A terrible epidemic
-
Because it should cover how they are kept, as well as condition. Weed out the morons who keep them in the wardrobe where the recently-dumped-teenage-son can get at 'em.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
OriginalGriff wrote:
Because it should cover how they are kept
I specifically didn't include how they are kept, just 'inspection and testing'. So how is testing going to make them less dangerous? But what is the point of keeping a hand gun, owned for self defence, in a locked cabinet?
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
Because it should cover how they are kept
I specifically didn't include how they are kept, just 'inspection and testing'. So how is testing going to make them less dangerous? But what is the point of keeping a hand gun, owned for self defence, in a locked cabinet?
I'm not trying to justify keeping or banning guns at all: I'm just responding to your comparison of cars and guns as tools and the death rates. It seems illogical to restrict access to a tool that is dangerous and designed to get from A to B but not a tool that is dangerous and designed to kill or badly injure, is all.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
I'm not trying to justify keeping or banning guns at all: I'm just responding to your comparison of cars and guns as tools and the death rates. It seems illogical to restrict access to a tool that is dangerous and designed to get from A to B but not a tool that is dangerous and designed to kill or badly injure, is all.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
OriginalGriff wrote:
to restrict access to a tool that is dangerous and designed to get from A to B
But despite those restrictions cars are still driven badly and result in far more deaths than caused by guns, so no, it isn't a valid argument you have.
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
to restrict access to a tool that is dangerous and designed to get from A to B
But despite those restrictions cars are still driven badly and result in far more deaths than caused by guns, so no, it isn't a valid argument you have.
Then I apologise profusely, and will bow out of this discussion.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
the car is a useful tool.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
a rifle is a useful tool
Yes, cars are a tool. And because cars are very dangerous in the hands of idiots, drunks, the drugged out, the untrained, and the proven-too-stupid-to-allow-to-drive-anymore every country in the world requires you be tested, licensed (and generally insured), and that the car is kept and maintained to a specified standard. There are people who should not be allowed near the keys to a car! And guns, now ... Just sayin'.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Don't forget that the cars has to be registered as well.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
Then I apologise profusely, and will bow out of this discussion.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
There is no need to take it so harshly Griff. You raised an often raised solution, licensing, but it wont work because you can't control the emotive response, intelligence, awareness of people on a minute by minute basis through a license. A bit like a car MOT, it only validates the car at the time of testing, yet is valid for a year. So how do you stop people using 'tools' badly? I don't know.
-
Don't forget that the cars has to be registered as well.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
And yet cars kill many more people than guns.
-
There is no need to take it so harshly Griff. You raised an often raised solution, licensing, but it wont work because you can't control the emotive response, intelligence, awareness of people on a minute by minute basis through a license. A bit like a car MOT, it only validates the car at the time of testing, yet is valid for a year. So how do you stop people using 'tools' badly? I don't know.
I'm not taking it harshly - or I didn't mean to imply I had - I'm just bowing out as gracefully as I can before this descends into the Religion of Gun Ownership that it normally does on t'interwebs! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
I'm not taking it harshly - or I didn't mean to imply I had - I'm just bowing out as gracefully as I can before this descends into the Religion of Gun Ownership that it normally does on t'interwebs! :laugh:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Put an alcohol breathalyser on guns?
-
50 k a year die in car crashes, but the car is a useful tool. If you have been to the US you would realise a rifle is a useful tool too. I met a girl in Coloma, in the sierra nevada mountains, working in a cafe. She was about 28, small of build, half indian half irish. She had had to shoot two bears because they were endangering her property. She had skinned and butchered them for food. In the US a rifle is a useful tool.
Yes, we already know how special the USA is; it's not like a Russian would meet a bear in the woods, or hyana's near your village in Africa. And then the idea that other countries "don't understand" how special the USA is - remarkably :) I'm not going to the States until I have at least a tank and two atomic bombs. For self-defense purposes ofcourse.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
And yet cars kill many more people than guns.
So, the fact that cars cause more deaths (and suger probably too) means that it is suddenly acceptable to buy a weapon meant to kill people? How about opening the market for morphine/heroin? It doesn't kill as many people as cars do, after all :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
-
So, the fact that cars cause more deaths (and suger probably too) means that it is suddenly acceptable to buy a weapon meant to kill people? How about opening the market for morphine/heroin? It doesn't kill as many people as cars do, after all :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
I see Kindergarden has kicked out.
-
Yes, we already know how special the USA is; it's not like a Russian would meet a bear in the woods, or hyana's near your village in Africa. And then the idea that other countries "don't understand" how special the USA is - remarkably :) I'm not going to the States until I have at least a tank and two atomic bombs. For self-defense purposes ofcourse.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^][](X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett)
I am sure that in equally rough countries guns are also a useful tool, as you say. So your point was?
-
I am sure that in equally rough countries guns are also a useful tool, as you say. So your point was?
-
I see Kindergarden has kicked out.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
the car is a useful tool.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
a rifle is a useful tool
Yes, cars are a tool. And because cars are very dangerous in the hands of idiots, drunks, the drugged out, the untrained, and the proven-too-stupid-to-allow-to-drive-anymore every country in the world requires you be tested, licensed (and generally insured), and that the car is kept and maintained to a specified standard. There are people who should not be allowed near the keys to a car! And guns, now ... Just sayin'.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
I would like to see drivers re-licensed every 5 years. I would certainly be prepared to pay for it as it would also assure me that my driving is still of a good standard. But more to the point it would deter some of the morons out there from developing the dangerously bad driving habits they seem to nurture. Plus it would be good income for the government.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
What do you suggest to solve the US problem with massacres? An MOT for rifles?
Munchies_Matt wrote:
What do you suggest to solve the US problem with massacres?
The death sentence. At the end of a very short trial.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
Munchies_Matt wrote:
What do you suggest to solve the US problem with massacres?
The death sentence. At the end of a very short trial.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013How about a more 'proactive' approach? HOw do you stop the massacre before it happens?
-
Licensing for people? Inspection and testing of weapons and how they are stored? Compulsory training and testing? Restrictions on what you can use immediately, just like most countries restrict car drivers either by licence conditions or by cost of insurance? At the moment, it's "you want it, you got the money? You got it." And that means that people who shouldn't be allowed within 100 yards of a knife and fork can buy a semi automatic and a bump stock and go hog-wild. Why is it considered normal that you check into a hotel with 20-odd weapons and nobody goes "hang on a moment"? Yes, a gun is a tool: but tools can be dangerous unless they are in the hands of trained people.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
OriginalGriff wrote:
icensing for people? Inspection and testing of weapons and how they are stored? Compulsory training and testing? Restrictions on what you can use immediately, just like most countries restrict car drivers either by licence conditions or by cost of insurance?
Unfortunately none of this would help because, generally speaking, it is criminals that do most of the killing and they'll get guns illegally.
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data. There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
At the moment, it's "you want it, you got the money? You got it."
No, some states require a license, some states require you to wait before you get the gun by registration. In others assault rifles are banned. It varies a lot. I am not defending the US's approach to guns, but I am pointing out the simplistic hysteria adopted by some non Americans about weapons is just that, and is due in large part because they don't live in countries where weapons are useful (for many reasons). However Europe isn't the gun free place many think it is, each Swiss male is part of the militia, and has an assault rifle and ammunition in his house (this is a generalisation of course). Austrian gun laws are very relaxed, anyone over 18 can buy a rifle or shotgun without a license. But why would inspection and testing reduce gun violence? Surely making sure it worked is counter productive. :)
Munchies_Matt wrote:
In others assault rifles are banned.
there is no such thing as an "assault rifle".
Munchies_Matt wrote:
But why would inspection and testing reduce gun violence?
It won't.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
