Why firearms are so strictly controlled in Ireland and UK

Rezident · 22-01-2017 02:39PM

Because guns are people-killing machines.

Since humans are such emotional beings, and some people get very angry sometimes, it should be very hard to kill someone. Guns means you can do it in an instant just by moving your index finger an inch. By the time you have calmed down, it is too late, people are dead. Oops?

There have been plenty of mass killings in countries like Germany, that you don't seem to bee aware of.

AnGaelach · 22-01-2017 02:44PM

Johnboner wrote: »

Should be relaxed, let's take a look at our European friends such as Germany and Switzerland, soldiers after serving get to keep their firearms at their homes in Switzerland and it is one of the safest countries in the world. In Germany the rules are strict but it is still possible to own a firearm after all the tests. These are only 2 examples but most other European countries have similar rules where it is actually possible to obtain a firearm. I am not talking about the system like in the USA where in many states you just enter a shop like centra, choose a gun you want and walk out. I would love to be able to shoot watermelons if I want with guns as I find that it is one of the most fun activities you can do which is unfortunately illegal in Ireland, it mostly prevents law abiding citizens from obtaining guns as you can see that it doesn't stop constant gang shootings in Dublin with illegaly obtained firearms.

That isn't how it works... Like, at all.

Johnboner wrote: »

Also why do we copy everything just from the UK?

You're aware of a few little groups called Republicans and Loyalists, right? I love guns, but having strict control over guns (and especially calibre) makes sense here. There's no domestic production, whatever comes in has to be imported under license (or bought illegally), meaning it can be (relatively) controlled.

Sure the Republicans used explosives to a greater extent, but I've no doubt that they'd use guns as well if they had greater access to them.

AnGaelach · 22-01-2017 02:51PM

Rezident wrote: »

Because guns are people-killing machines.

Yeah, all those 150-400,000 odd people in Ireland with guns are out committing murder :rolleyes:

Rezident wrote: »

Since humans are such emotional beings, and some people get very angry sometimes, it should be very hard to kill someone. Guns means you can do it in an instant just by moving your index finger an inch. By the time you have calmed down, it is too late, people are dead. Oops?

Yeah, because it's totally easier to find ammo for your gun, load it and kill someone in the heat of the moment than it is to pick up whatever's nearest you and crack them one across the head.

I get that you're afraid of guns, and that you don't trust yourself to act responsibly with them if someone hurts your feelings, but don't think the rest of us are as childish. Please.

Johnboner · 22-01-2017 03:04PM

mikeoneilly wrote: »

Had a family member killed with a legally held gun that got into the wrong hands.

Would quite possibly be alive today otherwise.

Had a family member killed by alcohol, ban all alcohol. If there was no alcohol, that person would be alive today.

Johnboner · 22-01-2017 03:06PM

Allinall wrote: »

From the OPs other Garda bashing thread, they have a conviction on their record, so I for one am glad of the restrictions in place.

Watermelons me hole.

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057695670/15/#post102358524

Garda bashing thread??? What about the 70 rape accusations of the Gardai? Oh yeah false accusations, sorry, they are super humans so they never ever do any wrong. I would love to have a conversation with you face to face and would explain myself properly as this is beyond ridiculous

Johnboner · 22-01-2017 03:08PM

AnGaelach wrote: »

That isn't how it works... Like, at all.

You're aware of a few little groups called Republicans and Loyalists, right? I love guns, but having strict control over guns (and especially calibre) makes sense here. There's no domestic production, whatever comes in has to be imported under license (or bought illegally), meaning it can be (relatively) controlled.

Sure the Republicans used explosives to a greater extent, but I've no doubt that they'd use guns as well if they had greater access to them.

Oh really that's not how it works??? Well thanks for telling me because I certainly didn't know that. Nice try pretending to be smart.

22-01-2017 03:10PM

BrokenArrows wrote: »

There is no need for the average person to own one.

Agree, all those I know involved in shooting and hunting sports are way above the average pleb. And what would be the point in only one

Have 6 at present.

Anyway, shame to be inside on a day like this, off to the hill to check out a new Nightforce scope at distance.
Not watermelons, prefare baloons

wakka12 · 22-01-2017 03:20PM

Johnboner wrote: »

Why are we doing everything for health and safety, we need a bit of danger in this world, you cannot be protected from everything if that's the case let's ban cars, alcohol and cigarettes as they are huge killers

How can you seriously try to use that as an argument? We could literally ban anything because of health and safety issues but many of them are not comparable to guns as guns were made with one use in mind, to kill people

AnGaelach · 22-01-2017 03:20PM

Johnboner wrote: »

Oh really that's not how it works??? Well thanks for telling me because I certainly didn't know that. Nice try pretending to be smart.

You know what ATS and federal regulations are, right? You can't just "walk in" and get a gun and walk out.

AnGaelach · 22-01-2017 03:22PM

wakka12 wrote: »

How can you seriously try to use that as an argument? We could literally ban anything because of health and safety issues but many of them are not comparable to guns as guns were made with one use in mind, to kill people

Aye because you can't enjoy clay pigeon or target shooting without secretly wanting to put a .22 in some guy's head.

Johnboner · 22-01-2017 03:34PM

AnGaelach wrote: »

You know what ATS and federal regulations are, right? You can't just "walk in" and get a gun and walk out.

Thank you, Sherlock Holmes, I certainly didn't know.

eeguy · 22-01-2017 03:42PM

AnGaelach wrote: »

Aye because you can't enjoy clay pigeon or target shooting without secretly wanting to put a .22 in some guy's head.

The OP seems to be more interested in handguns and semi autos, judging by the "soldiers bringing their firearms home" comment, not your shotguns or small calibre rifles.
I've never heard a good argument to allow people to own handguns.

Lyle Lanley · 22-01-2017 03:52PM

Johnboner wrote: »

That's what I am saying, require strict vetting before being able to purchase a firearm.

Don't we already have this in place?

BlinkingLights · 22-01-2017 03:55PM

Well considering what the US gun death rate is with their love of shooting things, let's just leave well enough alone!

We have a fairly acceptable balance between control and access for legitimate purposes.

22-01-2017 04:03PM

Why can't you get a gun OP?

Little CuChulainn · 22-01-2017 04:06PM

Johnboner wrote: »

Garda bashing thread??? What about the 70 rape accusations of the Gardai? Oh yeah false accusations, sorry, they are super humans so they never ever do any wrong. I would love to have a conversation with you face to face and would explain myself properly as this is beyond ridiculous

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ombudsman-investigates-70-sex-claims-against-gardai-35387598.html

"a prosecution was directed in just one case"

brightspark · 22-01-2017 04:40PM

NiallBoo wrote: »

Nobody wants to hurt you or your family, they just want your stuff.
Then if you shoot them then you must understand that its just because you value your stuff over a human life -nothing to do with your own safety.

People are people. They're not good or bad, just people. That person taking your stuff might be an asshole, but they're still a person with some absolutely basic rights. I'm very grateful that the law agrees with me on this one.

If you or anyone close to you have ever been robbed you would realise that it's not just the "stuff".

It takes a long time to get over it, you are constantly wondering when it will happen again, wondering what that person did in the house, wondering what happened to that cheap necklace that priceless as it was a gift from someone departed.

I'm sorry those who don't respect other people and their property don't deserve "rights". I'm sick of people with multiple convictions having their rights placed above the rights of society.

If somehow I was able to overcome some scum who tried robbing me or my family, I would like to think that the ambulance they should need would take care of any other calls before coming to pick them up some hours later frozen to my driveway.

I once believed like you do, that people aren't bad...I'm no longer that naive, there are bad people who have nothing to add to our society.

jimmycrackcorm · 22-01-2017 04:51PM

Johnboner wrote:

Had a family member killed by alcohol, ban all alcohol. If there was no alcohol, that person would be alive today.

I knew someone who died from a fall off a roof. Ban all roofs. That person would be alive today if they hadn't gone up to fix the roof.

eeguy · 22-01-2017 04:52PM

brightspark wrote: »

If you or anyone close to you have ever been robbed you would realise that it's not just the "stuff".

It takes a long time to get over it, you are constantly wondering when it will happen again, wondering what that person did in the house, wondering what happened to that cheap necklace that priceless as it was a gift from someone departed.

And how would a gun solve any of these problems?

My issue is that people have fantastically emotive arguments such as yours that have absolutely no basis in reality.
A whole load of whataboutery.

The only way a gun could prevent a robbery is if:
A) you own a gun

you're sufficiently trained to use it in a high pressure situation like a robbery
C) your house actually gets robbed
D) you're at home, awake, and able to get to the gun that's probably in a safe somewhere in your house

And then what? Are you going to murder the guy? Are you going to threaten him? Make him lie on the ground and tie him up while you wait 4 hours for the Gardai to arrive?
What if he has a gun and shoots back at you? Are you willing to risk a shootout in your house around your wife and kids?

Are you prepared to face the reality that when it's over either you'll be scrubbing his blood off the floor or your wife will be scrubbing your blood off the floor?

AnGaelach · 22-01-2017 05:32PM

eeguy wrote: »

The OP seems to be more interested in handguns and semi autos, judging by the "soldiers bringing their firearms home" comment, not your shotguns or small calibre rifles.
I've never heard a good argument to allow people to own handguns.

Handguns are also used in target shooting laddie. I don't know about his semi auto, I prefer a nice bolt action personally but I've no problem with someone wanting to own a semi-automatic You're aware it's not only AR15s that are semi auto right? You can get low calibre semi autos. A Remington 700 in .308 is probably deadlier than a K10/22.

wakka12 · 22-01-2017 05:36PM

AnGaelach wrote: »

Aye because you can't enjoy clay pigeon or target shooting without secretly wanting to put a .22 in some guy's head.

Guns were not made so we could shoot clay pigeons, they took on a recreactional quality in some regards sure but their main purposes is very much still killing other people. I don't see how you can argue with that really

AnGaelach · 22-01-2017 05:43PM

wakka12 wrote: »

Guns were not made so we could shoot clay pigeons, they took on a recreactional quality in some regards sure but their main purposes is very much still killing other people. I don't see how you can argue with that really

And the internet was created by the military that took on civilian and commercial qualities. What's your point, that something was originally designed with a purpose so it can only fit that purpose now?

Guns aren't scary, they're just tools. You can enjoy it by spending the evening on a range with friends, or you can use it to put a bullet in someone's chest from a mile away. For the vast, vast majority of people it's the former rather than the latter.

AndyBoBandy · 22-01-2017 05:50PM

AnGaelach wrote: »

Guns aren't scary, they're just tools. You can enjoy it by spending the evening on a range with friends, or you can use it to put a bullet in someone's chest from a mile away. For the vast, vast majority of people it's the former rather than the latter.

All it takes is the ever so tiny minority to walk into a school and kill 20 kids.

Remember Dunblane? It's not only famous for a good tennis player from there.

I'd rather not take the chance of 1 person (a minority) deciding he wants to kill 10/20/50 people, just because his ex girlfriend laughed at his small willy

wakka12 · 22-01-2017 05:58PM

AnGaelach wrote: »

And the internet was created by the military that took on civilian and commercial qualities. What's your point, that something was originally designed with a purpose so it can only fit that purpose now?

Guns aren't scary, they're just tools. You can enjoy it by spending the evening on a range with friends, or you can use it to put a bullet in someone's chest from a mile away. For the vast, vast majority of people it's the former rather than the latter.

Regardless of purpose, guns can still kill people. It doesn't matter what theyre being used for there are always still accidents with guns, how many toddlers accidentally shoot their little siblings with recreational guns in the US annually

Guns are weapons first and foremost, no matter how much harmless fun people can have with them

eeguy · 22-01-2017 05:59PM

eeguy wrote: »

The OP seems to be more interested in handguns and semi autos, judging by the "soldiers bringing their firearms home" comment, not your shotguns or small calibre rifles.
I've never heard a good argument to allow people to own handguns.

AnGaelach wrote: »

Handguns are also used in target shooting laddie. I don't know about his semi auto, I prefer a nice bolt action personally but I've no problem with someone wanting to own a semi-automatic You're aware it's not only AR15s that are semi auto right? You can get low calibre semi autos. A Remington 700 in .308 is probably deadlier than a K10/22.

I know. That's why I said it in the post you quoted.
Also, the OP never mentioned target shooting. He mentioned popping watermelons and soldiers keeping guns, while other posters are talking about guns for home "defense".

I think you're having a different conversation altogether.

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I knew someone who died from a fall off a roof. Ban all roofs. That person would be alive today if they hadn't gone up to fix the roof.

Don't ban roofs. Ban fixing roofs

TheChizler · 22-01-2017 06:03PM

I've shot guns in the controlled environment of shooting ranges and it honestly is great fun, but I wouldn't want to bring something that's only feature is being dangerous home with me.

Jayop · 22-01-2017 06:12PM

People that aren't interested in shooting at targets will naturally dismiss it the same way people who don't like golf or football think they're inane pointless pass times. I enjoy shooting guns haven't done so for years and I'd have no interest in shooting animals. Target shooting with a scoped rifle or handgun is all I'd be interested in. I'd be happy to leave the weapons if I had them at a club or secure place. It's not for protection or anything other than the fun of shooting targets and getting good at it that would interest me.

Zaph · 22-01-2017 06:27PM

Jayop wrote: »

I'd be happy to leave the weapons if I had them at a club or secure place. It's not for protection or anything other than the fun of shooting targets and getting good at it that would interest me.

While I have no interest in guns and wouldn't like to see the controls being eased, I'd have no problem with this. But even at that the methods of securing the firearms would want to be exceptional, otherwise there's a handy arsenal available should someone want a few shooters. Target shooting is a legitimate sport and a lot of people get enjoyment from it, but outside of genuine hunters and farmers I can't see any valid reason for anyone needing to have a gun in their own home.

Interesting article recently on the BBC news website about how controls have virtually eradicated all gun crime in Japan. Link.

BattleCorp · 22-01-2017 06:31PM

The amount of ignorance regarding guns here is staggering.

Guns are allowed in Ireland if you have a lawful reason to have one. Target shooting, hunting and vermin control are lawful reasons. Self defence is not a lawful reason to have one.

.22 handguns are allowed for target shooting. Some people have larger calibre handguns for target shooting but there are have been no new licences for those issued since November 2008.

There are over 200k guns in civilian ownership here in Ireland, the ownership of which is highly regulated.

Target shooting at ranges is actually one of the safest sports that you can do. The notion that gun owners are wannabe Rambo's is very far from the truth. Anybody with a rifle or handgun is legally obliged to keep them in a safe when not in use.

We don't have a problem here with legal guns. The problem is illegal guns in the hands of scumbags.

Unfortunately, people who don't know much about guns tar law abiding gun owners with the same brush as criminal scumbags.

eeguy · 22-01-2017 06:33PM

Zaph wrote: »

Interesting article recently on the BBC news website about how controls have virtually eradicated all gun crime in Japan. Link.

"The response to violence is never violence, it's always to de-escalate it. Only six shots were fired by Japanese police nationwide [in 2015]," says journalist Anthony Berteaux. "What most Japanese police will do is get huge futons and essentially roll up a person who is being violent or drunk into a little burrito and carry them back to the station to calm them down."

That is a fantastic idea.

Why firearms are so strictly controlled in Ireland and UK

Comments