[Bucco]

Originally Posted by LndLocked

No one is simplistic enough to think that any type of weapons / gun regulations will complete stop these types of tragedies. HOWEVER, all three of these countries have far far less loss of live due to gun violence per capita than the USofA.

And is it your belief that this is because of the guns here, and NOT the type of society we have allowed to be fostered ?

[LndLocked]

Originally Posted by Bucco

And is it your belief that this is because of the guns here, and NOT the type of society we have allowed to be fostered ?

While I am not exactly sure what "type of society" that you mean ..... I believe that their is a direct correlation and symbiotic relationship between pervasive, basically unregulated ownership and the "gun culture" we have developed.

The countries cited in the previous thread are testimony to this. They have always had far, far more stringent gun regulations, their societies are not burdened with a similar culture and enjoy much much less gun violence. Even on a per capita basis (which is the only valid way to make these types of comparisons).

[Golfingnut]

Although I am in favor of more Control and accountability directed at the gun owners, I can see the points of the pro gun folks. I also have doubts that restrictions would make us safer with whatever we would put in place, but I truly believe we must continue to try. I am also happy to see the conversation has stopped spouting the intent of the 2nd Amendment. We must modify, change or delete any Amendment, Law or regulation we have put in place if it is in fact beneficial to the citizens of the United States of America. Saying NO to any laws or saying NO to any guns are both wrong. So, I am continuing to read this thread in the hopes that someone has the answer.

[bkcunningham1]

Lndlocked, where the problem comes in with your argument is the phrase people love to use: "shooting deaths." It makes it seem like these are the only types of deaths anyone is concerned with with. It as if people take up their cross and jump on a situation to move their agendas forward without any thought to other real issues like the one Bucco and others are pointing out.


Violent crime trends in the US are down and in 2011 were at the lowest since 1969. Take a look at this and tell me where the US ranks. http://www.genevadeclaration.org/fil...ummary-ENG.pdf

There are approximately 200 million privately owned firearms in the US. This doesn’t include law enforcement and military weapons.
In 2011, the number of murders in the US were the lowest since 1968.

This is an excellent read if anyone is interested: The Facts about Mass Shootings - John Fund - National Review Online

"Until the Newtown horror, the three worst K–12 school shootings ever had taken place in either Britain or Germany.

"Almost all of the public-policy discussion about Newtown has focused on a debate over the need for more gun control. In reality, gun control in a country that already has 200 million privately owned firearms is likely to do little to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals. We would be better off debating two taboo subjects — the laws that make it difficult to control people with mental illness and the growing body of evidence that 'gun-free' zones, which ban the carrying of firearms by law-abiding individuals, don’t work."

[billethkid]

what I fail to understand is those who are in favor of gun control, against guns, don't have a gun, could care less if they ever see a gun or what ever other group I may have missed.......
why is the fact that we have a more degraded morality than most of us grew up with, we have a lack of respect for the law than most of us grew up with, violence, murder, mayhem and mass killing are promoted in today's entertainment i.e. the movies, television, games, etc, there is a significant lack of discipline in our society and a fear of doing so than any of us grew up with,.......and yet there is little or no discussion of how all the new permissiveness contributes to and promotes a tolerance for violence.

I personally believe it is because when one is against guns for example it is usually about the OTHER GUY and not ones self. In looking at making changes to the permissiveness that condones violence the same folks are involved. And would be affected, therefore there is little or no discussion or demand for change.

My usual example Mothers Against Drunk Drivers.....they have little or nothing to lose or not personally involved with drinking and we all understand the positive impact.

Where are the Mothers Against Driving WHile Using a Cell phone???? Far too many deaths caused by this activity....some would say as much or more than drinking. Why no groundswell to be against such a potentially killing activity? Because now these same mothers are personally involved and are themselves major users of cell phones while driving....hence they are silent on the issue. Very hypocritical behavior.

Bring on what ever makes everybody happy with controls they have no understanding of....there will be no decrease in gun ownership....there will be no change in the violence permissive society.....it will not eliminate the small percentage of wackos (for what ever reason or ills) from accomplishing their need to kill or mass murder.

btk

[janmcn]

It's easier and quicker to pass a High-Capacity Magazines Bill than to reform all of societie's woes, which could take generations to change. If just one life is saved by these new laws, it will be worth it.


High-Capacity Magazines Bill To Be Introduced By Democrats On First Day Of Congressional Session

[Bucco]

Originally Posted by janmcn

It's easier and quicker to pass a High-Capacity Magazines Bill than to reform all of societie's woes, which could take generations to change. If just one life is saved by these new laws, it will be worth it.


High-Capacity Magazines Bill To Be Introduced By Democrats On First Day Of Congressional Session

This item was on the WH page beginning in 2009 as a top priority and then pulled from the page with no action.

We have some pretty pressing economic items that MUST be addressed asap. Why would this come before the country's imminent financial collapse ?

[rubicon]

Meanwhile people keep obssessing about gun control in 2009 more than 13000 babies rising each year have been diagnosis with formerly known neonatal abstinence syndrome a withdrawal from opoids taken illegally by mothers . the average cost of care for hospitalization for these babies is
$53,400 usually billed to medicaid. We cannot control the drug problem in this country never had and never will .

After Michael Ryan killed 16 people injured 4 in 1987 he wandered Hungerford england for eight hours heavily armed before anyone with a firearm could come to the rescue.

In 2009 Paul clarke found a bag containing a shotgun brought to the police and was arrested was sentenced to 5 years until a public outcry gain his release.

In November of 2009 Danny Nightingale a former memeber of British special forces was sentenced to 18 months for position of a firearm and ammuntion. Sgt Nightingale glock pistol was a gift by Iraqi forces he had been training.

[BobnBev]

It all reverts back to the 2 parent family, and the work ethic, which is sorely
missing.

In the good ole days, talk back to your Mom, just wait till your father gets home from work.

Cop caught you screwing off, he'd take you home where you would be dealt with accordingly.

etc, etc, etc.

[DaleMN]

And the point is???

[janmcn]

Originally Posted by DaleMN

And the point is???

The point is that these violent gun-related deaths are the fault of everything except guns. For example; single parents, drug overdoses, texting while driving, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the imminent financial collapse, talking on cell phones while driving, type of society we have allowed to be fostered, and too many other excuses to remember.

And of course the answer to elimating these violent gun-related deaths is more and bigger and faster guns with no regulations.

That's like saying we should solve the drinking problem by providing more booze with less restrictions, or allow more texting while driving, or allow more cell phone usage while driving. Or it's like discussing lung cancer without being allowed to talk about cigarettes.

[rubicon]

Originally Posted by janmcn

The point is that these violent gun-related deaths are the fault of everything except guns. For example; single parents, drug overdoses, texting while driving, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the imminent financial collapse, talking on cell phones while driving, type of society we have allowed to be fostered, and too many other excuses to remember.

And of course the answer to elimating these violent gun-related deaths is more and bigger and faster guns with no regulations.

That's like saying we should solve the drinking problem by providing more booze with less restrictions, or allow more texting while driving, or allow more cell phone usage while driving. Or it's like discussing lung cancer without being allowed to talk about cigarettes.

janmcn: Every issue you cite here has one common denominator and that is irresponsibility. Its not drugs, its not booze its not cell phones its not financial issues and its not guns. Its the irresponsibility of people in how they handle booze, drugs, finances, cell phones and guns. Prohobition, strict drug laws, strict cell phone laws government regulations on financial companies and gun congrol won't stop irresponsible people from abuse and misuse. Gun conrol is on of those vogue terms that politicians use when they are faced with angry people. It gets them off the hook but it is meaningless.
i

[wendyquat]

Originally Posted by Figmo Bohica

Yes, it does work. Just ask those in Cambodia, Russia (USSR), Pre WW II Germany, China and other places where gun control was brought by the government. Oh, that's right, lots of those folks won't be able to answer you, their government killed them.

Now define "responsible" gun control and we may be able to start a discussion. Or did you really mean "people control."

You said it but

[Skybo]

Originally Posted by billethkid

what I fail to understand is those who are in favor of gun control, against guns, don't have a gun, could care less if they ever see a gun or what ever other group I may have missed.......
why is the fact that we have a more degraded morality than most of us grew up with, we have a lack of respect for the law than most of us grew up with, violence, murder, mayhem and mass killing are promoted in today's entertainment i.e. the movies, television, games, etc, there is a significant lack of discipline in our society and a fear of doing so than any of us grew up with,.......and yet there is little or no discussion of how all the new permissiveness contributes to and promotes a tolerance for violence.

I personally believe it is because when one is against guns for example it is usually about the OTHER GUY and not ones self. In looking at making changes to the permissiveness that condones violence the same folks are involved. And would be affected, therefore there is little or no discussion or demand for change.

My usual example Mothers Against Drunk Drivers.....they have little or nothing to lose or not personally involved with drinking and we all understand the positive impact.

Where are the Mothers Against Driving WHile Using a Cell phone???? Far too many deaths caused by this activity....some would say as much or more than drinking. Why no groundswell to be against such a potentially killing activity? Because now these same mothers are personally involved and are themselves major users of cell phones while driving....hence they are silent on the issue. Very hypocritical behavior.

Bring on what ever makes everybody happy with controls they have no understanding of....there will be no decrease in gun ownership....there will be no change in the violence permissive society.....it will not eliminate the small percentage of wackos (for what ever reason or ills) from accomplishing their need to kill or mass murder.

btk

Yes BTK. You absolutely nailed it.

[buggyone]

Originally Posted by Skybo

Yes BTK. You absolutely nailed it.

I hear what you and some others are saying and it is pretty accurate. I would like to hear what positive solutions you might have to the "lack of respect" to which you attribute most of the woes. How would you enact any changes?

I am not being argumentive but truly would like to hear ideas which would work in a realistic world.