Americans and their guns

[GB]

With all the trouble guns bring their country...why? Just why?

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/en...prints-next-month_uk_5b507163e4b0de86f48a323c

Starting next month, US citizens will be legally allowed to find the blueprints for a gun online, download them onto a 3D-printer and then create that firearm from scratch.

These often plastic-based weapons are not registered which can make them virtually untraceable, often resulting in them being called ‘ghost guns’.

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't agree with guns - and America has a very unhealthy relationship with them - but if ever I moved to the States, I would certainly buy one, or possibly two.

 

[gordonthemoron]

only cowards need guns

 

[AlterEgo]

only cowards need guns

No they don’t Gordon, and that is a very silly thing to say.

 

[elstreepilot]

Perhaps surprisingly, only about 30% of Americans own any gun at all. However, those that do may own quite a few.....

 

[Simon11]

Ive been living in the US for 10 months and there are quite a few strange things about this country. Gun policy in the US is just so strange and bizarre! You get used to seeing stickers banning guns from stores.

I went to Nevada and went on a gun range. Rather shocking of the power in just a basic gun!

 

[hooverboy]

you do realise it is obligatory to take your offspring for shooting practice with a bow and arrow every sunday for an hour in this country,don't you?

you might think the yanks have strange laws,but they are actually borrowed from us in the first place.And the laws were put there for a reason.

our reason at the time was coming off the back end of the protestant reformation,where most of europe was under the iron grip of the inquisition,and the pope was mustering forces in france and ireland ready for an invasion of england,which was discovered and foiled.

the yanks,I suppose likewise,when the latins were coming up from the south,and mad george had rather stupidly wanted to rule by divine right and have them pay tribute..to which the yanks,(rightly) gave him the finger and said no taxation without representation, which he did not take kindly to.

the whole purpose of the right to keep and bear arms is to ward off oppressive government,not for hunting.

 

[hooverboy]

I don't agree with guns - and America has a very unhealthy relationship with them - but if ever I moved to the States, I would certainly buy one, or possibly two.

I think perhaps you need to travel a bit.

I can think of a few countries where they don't particularly like them, but have them,and are trained to use them in a SHTF scenario.

 

[deltic1989]

you do realise it is obligatory to take your offspring for shooting practice with a bow and arrow every sunday for an hour in this country,don't you?

Yes however the majority of the British population have the common sense to see that this is an archaic piece of legislation that has no relevance in the modern day (In the same way as the one about shooting a Scotsman in York, as much fun as that sport may be ).

the whole purpose of the right to keep and bear arms is to ward off oppressive government,not for hunting.

That may have been the original purpose, but in the modern day it would be nigh on impossible for Bubba and his mates to "Rise up against the man" (Imagine that in a Southern US accent). The second amendment is just used as an excuse for J.R. to keep a hand cannon under his pillow, presumably to make up for disadvantages in the trouser region.

 

[Bevan Price]

the whole purpose of the right to keep and bear arms is to ward off oppressive government,not for hunting.

That is what they want us to believe, but the real reason is that the arms industry wants to ensure that it can sell $$$$$$ worth of guns &ammunition each year, And US politicians will never vote to curb arms because their campaign funds get large contributions from the arms industry.

 

[Lucan]

mad george had rather stupidly wanted to rule by divine right and have them pay tribute..to which the yanks,(rightly) gave him the finger and said no taxation without representation, which he did not take kindly to

Mad King George had nothing to do with it in reality. He did not have the power to make any decisions that affected the Americans, and no-one took any notice of whether or not he thought he had any divine rights anyway.

It was American Independence propaganda that portrayed him as a tyrant. Propaganda generally requires a bogey-man, and the "German" King George could be associated with the intensly disliked mercenary Hessian troops that were used by Britain during the War of Independence. Britain's last tyrant king was Henry VIII. More significant was the madness of the British government in not granting the Americans the representation they wanted, which would have defused the whole situation.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

While Huffington Post arguably has it's own liberal bias (in the American sense), I wouldn't be surprised if this happened at all. In truth though with the OP, guns aren't what bring trouble to the United States, because in Switzerland, there is a similar rate of gun ownership in proportion to the population (I believe one in two people own a rifle), and their crime is very low. The problem is that the American laws are so lax and inconsistent that it's easy for all the problems to happen. Chicago might have the tightest gun control laws in the US, but since you can just buy one in another state you don't even need a black market for all the crime that happens there. It's no coincidence that I use Switzerland as an example of good laws either because the Second Amendment, as far as I know, was based off the Swiss militia system.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed

It usually varies in words from what I've seen unless I just remember it differently, but the keywords are "well regulated". Does being able to just walk into a store and buy an semi-automatic assault rifle sound like laws that are well regulated? Nah, thought not, so if you can actually do what's quoted in the article it's just another mad turn in the direction the US is going in at the moment. What's funny though is the people who like to go on about second amendment rights can sometimes be those who also blame video games for gun violence. I guess a first amendment right violation is okay so long as it fits the agenda. I am not against the constitution in the case of gun ownership, since it helps to have something to fight oppressive tyrant governments (and people who deny this possibility will sometimes claim Trump is literally Hitler), but it's really just a whole mad fest.

 

[hooverboy]

That is what they want us to believe, but the real reason is that the arms industry wants to ensure that it can sell $$$$$$ worth of guns &ammunition each year, And US politicians will never vote to curb arms because their campaign funds get large contributions from the arms industry.

not true.
the americans understood(and mostly fled from) people/institutions who had an extremely blinkered view of the world,and who thought that anybody who disagreed with their worldview was heretic and should be exterminated.

now do we have such people in the modern world?..a cursory glance around you should affirm.
and it's not just mad mullahs. it's also recent soviet history too, just substitute the word "heretic" for "mentally ill"

and take a look at present politics,there is also a religeous zealotry about "progressivism",and the concept of big government micromanagement,just as much as there is the gun totin rednecks.Applies just as much in this country as over the pond.
...nobody is going to budge or comprimise.it will turn into a fight.

fact is in this country,and in the US, we find big government threatening and overbearing, whereas in most of europe ,top down diktat has been the default position more often than not.

 

[AlterEgo]

I think perhaps you need to travel a bit.

I can think of a few countries where they don't particularly like them, but have them,and are trained to use them in a SHTF scenario.

Hahahahaha. I need to “travel a bit”? That’s a good one. Have a look at the link in my signature.

I don’t really know what point you’re trying to make. I’d certainly purchase a gun if I lived in the USA simply because of the vast number of people and criminals who have guns. Not because I “agree” with guns or American gun culture.

 

[trash80]

I don’t really know what point you’re trying to make. I’d certainly purchase a gun if I lived in the USA simply because of the vast number of people and criminals who have guns. Not because I “agree” with guns or American gun culture.

Depends where you are in the US whether guns are that visible or not. My friend moved over to the US over 20 years ago and now has a successful business on the Illinois/Iowa border. Now he is a bit of a military nut but he has never owned a gun in the US or wants one. He's told me that its rare to see any at all where he is in the US apart from on law enforcement. Once he saw a woman in a shop with a holster but it was sufficiently novel that everyone (locals he meant) stared in bemusement.

 

[InterCity:125]

I don't agree with guns

Every Swiss citizen between 18 and 50 years of age has to own a gun because he is a reserve soldier in the Swiss armed forces, yet you don’t see gun crime in Switzerland much.

 

[AlterEgo]

Depends where you are in the US whether guns are that visible or not. My friend moved over to the US over 20 years ago and now has a successful business on the Illinois/Iowa border. Now he is a bit of a military nut but he has never owned a gun in the US or wants one. He's told me that its rare to see any at all where he is in the US apart from on law enforcement. Once he saw a woman in a shop with a holster but it was sufficiently novel that everyone (locals he meant) stared in bemusement.

Gun ownership varies wildly by geography of course but if I ever lived anywhere in the States I’d still own one and train in its use.

 

[whhistle]

Every Swiss citizen between 18 and 50 years of age has to own a gun because he is a reserve soldier in the Swiss armed forces, yet you don’t see gun crime in Switzerland much.

That's because their culture has realised what the guns are for.
America is coming from cowboys and indians, where crazy yahoo shoots off because he can.

I never understood why gun ownership/use is accepted... many school kids are murdered, so I see America as putting owning guns above kids lives.

I understand the consitiution (which could be changed surely?) means Americans have the "right to bear arms" <-- whatever that really means.
As a side note, does that mean that an American has the right to stab another American in the eye ball with a stick? And there's no comeback?

But lets say that's okay:
So a burgler comes into your house, unarmed. You have a gun. What are you going to do? Shoot them? So it's legal to shoot a trespasser, whether you kill them or not? And lets say you did kill them... that's okay?

If not, then surely owning a gun is pointless as it'll be illegal to use it against a person. Again, I understand shooting as a sport (even if I dont particularly agree with it), but I don't see javelin throwers carrying a javelin around with them all the time.

 

[AlterEgo]

So a burgler comes into your house, unarmed. You have a gun. What are you going to do? Shoot them? So it's legal to shoot a trespasser, whether you kill them or not? And lets say you did kill them... that's okay?

It depends on whose law you are talking about but it is certainly permissible to use lethal force in this country, including from a legally held firearm, in a situation where you may reasonably be in fear for your life.

In a situation where I, a 5 foot 8 averagely built man was confronted with an enormous, aggressive, 6 foot 6 intruder who had broke into my house, and who was advancing towards me, I would shoot him and expect the law to find me innocent of murder.

(I don’t own any guns btw, I don’t see the need in this country)

 

[Bromley boy]

Gun ownership varies wildly by geography of course but if I ever lived anywhere in the States I’d still own one and train in its use.

Out of interest, why?

When this subject was discussed on here before there were statistics produced showing that, especially in the states, owning a gun actually makes you less safe: it is more likely to end killing you or a loved one than an intruder.

 

[Aictos]

For these wanting stronger gun control laws, note that the proposed laws won't make the slightest difference to these they're aimed at ie the criminal faction.

Your average criminal isn't going to give two hoots if their firearm is licensed or not and I believe the 2nd Amendment is rightly there for law abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves and their property from attack.

Yes it's awful about the various shootings in the US but you can't tar the entire gun owning community with the actions of the few mentally disturbed minority and I say that because no sane person would feel the need to walk into a public building and start shooting.

Americans have the right by law to hold arms and I believe it's a right that should not change period!

 

[AlterEgo]

Out of interest, why?

When this subject was discussed on here before there were statistics produced showing that, especially in the states, owning a gun actually makes you less safe: it is more likely to end killing you or a loved one than an intruder.

This is partly because some of those studies factor gunshot suicides into the equation. But even so, just because something is a general trend doesn’t mean to say that if I as an individual were to own a gun I would be less safe.

 

[nlogax]

In all the years I lived there I never once fired, carried or craved to own a gun. I never understood the need then and I still don't understand the need now.

 

[J-2739]

Fancy making your own gun?

As long as people use them responsibly, then I see no problem. I'm sure school shooters and the likes only take up a small percentage of gun users.

 

[najaB]

As long as people use them responsibly, then I see no problem. I'm sure school shooters and the likes only take up a small percentage of gun users.

This is exactly the point - while gun ownership is excessively high, the problem is gun usage. The USA has a 'shoot first' culture that isn't present in other countries.

 

[Warwick]

That is what they want us to believe, but the real reason is that the arms industry wants to ensure that it can sell $$$$$$ worth of guns &ammunition each year, And US politicians will never vote to curb arms because their campaign funds get large contributions from the arms industry.

This man speaks the truth.

 

[Bromley boy]

This is partly because some of those studies factor gunshot suicides into the equation.

True.

But even so, just because something is a general trend doesn’t mean to say that if I as an individual were to own a gun I would be less safe.

But, looking at it another way, would it make you any safer? I’m not sure the evidence supports that - although I get that it’s not just about statistics.

Living in the states there would be a strong feeling of “if anyone breaks in they’re likely to be armed, so I need to arm myself.”

Personally I’m just very grateful we live in a country without widespread access to firearms: although of course the problem in the US isn’t just availability of guns - Canada and Switzerland both have high gun ownership levels and nothing like the rates of gun death seen in the US.

 

[najaB]

Canada and Switzerland both have high gun ownership levels and nothing like the rates of gun death seen in the US.

Because neither county has (a) the unhealthy 'cowboy culture'; not (b) anything like the same level of social/racial divisiveness as the USA.

 

[Lucan]

the proposed laws won't make the slightest difference to these they're aimed at ie the criminal faction. Your average criminal isn't going to give two hoots if their firearm is licensed or not

I use several USA-oriented forums, and that is an argument that the gun-nuts (and others) often use. But taking that to absudity, there is no point in any law then? - because criminals (by definition) do not obey laws. The fact is that with so many guns around in the USA, being legally obtainable with few or no checks, criminals can easily obtain them.

OTOH, the vast majority of law-breakers in the UK are not gang members and would not know where to begin to obtain a gun. If I felt like going out to murder someone right now (I admit I have felt like that once or twice in my life), I do not know where I would find a gun, and the use of a knife/poison/club requires a much higher level of ire and a greater risk of the plan failing (the victim might overpower the attacker). Guns are rarely used in UK crime, even in organised crime and despite criminals' unconcern with gun licensing, because the criminals know that the mere sight of a gun would bring every policeman within 20 miles or more rushing to the scene as a priority over everything else, and they would get the book thrown at them once in court too.

As long as people use them responsibly, then I see no problem. I'm sure school shooters and the likes only take up a small percentage of gun users.

So that's OK then. Maybe you are attempting some black irony - so am I.

 

[Giugiaro]

I was trying to get the video where they tested if armed students could respond to a live shooter entering a school.
If I remember, the students and teachers failed to act against the mass shooter, because of how panic made it very difficult to handle guns and aim properly, specially in front of a shooter wilding a semi-automatic.
This also taking into consideration that students and teachers would be actively carrying guns with them at all time. If that doesn't sound like a very bad idea...