tougher gun restrictions. It's one thing to have an illegal black market that is running out of control - it makes little sense to admit that and simply say well then lets just sell the things in walmart.

Guns and ammunition should only be sold to people with licences, licences should require background checks and a qualification in firearms. All sales of guns and ammunition should be catalogued.

homerhop

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Guns and ammunition should only be sold to people with licences, licences should require background checks and a qualification in firearms. All sales of guns and ammunition should be catalogued.

We have that here as it is, and yet there are people being shot on the streets of our cities and towns by illegally owned firearms that are coming in with drug shipments.

LowKeyReturn

homerhop wrote: »

We have that here as it is, and yet there are people being shot on the streets of our cities and towns by illegally owned firearms that are coming in with drug shipments.

There is no silver bullet solution if you're pardon the pun. The current situation in Ireland is Scumbag 1 gets gun and puts two or three well placed rounds in Scumbag 2. What do you think would happen if you could buy a box of 100 rounds in Dunnes? Even if the answer is nothing would change - it makes no sense not to put protections in place.

homerhop

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

There is no silver bullet solution if you're pardon the pun. The current situation in Ireland is Scumbag 1 gets gun and puts two or three well placed rounds in Scumbag 2. What do you think would happen if you could buy a box of 100 rounds in Dunnes? Even if the answer is nothing would change - it makes no sense not to put protections in place.

What protections do you want to see in place?

We have to give permission to our medical records, character references, a letter for our reason on why the fire arm we are applying for is needed or suitable and show proof of a competency course having being completed.
The Super specifies how many rounds of we are allowed to have and inspect our security.
And as you say scumbags will always have the ability to get their hands on firearms just as they will in the states regardless of what rules or regulations you bring in.

Would you believe me if I told you it is actually easier for a tourist to get a shooting permit for their stay than it actually is for a citizen to get a license here?

LowKeyReturn

homerhop wrote: »

What protections do you want to see in place?

We have to give permission to our medical records, character references, a letter for our reason on why the fire arm we are applying for is needed or suitable and show proof of a competency course having being completed.
The Super specifies how many rounds of we are allowed to have and inspect our security.
And as you say scumbags will always have the ability to get their hands on firearms just as they will in the states regardless of what rules or regulations you bring in.

Would you believe me if I told you it is actually easier for a tourist to get a shooting permit for their stay than it actually is for a citizen to get a license here?

My suggestions above where in regard to the US. The protections in place here seem fine as they are - they also seem to be working to some degree, given our gun death rate.

Personally I'd also have everything locked up in a gun cabinet that required notice to be given for it to be opened. Opening it outside of a specified period automatically calls the gardai.

The latter wouldn't surprise me given all my shooting, these days, is done under an instructor for which I don't need any permit.

Witcher

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Personally I'd also have everything locked up in a gun cabinet that required notice to be given for it to be opened. Opening it outside of a specified period automatically calls the gardai.

:pac: Jesus ya hear some things on these threads but this takes the biscuit.

LowKeyReturn

Blay wrote: »

:pac: Jesus ya hear some things on these threads but this takes the biscuit.

Why is that taking any form of baked goods? They've been on sale for quite some time. I would have thought given the number of these shootings that where with legally held guns you'd want to know if someone had access.

So far everyone of the gun owners on this thread that have addressed me directly has had something sensible to say. I may not have agreed with it but it was a point well made. You on the other hand seem to be the exception. Perhaps an additional check might be an IQ test?

Witcher

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Why is that taking any form of baked goods? They've been on sale for quite some time. I would have thought given the number of these shootings that where with legally held guns you'd want to know if someone had access.

So far everyone of the gun owners on this thread that have addressed me directly has had something sensible to say. I may not have agreed with it but it was a point well made. You on the other hand seem to be the exception. Perhaps an additional check might be an IQ test?

I do know who has access..how I achieve that is with a thing called a set of keys.

Because you were making good points but that one is utter idiocy. It's easy to suggest things when they don't affect you in any way.

homerhop

Personally I'd also have everything locked up in a gun cabinet that required notice to be given for it to be opened

And how would that work?

LowKeyReturn

Blay wrote: »

I do know who has access..how I achieve that is with a thing called a set of keys.

Because you were making good points but that one is utter idiocy. It's easy to suggest things when they don't affect you in any way.

Why is it idiocy? It effects others if someone breaks in to a house, steals a couple of hand guns and goes shooting up somewhere. The only idiot here is a gun owner who wouldn't do the up most to ensure his hobby doesn't hurt someone else.

Would you also stop with this mightier than thou crap. You're worse than those women who go on about 'you can't talk about children because you don't have one' when they're running round all over the place. If owning a gun didn't effect non-gun owners there wouldn't be an issue would there?

LowKeyReturn

homerhop wrote: »

And how would that work?

Pretty simple - same as a monitored alarm system. The ones on the market at the moment just send you a text but it'd be pretty easy to set a system up. As I say though more of a nice to have given the safeguards you outlined seem to be doing the trick here. I'm not aware of a single murder with a legally owned gun here - open to correction on that.

EDIT: Sorry well I'm aware of one in 40s - but recently? I suppose there may have been with farmer owned shotguns - which to be fair necessity of owning those would preclude them from being locked up as described?

irish bloke

Everytime I see this thread title in latest posts I think there is another shooting. Catches me everytime

Witcher

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Why is it idiocy? It effects others if someone breaks in to a house, steals a couple of hand guns and goes shooting up somewhere. The only idiot here is a gun owner who wouldn't do the up most to ensure his hobby doesn't hurt someone else.

Would you also stop with this mightier than thou crap. You're worse than those women who go on about 'you can't talk about children because you don't have one' when they're running round all over the place. If owning a gun didn't effect non-gun owners there wouldn't be an issue would there?

I would safely say there are very few people out here in Ireland with 'a couple of handguns' and if they do they have more secuity than just a safe and they don't leave them assembled in one safe. You don't seem to be familiar with the security regulations as they stand right now.

Criminals arent interested in the firearms Irish people have. The pistols they use in gangland shootings arent stolen..they're imported illegally. My shotgun alone in worth €2000..so you can guess I don't just leave it lying around.

People owning firearms in Ireland doen't affect you in any way.

BattleCorp

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

Personally I'd also have everything locked up in a gun cabinet that required notice to be given for it to be opened. Opening it outside of a specified period automatically calls the gardai.

.

If you go over a certain amount of guns or certain types of guns, you must have a monitored alarm. That's already in effect here.

Your opening the safe outside a certain period wouldn't work. Fair enough, I could get a safe with a time lock, but what happens if there is fcukall on telly and I decide to clean my firearms?

A safe = good idea.
A monitored alarm = good idea.
Only opening it during certain periods = unworkable.

LowKeyReturn

Blay wrote: »

I would safely say there are very few people other there in Ireland with 'a couple of handguns' and even less that leave them assembled in one safe. You don't seem to be familiar with the security regulations as they stand right now.

Criminals arent interested in the firearms Irish people have. The pistols they use in gangland shootings arent stolen..they're imported illegally. My shotgun alone in worth €2000..so you can guess I don't just leave it lying around.

People owning firearms in Ireland doen't affect you in any way.

I'm not - perhaps an explanation would have made you out to be less of a wing nut?

That said there seems to be people pushing for a relaxation of the rules and wider ownership - that does effect me.

Witcher

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

That said there seems to be people pushing for a relaxation of the rules and wider ownership - that does effect me.

Like who?

LowKeyReturn

BattleCorp wrote: »

If you go over a certain amount of guns or certain types of guns, you must have a monitored alarm. That's already in effect here.

Your opening the safe outside a certain period wouldn't work. Fair enough, I could get a safe with a time lock, but what happens if there is fcukall on telly and I decide to clean my firearms?

A safe = good idea.
A monitored alarm = good idea.
Only opening it during certain periods = unworkable.

Thanks for that good to know. To be fair I would counter that by saying if a regulation did come in for a time lock I'd have to say tough luck. Does seem unworkable in situations where the gun is needed for utility.