nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Guns in America

davyjose

I know there's another thread on this but this is slightly OT from that - its less about that incident and more about general Gun culture in America.
My Fiance is American and TBH having grown up in America she's seen guns - her ex (they have a daughter from their marriage, whom i adore FTR) was an ex-marine, with 2 guns in the house, a true believer in the NRA - but she is one of many who hates guns. And wants them banned - why is this happening? How is America so divided? And so able to withstand pressure from the rest of the world???

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

0ubliette

If i was to ever end up marrying my american missus, and lived in america, first thing id do upon getting citizenship, sign up to the NRA, and buy myself an M-14. God i love that rifle.
When i was last in america, i used a shedload of guns, from an ak47 to an m4, pump shottys, colt 1911, the works. I know id so end up a gun nut if i lived there.

Degsy

#Elites wrote:

Personally i wouldnt mind a handgun kept safely in the house for protection..anything bigger (m4 type things, shotguns) should be a lot more strict.

Jeesus h Christ..i suppose you mean a loaded handgun too?Its because of this sort of idea that handguns are very difficult to license,especially in this country.

Dyr

All i know is quality american TV programmes would be all the poorer if it wasn't for the ready availability of firearms. Jack Bauer running around with a baton? Nonsense.

Willymuncher

davyjose wrote:

I only 1% disagree - I could say the Beatles have done more for the history of Popular music than any American band has, but that's to miss the point - Britain had a massive influencer on a developing America - why do you think the 'Grapes of Wrath' was written in English? But I see what you're saying. Last time I was over and my gf was deciding which Pizza to order, and I stepped in and said 'Why don't i just 'cook' some dinner???'
It IS a strange place!

It seems to me that you don't like the states that much...

I personally love pizza everyday for dinner

biko wrote:

It's apparent that Americans can't handle their guns.

There are millions of people in the country that own firearms and are responsible with them, I don't think its fair to say they can't handle them.

5starpool

While I think it is riciculous to cite a law from a couple of hundred years ago as good reason to be allowed to keep their guns, it would be a futile exercise to even try to ban guns now. Even allowing for the likely widespread opposition to such a law, that horse has well and truly bolted and all the legally held guns back even would not go any way towards getting the guns from the criminals.

I am relieved that there are such strict gun laws here, and despite the high profile shootings over here, the vast majority of that was amongst the criminal world shooting each other, which can only be a good thing.

NutJob

They should keeping giving guns to people with histories of mental illness. In fact it should be mandatory for known depressed suicidal teenagers to have automatic weapons after all its in the constitution.

slipss

#Elites wrote:

Personally i wouldnt mind a handgun kept safely in the house for protection..anything bigger (m4 type things, shotguns) should be a lot more strict.

I couldn't disagree more, if you want to have a firearm to defend your home it would be much better for people to have a rifle than a handgun. The only advantage a handgun has is that its easily concealable (i.e it can be carried around on the streets). I can see no reason whatsoever that handguns should be legal in America either, their argument for keeping guns is that they are for home protection and/or hunting. Well unless your a ninja you are going to have a nearly impossible task to kill a dear with a handgun and a rifle is just as good at defending your home as a pistol, publicly owned handguns are concealable anti-personel weapons, and its ridiculas for anyone to claim they "need" one for any reason.

Degsy

slipss wrote:

I couldn't disagree more, if you want to have a firearm to defend your home it would be much better for people to have a rifle than a handgun. The only advantage a handgun has is that its easily concealable (i.e it can be carried around on the streets). I can see no reason whatsoever that handguns should be legal in America either, their argument for keeping guns is that they are for home protection and/or hunting. Well unless your a ninja you are going to have a nearly impossible task to kill a dear with a handgun and a rifle is just as good at defending your home as a pistol, publicly owned handguns are concealable anti-personel weapons, and its ridiculas for anyone to claim they "need" one for any reason.

In some states you're allowed to carry a weapon for protection..its called a Conceal Carry Permit.
Also people Do use pistols for hunting beleive it or not.

Manic Moran

Degsy wrote:

In some states you're allowed to carry a weapon for protection..its called a Conceal Carry Permit.
Also people Do use pistols for hunting beleive it or not.

46 out of 50. Two don't require a permit (Alaksa, Vermont), and of the other two, Wisconsin has had its bill pass the legislature twice, but the Governor keeps vetoing it, it's only a matter of time, and the last state (Iowa, if I recall) permits unconcealed carry without a permit if you don't mind people giving you funny looks in town.

In fact it should be mandatory for known depressed suicidal teenagers to have automatic weapons after all its in the constitution.

Sarcasm aside, you'll note that the firearms lobby doesn't have any issue with the mental capacity requirement.

first thing id do upon getting citizenship, sign up to the NRA, and buy myself an M-14. God i love that rifle.

Forget the M-14. Buy an FAL. Same category and ammo, but better! (You don't need citizenship, green card will do)

I couldn't disagree more, if you want to have a firearm to defend your home it would be much better for people to have a rifle than a handgun. The only advantage a handgun has is that its easily concealable

Which goes to show what you know about firearms usage. Assuming you're talking about inside your house or apartment, as opposed to guarding your street corner in case of a Katrina-esque disaster, rifles have two very major problems: Length and overpenetration. A house is usually a confined area, with not much room to swing anything about. The other problem, overpenetration, comes from the fact that your typical rifle round will punch through walls and go down the street, or next door, or wherever if you miss. At least a shotgun has the advantages of not needing a precise aim and usually no overpenetration (Depending on the load), but it does also suffer the 'wieldability' problem, and frankly, your house repair bill afterwards is going to be impressive, semi-autos are expensive, (I checked out a Bernelli M3 yesterday, $1500), pump-actions are too slow, and magazine capacity is limited. They are the 'traditional' home defense weapon mainly because they are traditional. A pistol suffers no problem in confined quarters, and with defense loads such as Hydrashok or hollow point they do not tend to overpenetrate, they carry sufficient ammunition without reloading for most conceivable situations, and they are quite sufficiently lethal.

NTM

rogue-entity

Snickers Man wrote:

<snip>
It's basic democracy and bill of rights is much admired and held up as a paragon of freedom by peoples around the world.

Its business methods are widely copied. Its companies are the leading players in many global industries.

It has spread English around the world far more effectively than the British Empire.

About the only things it hasn't influenced the rest of the world to adopt are its sport (basketball excepted) and its gun laws.

And they do say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

But how many "free countries" actually impliament those same rights, to the same degree of freedom. Ireland doesnt for one. Our freedom of speech right is hobbled by this "public morality" clause, and I am pretty sure libel laws that recently restricted boardsie's rights to mention events by a certain promoter dont exist in the US. Sweden is one country that I admire for its freedom, especially in response to the Pirate Bay incident where public outcry at the illegal action taken by the swedish police eventually resulted in TPB coming back to sweden.

Best example of non-US companies copying US business methods: Vodafone.
Another example of US culture creeping in over here is all the lobbying done to try and legalise software patents.. something that I strongly feel should be illegal, and unrecognised. Legalising them in all member states would result in the lost of our own native businesses and the extention of US dominance in the global market. Something that I also abhor the thought of.

That is debatable of course, but the spread of americanisms, and american spelling is becoming more and more prolific in the english speaking world, and it is actually acceptable to submit an academic report in "american english".

The fact remains, criminals will always be able to get access to guns, making them illegal for civilians to have them, wont stop this. It just means that the criminals are armed, and the civilians are not. Just look at gun crime in Ireland, with armed gangs raiding Securicor vans and criminals offing themselves over money and drugs. The best that America could hope for is to reduce the easy access to powerful weapons for civilians by making it harder for people to get them.. but I dont believe for one second that american gun culture will go away.

purple'n'gold

If American law allows people to buy, and have firearms in their position that’s their business. Nothing at all to do with the rest of the world. And as regards lunatics killing people, the USA is a huge country with a huge diverse population. You are bound to have more nutters per square yard there than in a smaller more homogeneous country.

PeakOutput

purplengold wrote:

If American law allows people to buy, and have firearms in their position that’s their business. Nothing at all to do with the rest of the world. And as regards lunatics killing people, the USA is a huge country with a huge diverse population. You are bound to have more nutters per square yard there than in a smaller more homogeneous country.

in theory it should be the same per square yard but because they are bigger they will have more but like i said there is something in their society that makes them breed alot more psychos for sum reason

cson

My opinons on the matter;

First of all the comparisons between the United States and Switzerland are bordering on stupidity. You are discussing two different mindsets and cultures here that have little in common. (Bar the avalibility of guns).

I think someone mentioned culture here, Europeans and Americans have a different culture and mindset with regard to guns. I think in Europe most people see guns as a necessary evil perhaps, one means to protect and keep countrys safe. (I know there are lots of shooting clubs etc, but this is what I think for the most part what Europeans think). In the United States owning a gun is somewhat a rite of passage and is a form of pastime. Two totally different attitudes towards guns.

Myself, I think that with the constitution firmly enshrined with the right to own guns that to envoke stricter laws or banning, well you might as well be pissing into the wind. Personally I feel safer in a country with strict gun laws as people such as Cho would have severe difficulty in obtaining weapons.

mcsmohil

mike65 wrote:

Exactly, and its not up to the rest of us to moan either, the USA is a functioning democracy and of the oldest in the world. Its thier call.

Mike.

Oldest in the world?????

mcsmohil

purplengold wrote:

If American law allows people to buy, and have firearms in their position that’s their business. Nothing at all to do with the rest of the world. And as regards lunatics killing people, the USA is a huge country with a huge diverse population. You are bound to have more nutters per square yard there than in a smaller more homogeneous country.

Lots of guns = lots of dead people, simple.

biggun

exCrumlinBoyo wrote: »

I live in Florida and being an expat from Ireland, I don’t understand the need for guns. The main reason American’s want to have guns is for hunting purposes. Now that’s all well and good, not for the defenseless animal off course, that’s another story for another day, to go hunting with an AK 47 assault rifle. To me that what the problem is!

You can go and buy military weapons for jayis sakes. Huge guns that would blow up a small country! Automatic, Semi Automatic… theses guns are not for hunting, they are deadly assault military weapons. Simple as.

I can go not 5 mins where I live or work and buy an Arsenal which again could take out a small country.

My main point is these people like to hunt, I don’t agree killing a defenseless animal from behind a tree with a sniper rifle but I do disagree with being able to buy fully automatic, magazine loaded machine guns. Hunting I don’t think so.

Guns are always going to be a part of life over here, that’s a fact. You are never going to get rid of them. They should limit the purchase of guns to hunting rifles not AK -47’s and the like.

My wife’s father recently handed to my wife for safe keeping 3 guns. When I say guns, I mean a .44 Magnum. A dirty harry gun, this thing is ridiculous. A double barrel shot gun and another gun along with 3 pillow cases of ammo. I hate the fact that is in my house, but its part of life over here. They just need to restrict the type of weapons and how easy assessable the ammo is for these guns.

Me a total ban should be imposed.

Its a bloody good thing that people like you dont ever get the chance to implement policy decisions like that anyways. Time and time again people like yourself have been exposed as being completly ignorant of the supposed topic you profess an expertise in in the first place.

1) Have you ever used a firearm ?
2) Have you ever had to use a firearm in defense of your self or a friend or fmaily member ?
3) Have you ever had your home invaded by persons intent on killing you , raping your wife and children and making you watch, then raping and killing your kids.

If in the event of any of the above occurring, how would you think you would be able to defend yourself ?

Oh yes, you would appeal to their sense of reasoning and ask them to leave your home , not killing you or any of your family, or possibly setting fire to the home you worked so hard for to destroy forensic evidence. I travel to the states regularly and have a CCW permit from the state of Utah. I will use that weapon to defend myself at all costs. Have a look at the dregs coming to this country. We have people coming from the likes of eastern europe and Africa where the value placed on human life is virtually ZERO. What are you going to do when they come for you.

My old departed father used to have a great saying;

" IF YOU CANT SAY ANYTHING CONSTRUCTIVE, SHUT THE **** UP"

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

mcsmohil wrote: »

Oldest in the world?????

what exactly about that statement did you find worthy of 5 question marks?

Little Princess

biggun wrote: »

1) Have you ever used a firearm ?
2) Have you ever had to use a firearm in defense of your self or a friend or fmaily member ?
3) Have you ever had your home invaded by persons intent on killing you , raping your wife and children and making you watch, then raping and killing your kids.

how many people are actually put in that situation at year?

then ask urself how many people are killed by guns per year in situations that are not like the one you described. the number of people killed in situations not like the one you described by guns, probably far out weighs the number of people killed in self defence while breaking and entering a house in order to rape a family and murder kids.

logical conclusion. ban guns to stop the thousands of gun murders a year that outweigh the amount of people killed in self defence a year and let the police deal with the well being of people.

everybody i know from america has made a fortune. theyve always told me that the reason they made a fortune in america is because generally americans are really really backwards and dumb. in my honest opinion, this is probably why they will not change their gun laws. theyre too stuborn to change their constitution because they're hung up in their own american pride. this goes with the argument that americans are dumb. there are obviously some exceptions.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

should we ban cars as well and force americans to use public transport?

Little Princess

Clammy Todgers wrote: »

should we ban cars as well and force americans to use public transport?

this argument is dumb. cars arent designed for killing people. a lot of the guns and ammunition sold in america are designed specifically for killing people.

Witcher

Little Princess wrote: »

this argument is dumb. cars arent designed for killing people. a lot of the guns and ammunition sold in america are designed specifically for killing people.

some guns arent designed to kill, target pistols arent designed to kill.

a round of ammunition has the capacity to kill anything - animals and people, not just people, it

could be used for hunting. or it may not be used to kill at all what about

target shooting?

if every gun in america was bought to kill people there would be a lot more

murders!

a lot of guns are used for home defence and hunting

i presume from your posts you've never used a gun before

:cool::cool::cool:

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

the biggest problem with having this debate is that the only experience most people have had with guns is on tv. And we all know how true to life prime time tv can be.

Little Princess

blay1 wrote: »

a round of ammunition has the capacity to kill anything, not just people, it

could be used for hunting. or it may not be used to kill at all what about

target shooting?

if every gun in america was bought to kill people there would be a lot more

murders!

a lot of guns are used for home defence and hunting

i presume from your posts you've never used a gun before

:cool::cool::cool:

yeah ur right. im sure that mr Uziel Gal of the israeli defence forces had deer in mind when he designed the uzi.

Clammy Todgers wrote: »

the biggest problem with having this debate is that the only experience most people have had with guns is on tv. And we all know how true to life prime time tv can be.

no. its a pretty straight forward logical argument. no experience with guns required. and as a matter of fact i have a few american cousins who are fascinated with guns. ive fired a lot of different weapons

Witcher

Little Princess wrote: »

yeah ur right. im sure that mr Uziel Gal of the israeli defence forces had deer in mind when he designed the uzi.

nobdy would attemt to shoot a deer with a 9mm, if uzis are posessed, they are usually for

target shooting

how many people in the us have uzi's? not a lot

the most common firearm is a shotgun or pistol

and if you look at recent school shootings nobody used an assault rifleor submachine gun, the

weapons used were either pistols or shotguns.

and a lot of assault rifles in america are restricted to semi auto only

:cool::cool::cool:

Little Princess

blay1 wrote: »

how many people in the us have uzi's? not a lot

the most common firearm is a shotgun or pistol

and if you look at recent school shootings nobody used an assault rifle, the

weapons used were either pistols or shotguns.

and a lot of assault rifles in america are restricted to semi auto only

:cool::cool::cool:

im not saying that all weapons should be banned. im saying that there is need for stricter gun control in america which includes the banning of assault weapons. if you want to hunt get a hunting weapon.

Witcher

Little Princess wrote: »

im not saying that all weapons should be banned. im saying that there is need for stricter gun control in america which includes the banning of assault weapons. if you want to hunt get a hunting weapon.

yeah i agree with you totally.

:cool::cool::cool:

It wasn't me!

mcsmohil wrote: »

Lots of guns = lots of dead people, simple.

There are over 250,000 licenced firearms in Ireland. How many of those have been used in criminal activities?

Little Princess

It wasn't me! wrote: »

There are over 250,000 licenced firearms in Ireland. How many of those have been used in criminal activities?

gun culture in ireland is not the same as it is in the US. the problem in america is that people use them. if that was a problem in ireland id be calling to ban guns completely in ireland as well.

i dont think ive ever heard a conclusive argument that is pro guns. there are no valid pro gun arguments in this thread.

Traumadoc

mcsmohil wrote: »

Lots of guns = lots of dead people, simple.

Over 1/4 of homes in Switzerland have guns, yet the murder rate is less than that of the UK where only 1/20 of homes have guns.

It wasn't me!

Why should people not be allowed have them? I mean, there's nothing inherently dangerous about them in capable hands; they're just machinery.

Here, all manner of firearms can be and are licensed, for a whole host of reasons, being various types of target shooting and many types of hunting.

In America, the types of target shooting and hunting are even more varied, and they're allowed license a firearm for defensive purposes as well. As a result, the hunting and target shooting firearms are more varied, including some whose capabilities are pretty intimidating for those who are frightened of guns, the ability to retain competitive accuracy at a thousand yards, for instance, with high-power rounds. If you ignore that these are not inherently dangerous objects, you're probably pretty terrified of them, but there's nothing wrong with them.

As regards the defence of oneself and one's family, personally I have no issue one way or the other. I do however believe that in situations where there's someone shooting at other people, I'd really, really want a gun handy. No point standing on the moral high ground and saying the guy shooting shouldn't have been able to get the gun so easily in the first place if you and a number of others are dead, when, had you carried a gun for protection, there would have been a significantly lower death toll, and you'd be less likely to be in it. When it comes down to it, where a situation involves an offensive gun, adding one to counteract this shooter isn't going to escalate the situation. Manic Moran made the point in the other thread that these massacres would not have been massacres, or would certainly have featured far lower casualties, had a private citizen been armed and ended the standoff quickly. Being helpless isn't going to be nice there, and I wonder how many would rather be unarmed, or whose morals would go out the window and they'd want the gun.