Slim Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Best piece I've read on this today: http://www.theonion....-reports,30743/ Ruger: Shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotsAlan Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 We had a knife rampage here in China the day before: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-20723910 I found that upsetting. This is becoming a regular occurance over here. Private ownership of guns in China is an absolute no no. Not even shotguns for farmers. Not even air rifles. But airsoft you can buy in the corner shop. I just find it totally depressing that anyone should do such a thing. No matter what they use. After Dunblane, the uk Government banned private ownership of hand guns. You can argue all you want about Moat etc, but I would prefer not to know what the ban prevented rather than see another Dunblane. If we were to know what the ban prevented then there would be more grieving families. We have enough statistics that show availability of firearms kill. We do not need any more. After Dunblane, there was a massive public led campaign to ban guns. I can't remember the name: from memory it was "snowdrop" campaign? If America don't at least have a token attempt at doing the same, how can we possibly continue to look upon them as the policemen of the world? China and the knife attacks? Yup, they did try to restrict the sale of knives for a while a few years back (not on display in shops, ID required for purchase). But they gave up on that because there was too many out there already. Such a sad couple of days :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Why do home owners need weapons that can shoot a Nato 5.56mm round, normally found in use by the military and law enforcement? Is it to stop all those burglars wearing full kevlar and plated armor? Or is there some sort of Terminator home invasion thing going on in the States we havent heard about over here in the rest of the world? Which is ballistically identical to the .223 Remington round, most commonly used as a hunting round for small to medium sized game all around the world. Are you suggesting people may only be allowed .22 rimfires for controlling Deer and Wild Boar, etc with?. I'm sure that would be humane!. There is a difference between ownership for hunting and ownership for "personal protection". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 America has the one of the highest private firearm ownership statistics in the world (around 80%) and one of the highest firearm related crime rates in the world.... While the UK (0.2% was the last figure I saw) has a relatively low firearm related crime... I wonder if the two are linked somehow.... OH yeah I also read somewhere that there are something like 300 millions firearms in America. Of which 2 thirds are in "private" ownership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruger Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 MDO is actually a toy gun enthusiast everybody. Just saying, as somehow these points must be significant to this debate lol. MDO spent 10 years in the military. MDO has fired many firearms of many calibers. MDO also plays airsoft now he is no longer in the military. One does not detract from the other. Nice try at ad hominem, Ruger. Likewise, Duh. Again, please tell me what makes a firearm an "assault weapon". Its quite an interesting one this. An assault weapon is a firearm, that can be fired, usually at a high rate of fire, primarily for use against human targets. The ban will be a ban on cosmetic features MDO, that's what I'm getting at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruger Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Best piece I've read on this today: http://www.theonion....-reports,30743/ Ruger: Shut up. No I didn't start it. Please enter the debate if you have anything constructive to say?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Best piece I've read on this today: http://www.theonion....-reports,30743/ Ruger: Shut up. No I didn't start it. Please enter the debate if you have anything constructive to say?. Lets go the whole hog and just give every civillian a Barrett. I mean nothing stops a dear like a .50 round. Much more humane than a puny .223. Or how about grenade launchers? That'll show those pesky home invaders!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruger Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 And you mention Switzerland alot. The controls on the issued firearms and ammunition are very stringent. Also people can't just wander around carrying guns, they have to be licensed and these license are only issued for specific purposes (i.e. security personnel). Hardly when half the population privately own them. I bring it up a lot to contra your claims about assault weapons. The evidence is there that shows carrying is not the USA's problem its not carrying them that causes these tragedies. Why do you think they all happen in GFZ's. They need abolishing ASAP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 And you mention Switzerland alot. The controls on the issued firearms and ammunition are very stringent. Also people can't just wander around carrying guns, they have to be licensed and these license are only issued for specific purposes (i.e. security personnel). Hardly when half the population privately own them. I bring it up a lot to contra your claims about assault weapons. The evidence is there that shows carrying is not the USA's problem its not carrying them that causes these tragedies. Why do you think they all happen in GFZ's. They need abolishing ASAP. Why do Americans need firearms? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 The most unpleasant aspect of America is that it's full of Americans - most of whom think that they don't have a dick unless they're able to wiled a gun of some kind. The unfortunate thing about it is that most of them can't shoot straight and don't know when to stop firing (anyone who has a military background which includes fighting alongside American forces will readily confirm that they were far more of a danger than the enemy), which may seem a little strange in a country where the national sport appears to be 'drive-by shooting.' It isn't the guns - other countries cope with having them as has alreasdy been said. Therefore, the only conclusion that can possibly be drawn is that the problem lies with the stupid, ignorant and barbaric fucking Americans! Why is everyone so reluctant to state this simple truth? Spot on. Legal gun ownership does not equal social irresponsibility, in fact it acts as a crime deterrent. However having a nation of fuckwits does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotsAlan Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Best piece I've read on this today: http://www.theonion....-reports,30743/ Ruger: Shut up. No I didn't start it. Please enter the debate if you have anything constructive to say?. Lets go the whole hog and just give every civillian a Barrett. I mean nothing stops a dear like a .50 round. Much more humane than a puny .223. Or how about grenade launchers? That'll show those pesky home invaders!!! Yup. I agree MDO. The only way to deal with Ruger is to arm everyone. Unfortunately, if you equipped us all with Barretts, Ruger would feel the need to invest in some Howitzers..... Then you would need to replace our Barretts with some cruise misiles. Then Ruger would want A bombs. I'm with you MDO. Much easier just to ban from the bottom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruger Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Best piece I've read on this today: http://www.theonion....-reports,30743/ Ruger: Shut up. No I didn't start it. Please enter the debate if you have anything constructive to say?. Lets go the whole hog and just give every civillian a Barrett. I mean nothing stops a dear like a .50 round. Much more humane than a puny .223. Or how about grenade launchers? That'll show those pesky home invaders!!! Yup. I agree MDO. The only way to deal with Ruger is to arm everyone. Unfortunately, if you equipped us all with Barretts, Ruger would feel the need to invest in some Howitzers..... Then you would need to replace our Barretts with some cruise misiles. Then Ruger would want A bombs. I'm with you MDO. Much easier just to ban from the bottom. Nope not my opinion in the slightest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruger Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 The naivety is staggering. You can't ban stuff that already exists ScotsAlan. Why do you think China gave up restricting knives?. America has the same issue with guns. Its to late to ban shit. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotsAlan Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Ruger. How do you justify private ownership of firearms? What purpose does it serve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.