199

[Craig the cyclist]

View attachment 1252 (To quote America's greatest philosopher)

Which I guess leaves us with three options.....

Ban their way out, which we all see won't work
Shoot their way out by arming all the good guys with more guns than the bad guys, which we all see won't work (and has been suggested)
Educate their way out

Which has the most chance of success do we think?

 

[matticus]

Craig, my dear chap - have you noticed the correlation between:
- countries that allow speedy purchase of assault rifles, and
- mass killing using those assault rifles?

 

[Rusty Nails]

Which I guess leaves us with three options.....

Ban their way out, which we all see won't work
Shoot their way out by arming all the good guys with more guns than the bad guys, which we all see won't work (and has been suggested)
Educate their way out

Which has the most chance of success do we think?

The first and third options are not mutually exclusive. Both are important but the third is likely to be slower than the first....if the US government were determined enough.

 

[Deleted member 28]

If you want to start a thread where you just jump up and down and wave for attention I promise I will look in on it from time to time.

Unlike you when your favourite water and crisps were in short supply?

 

[Rusty Nails]

 

[icowden]

If you want to kill a dozen people and give zero shits if you die in the process (or even intend to kill yourself as part of it) what good is a ban?

Small words: It makes it harder for you to carry out the thing you wanted to do.

An example:

A man wants to commit a mass murder. There are 4 rooms each with 12 people in.
In room 1 he only has his fists. He fails. The 12 people immobilise him.
In room 2 he has access to a knife. He kills 2 people before the other 10 disarm an immobilise him.
In room 3 he has access to a revolver with 6 bullets. He kills 6 people and is disarmed
In room 4 he has access to a semi-automatic rifle with a clip of 250 bullets. He kills all of the people in room 4, and the remaining people in rooms 3, 2 and 1 before he is killed by an armed response unit.

Do you see?

Better support for mental illnesses, restrictions on guns, places you can go if you feel overwhelmed, that is the way forward, a ban is futile.

I don't think that these things are exclusive.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I don't know or really care.

Perhaps you should. You want to compare the usage of weapons between the two countries and I assumed that you maybe had a source available you were relying on.

The point is that simply banning something is pointless. Handguns are banned in the UK, they are used most often in crimes/murders/shootings.

Again you offer this ’used most often’ reference for handguns but that’s only, as far as I can tell, in comparison to other firearms. That’s why I’m asking what their level use is in comparison to all weapons.

By banning assault rifles in the US does anyone really think that this type of mass shooting with them will just stop?

I don’t think anyone has suggested any single measure, even a ban, will stop mass shootings. It would probably make them less likely though.

We don’t need to reject reasonable answers at tackling mass shootings because they’re not the perfect answer.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Small words: It makes it harder for you to carry out the thing you wanted to do.

An example:

A man wants to commit a mass murder. There are 4 rooms each with 12 people in.
In room 1 he only has his fists. He fails. The 12 people immobilise him.
In room 2 he has access to a knife. He kills 2 people before the other 10 disarm an immobilise him.
In room 3 he has access to a revolver with 6 bullets. He kills 6 people and is disarmed
In room 4 he has access to a semi-automatic rifle with a clip of 250 bullets. He kills all of the people in room 4, and the remaining people in rooms 3, 2 and 1 before he is killed by an armed response unit.

Do you see?


I don't think that these things are exclusive.

Yep, I see. You have no idea how scary and out of control these events are for the victims.

You also have no idea about semi-automatic rifle magazine capacity.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Craig, my dear chap - have you noticed the correlation between:
- countries that allow speedy purchase of assault rifles, and
- mass killing using those assault rifles?

No. There are many many countries with far fewer controls, and at the same time far fewer mass shootings.

I reckon you could equally say 'have you noticed the correlation between countries with fewer mass shootings and also a far speedier judiciary system that often ends in a very rapid capital punishment outcome.'

 

[icowden]

You also have no idea about semi-automatic rifle magazine capacity.

I don't need to. I know that they can fire a lot of bullets very quickly. AN AR15 can hold 100 bullets and you can fire about 45 of them in a minute. How does that invalidate my argument? The man in my example needs 40 bullets, or 80 to put two bullets in each person.

 

[icowden]

No. There are many many countries with far fewer controls, and at the same time far fewer mass shootings.

Oh goody. Will you be providing a list?

(Spoiler - the only countries with a worse gun death rate for both homicide and suicide are very poor countries in South America and Africa
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country)

 

[Rusty Nails]

No. There are many many countries with far fewer controls, and at the same time far fewer mass shootings.

I reckon you could equally say 'have you noticed the correlation between countries with fewer mass shootings and also a far speedier judiciary system that often ends in a very rapid capital punishment outcome.'

Do those countries have a similar rate and range of type of gun ownership as the US? I don't know the answer, but it might be relevant.

 

[icowden]

Yep, I see. You have no idea how scary and out of control these events are for the victims.

What has that got to do with banning and controlling guns so that there aren't any victims in the first place. The best way to make less victims is to have fewer guns, and to control guns that are sold.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Do those countries have a similar rate and range of type of gun ownership as the US? I don't know the answer, but it might be relevant.

As iCowden says, the US does not even make the top 10 in the homicide by gun list by country.

So, that means that the US is a safer country despite the huge gun ownership.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

What has that got to do with banning and controlling guns so that there aren't any victims in the first place. The best way to make less victims is to have fewer guns, and to control guns that are sold.

No, that does not work out. Fewer guns does not mean fewer victims at all, not every gun is used to kill someone.

Better education and a changed relationship with guns will lead to fewer victims.