Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Another mass shooting in the U.S

1…3637394142…71

Comments

  • #1142
    yammycat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 445 ✭✭yammycat


    MadsL wrote: »
    I suggest you try that sometime. :rolleyes:

    been there done that, texas my friend, you should visit


  • #1143
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    Fair enough.



    Won't make much difference. More often than not buybacks tend to bring in antiques or inoperative weapons. But if an agency wants to run one, more power to them.



    I would be curious to see the legal definition you propose for this, and the rational basis for that definition.



    Given that reloading is a popular activity amongst recreational shooters, how would this be enforced? That's before you get to the question of 'what's a reasonable number?'



    Subject to two caveats. Firstly, though you can mandate that every house have a safe, you cannot mandate that it be used. This was the question specifically addressed in DC vs Heller. Secondly, it is unConstitutional to place an excessive cost on the exercise of a Constitutional right. Mandating the sale of trigger locks on guns such as happens in California is OK as they're only $10 or so. (Here in CA, they have to be sold, but not necessarily used) But a $700 safe is a bit more than would likely pass muster, so the government is going to be buying a lot of safes.



    How does that affect firearms with detachable magazines?



    There is currently a criminal check and a mental illness check. What more would you suggest, bearing in mind that it cannot be so invasive as to unnecessarily restrict the Constitutional right?



    Fair enough.



    Why?



    Agreed, with a caveat. Mass murders are not a significant problem in the big scheme of things. We could have a Newton every week of the year, and still only be a blip on the number of murders in the US. If we really want to make a dent in murders, we need to go after all those who take up a life of criminal violence, who are as often black and hispanic.

    NTM

    Look Manic i want to apologise to you as i got a little heated in my views. All i want is less of these atrocities occuring. I'm sure you want the same thing. We have different viewpoints on the role of guns in these situations. Even some prominent NRA members like Machin have agreed they are some part of the problem.

    My proposals are all off the top of my head. What's needed is a bi-partisan inclusive process, where Dems and Republicans sit down, bash heads, consult the public, consult the schools etc and come up with a range of proposals to try stop the frequency with which these events are occuring.

    In my opinion guns are part of this problem (and not that teachers dont have them!). It would take a person with a much greater knowledge of American law, politics and society than me to give you a better proposal. I just hope you get some.

    And for the record, i may have childishly tried to play down your army service in an "illegal, nonsense" war, but lets face it you had no choice in starting the war and served your country, that in itself is noble and i respect that. I've only ever been trying to come up with ideas (likely borne out of frustration) to stop these events occurring so often in your country. I love America (the country) been to some great places , just frustrating these things keep happening. As for all the "normal", every day homicides, it's these atrocities in particular which shape the worlds opinion on your country. Little crime statistics per state take no heed, but 20 kids dead in a school and the world takes notice. I care about things like that.

    So, again, apologies and we'll have to agree to disagree on some issues.


  • #1144
    FISMA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,616 ✭✭✭FISMA


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    9. Removing ammunition and guns from regular stores.

    In 1997, during the Clinton Assault Weapon ban, criminals Phillips and Mătăsăreanu held up a bank in North Hollywood with illegal weapons.

    The cops were underpowered against these criminals. So during the shootout, the police raided the local gun store in an effort to match firepower.

    That civilian store saved many lives that day.

    Let us all, however, thank the lawyers that in 1993, when these criminals were found with
    1. a concealed weapon [Phillips]
    2. 2 semi-automatic rifles
    3. 2 handguns,
    4. more than 1,600 rounds of 7.62×39mm rifle ammunition,
    5. 1,200 rounds of 9×19mm Parabellum
    6. .45 ACP handgun ammunition,
    7. radio scanners,
    8. smoke bombs,
    9. improvised explosive devices,
    10. body armor vests, and
    11. 3 different licese plates
    and managed to get their clients 100 days in jail and 3 years probation!

    Congratulations to those lawyers!

    Same old story, we had them, but let them go.

    The idea of people cracking and doing these rampages is factually incorrect.

    In almost every instance of mass shootings in the last 20 years the shooter was known to be either psychotic or a psychopath. Almost exclusively, we have had these people in custody or in the system in one form or another, but failed to act.

    Until you fix these loopholes, banning Bushmasters will be as ineffective this time, as the first time around.


  • #1145
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    Heckler wrote: »
    Like I said limited experience but thanks for the clarification. I figured i was in the ballpark anyway with what I said re ammunition limits. I have a vague knowledge of what you said and what it entails but I figure it must be a million miles away from what someone who doesn't shoot can get their head around.
    Pretty much. That's the problem - some aspects of the sport are pretty esoteric and unknown to the general public (because they're not interested, rather than because it's hidden away - hell it's been on here in detail for years).
    Then people start talking about laws and before you know it, you've got an unholy mess on your hands. The last time, it ate six years of my life, and that's just Irish law, where everyone is used to extensive regulation and the disputes are all over minor differences. In the US... well, this is why they pay people to work on this stuff full-time with staff over there.


  • #1146
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    If drink was a cause of mass-murders in Ireland i would welcome draconian US laws here.
    ONE in three deaths on Irish roads are alcohol related compared to an average of one in four throughout the European Union.
    A major EU report on road safety, published yesterday, also suggests that Irish drivers believe drink-driving laws are much more effective than they actually are.

    Just under two thirds of Irish drivers questioned said that they believed alcohol was a major threat to road safety, as compared to 80% in the rest of the EU.
    To be honest, if there was a solution that didn't involve gun control of any form, i'm all for that too.

    Fact is, there is no single problem that needs fixing. It's a multi-faceted problem and guns are part of that problem. That's an opinion - and you disagree - that's fine.

    We are close to agreeing I'll say that.
    It actually staggers me that US laws to gun licensing and other products is so much more stringent than to guns. You can't buy a Kinder Egg legally but can buy a Bushmaster .223...... look i'm exhausted trying to rationalise with the gun lobby in here. I just want less of these mass-murders and i'm sure you all agree with me on that. Good luck, i'm out.

    Christ, I'm sick of hearing about Kinder eggs like they are some kind of talisman of rationality. Who the **** thought it a good idea to put a choking hazard inside chocolate! Have a reading of the warning inside of Kinder Egg sometime. If it comes down to the legality of kinder eggs we have jumped the shark. Goodnight.


  • Advertisement
  • #1147
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    My proposals are all off the top of my head. What's needed is a bi-partisan inclusive process, where Dems and Republicans sit down, bash heads, consult the public, consult the schools etc and come up with a range of proposals to try stop the frequency with which these events are occuring.

    Amen to that.


  • #1148
    yammycat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 445 ✭✭yammycat


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    What's needed is a bi-partisan inclusive processive, where Dems and Republicans sit down, bash heads, consult the public, consult the schools etc and come up with a range of proposals to try stop the frequency with which these events are occuring.

    yea, sure thing, these massacres are about guns

    In America today you can become famous 2 ways

    1. damn hard graft, study hard through school, college, get your degree and make a mark, maybe as a kick ass doctor or maybe as a programmer or an engineer or anything that requires hard work and effort

    2. shoot some kids in the face and the media will make you famous 4ever, blanket coverage 24/7 endless endless coverage, your name will live on in infamy through the ages ERIC HARRIS DYLON KLEBOLD, yea we shot some ppl in da face we famous now

    Just shoot some kids in the face and you be da man, you be famous

    There are so many lost lonely ****ed up kids watching this 24/7 coverage and thinking hell yea this is how i can be someone this is how i can make a mark

    Talking about assault rifle bans like it will make a difference when the biggest school massacre was perpetrated by Cho with a couple of handguns.

    Gun control will not end school massacres, media control will, the filth selling advertisements on the backs of dead kids.

    They may well ban assault rifles after this but it wont matter a damn, if they really cared they would ban or put 500 million dollar tax on any report of a massacre bar some random scrub shot x number of ppl / story no repeat


  • #1149
    FISMA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,616 ✭✭✭FISMA


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    If drink was a cause of mass-murders in Ireland i would welcome draconian US laws here.

    What about drugs?

    About every 19 minutes an American dies from a prescription drug overdose.

    In 2007, that amounted to about 27,000 a year. Source.

    In 2009 more than half of gun deaths were suicide 55.6% (17,352). I wonder how many of these people were depressed or otherwise mentally compromised?

    Every mass shooter in the last 20 years was known to be a psychopath or psychotic. I believe all of them were on medication.

    Drugs in the states is killing more people than homicides.

    But drug companies buy a lot more air time on CNN than gun companies do, correct?

    Time to go after the drug companies.


  • #1150
    Heckler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,368 ✭✭✭Heckler


    Sparks wrote: »
    Pretty much. That's the problem - some aspects of the sport are pretty esoteric and unknown to the general public (because they're not interested, rather than because it's hidden away - hell it's been on here in detail for years).
    Then people start talking about laws and before you know it, you've got an unholy mess on your hands. The last time, it ate six years of my life, and that's just Irish law, where everyone is used to extensive regulation and the disputes are all over minor differences. In the US... well, this is why they pay people to work on this stuff full-time with staff over there.

    Esoteric, thats the word I was striving for. I don't know who you are in real life but i know many hardworking people like you (in the Fermoy Rifle Club in Cork) trying to make target shooting and in general safe recreational shooting an acceptable and safe pastime. Keep up the good work.


  • #1151
    Piliger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    yammycat wrote: »
    been there done that, texas my friend, you should visit

    Especially using the Gun Show loophole .......


  • Advertisement
  • #1152
    bajer100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 93 ✭✭bajer100


    Sparks wrote: »
    You know that it's already been pointed out that some did, right?

    Some, some, some - but not all! FFS! So lots of lives could be saved. But you don't care. 20 children get killed - you don't care. It's all just meaningless to you.

    Anyway - I don't really care. You're insane mentality will never infect my country and your belief's will be trounced by intelligent people.


  • #1153
    bajer100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 93 ✭✭bajer100


    MadsL wrote: »
    We are close to agreeing I'll say that.



    Christ, I'm sick of hearing about Kinder eggs like they are some kind of talisman of rationality. Who the **** thought it a good idea to put a choking hazard inside chocolate! Have a reading of the warning inside of Kinder Egg sometime. If it comes down to the legality of kinder eggs we have jumped the shark. Goodnight.

    You are full of nonsense and cannot back up any of your claims with peer reviewed science. You just want to selfishly own guns.


  • #1154
    bajer100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 93 ✭✭bajer100


    MadsL wrote: »
    In the other thread the poll is running just 60/40 against more liberal gun laws in Ireland.

    The 'gun-nuts' here are simply explaining that the US is not the 'free-for-all' that most posters think it is, and that the controls that they are suggesting actaully exist, for the most part, in the US and that other controls are unworkable.

    That and the small matter of the US Constitution. Hell, we even have a few hippies like myself and Wibbs who see that this vague "gun control" is not the panacea you are looking for.

    The usual line trotted out is that, you are generally 2.5 more likely to be shot in the US than in Ireland. Most people explain this as because of those gun-nut Americans and all their guns. However there are 88 guns per 100 people in the US and 8.6 per 100 in Ireland. If the numbers of guns were a direct factor in the number of gun deaths, then you would expect, proportionately speaking that you would be 10 times more likely to be shot in the US not merely over twice as likely. Clearly some limiting factor is at play. Could it be that owning more guns limits the number of shootings? Shock horror, surely not.

    This could be taken to mean Ireland is a more dangerous place than the US for gun crime. ;)

    You are full of nonsense and cannot back up any of your claims with peer reviewed science. You just want to selfishly own guns.


  • #1155
    bajer100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 93 ✭✭bajer100


    hedzball wrote: »
    WL just from a curious point of view not taking any calibre into account..

    How much do you reckon a limit on ammo would you put down..

    Say a shotgun and rifle for sake..





    'hdz

    You are full of nonsense and cannot back up any of your claims with peer reviewed science. You just want to selfishly own guns.


  • #1156
    bajer100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 93 ✭✭bajer100


    Sparks wrote: »
    Amen to that.


    You are full of nonsense and cannot back up any of your claims with peer reviewed science. You just want to selfishly own guns.


  • #1157
    yammycat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 445 ✭✭yammycat


    bajer100 wrote: »
    You are full of nonsense and cannot back up any of your claims with peer reviewed science. You just want to selfishly own guns.

    derp, peer reviewed science, statistics are statistics, perhaps you should consult a dictionary


  • #1158
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    bajer100 wrote: »
    You're insane mentality will never infect my country and your belief's will be trounced by intelligent people.
    Your, not you're; and beliefs, not belief's.


  • #1159
    MadsL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    bajer100 wrote: »
    Anyway - I don't really care. You're insane mentality will never infect my country and your belief's will be trounced by intelligent people.

    3,529 people families would differ as to sanity. But shhh. Don't mention the war.


  • #1160
    bajer100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 93 ✭✭bajer100


    MadsL wrote: »
    3,529 people families would differ as to sanity. But shhh. Don't mention the war.
    no

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these weapons were not available - less people would die. It really is this simple. Less weapons - less deaths.

    If you think I am wrong - put your money were your mouth is and pay me money if you are right.


  • #1161
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    bajer100 wrote: »
    If you think I am wrong - put your money were your mouth is and pay me money if you are right.
    Finally, the underwear gnomes' business plan is revealed!


  • Advertisement
  • #1162
    yammycat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 445 ✭✭yammycat


    bajer100 wrote: »
    no

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these weapons were not available - less people would die. It really is this simple. Less weapons - less deaths.

    If you think I am wrong - put your money were your mouth is and pay me money if you are right.

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these cars were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these knives were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these bicycles were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these drinks were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these foods were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these toys were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these pets were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these ice skates were not available - less people would die

    etc etc

    herp de derp

    hurr durr


  • #1163
    bajer100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 93 ✭✭bajer100


    Sparks wrote: »
    Finally, the underwear gnomes' business plan is revealed!

    Hey Sparks -I was just asking for people to bring on further evidence. What's your problem?


  • #1164
    FISMA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,616 ✭✭✭FISMA


    bajer100 wrote: »
    You are full of nonsense and cannot back up any of your claims with peer reviewed science. You just want to selfishly own guns.

    That's a real academic decathalon you got there bajer!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtNHuqHWefU


  • #1165
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    yammycat wrote: »

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these cars were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these knives were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these bicycles were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these drinks were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these foods were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these toys were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these pets were not available - less people would die

    I have no idea what you are talking about. The simple fact is - if these ice skates were not available - less people would die

    etc etc

    herp de derp

    hurr durr

    All those things have a purpose other than killing. Guns do not.


  • #1166
    bajer100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 93 ✭✭bajer100


    Sparks wrote: »
    Finally, the underwear gnomes' business plan is revealed!

    Can you explain this?


  • #1167
    FISMA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,616 ✭✭✭FISMA


    bajer100 wrote: »
    Can you explain this?

    It means you should go to sleep before your throw-away account gets banned.


  • #1168
    yammycat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 445 ✭✭yammycat


    MagicSean wrote: »
    All those things have a purpose other than killing. Guns do not.

    OH KAY, so you didn't notice dem big bad guns in dose olympics no, nobody died and ppl got dem gold medals ? you didnt C , someone should tell dose holympic games guns be 4 killin folks and dey sudnt b givin medals out 4 skillz wid dem nig bad guns


  • #1169
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    bajer100 wrote: »
    Hey Sparks -I was just asking for people to bring on further evidence. What's your problem?
    Son, I've got 99 problems, but you're not one of them. Right now, you're a source of amusement - if vulgar and obscene amusement. But suggesting that you were merely asking for more evidence as though you were being rational and objective is pretty rich, given that we're past 1100 posts, many of which had cited sources, or listed off that evidence, or explained the positions taken by the posters.


  • #1170
    Sparks
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    MagicSean wrote: »
    All those things have a purpose other than killing. Guns do not.
    /sigh.
    Mine do.
    And since mine do, the black and white absolute statement that guns are only designed to kill is incorrect, and now we're back to a complex problem that requires more than just a simple soundbite-optimised approach.

    Y'know, I seem to recall saying that already in this thread...


  • Advertisement
  • #1171
    bajer100
    Closed Accounts Posts: 93 ✭✭bajer100


    Sparks wrote: »
    Son, I've got 99 problems, but you're not one of them. Right now, you're a source of amusement - if vulgar and obscene amusement. But suggesting that you were merely asking for more evidence as though you were being rational and objective is pretty rich, given that we're past 1100 posts, many of which had cited sources, or listed off that evidence, or explained the positions taken by the posters.


    Wtf are you talking about you clown? You are calling me "son" - I am 44 years old with an IQ of 147. I have solved the Rubik's cube quicker than you could ever solve even one side. If you want to challenge me on this - no problem.


Advertisement