Society/Culture Gun's

[acker]

Just came back from Luke & Sam Willis's funeral in Newcastle

How did the person who murdered these 2 brothers ever get hold of a .38 calibre revolver.

What is wrong with gun control in our society

 

[Brad Roo]

Back before there was gun control, there was no gun control.

It was only 20 years ago that you could buy a machine gun OTC in Tasmania.

I'd guess that there would be more unregistered guns than registered guns in Australia.

BTW, don't blame the gun, blame the moron that uses it.

 

[Fire]

BTW, don't blame the gun, blame the moron that uses it.

I blame both.

They worked in partnership.

 

[BarneyBent]

Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people. No guns, no people with guns.

 

[Brad Roo]

Typical naive comment.

I distrust the average politician far more than the average gun owner.

Domestic gun ownership is the ultimate form of democracy.

 

[Fire]

Typical naive comment.

I distrust the average politician far more than the average gun owner.

Domestic gun ownership is the ultimate form of democracy.

I would rather a more moderate form of democracy then thankyou.

Perhaps extremes are bad. There's a novel thought.

 

[Brad Roo]

I would rather a more moderate form of democracy then thankyou.

Boy, and haven't you received what you wished for?

Perhaps extremes are bad. There's a novel thought.

There's nothing "extreme" about gun ownership.

That is 100% PC wankage.

 

[Upgrayedd]

A man who really wants a gun is going to get one, unless you restrict gun ownership to police, however then the farmers have legit reasons to own a gun, then handgun/rifel clubs.

Cant stop the real loons owning the guns, you never will with how freely avalable they are around the world, best thing you can do is deter most psychos with strict gun controls (we do have some strict controls, however when it was only played in about 20 years ago people are still going to own some unlicenced guns)

 

[CAS79]

Back before there was gun control, there was no gun control.

It was only 20 years ago that you could buy a machine gun OTC in Tasmania.

I'd guess that there would be more unregistered guns than registered guns in Australia.

BTW, don't blame the gun, blame the moron that uses it.

That's the argument used in the US and Brazil yet the murder rates in these countries are amongst the highest in the world.

The number of nutters does not change much between countries I'm sure yet the easy access to weapons means that when these people snap they have easy access to a weapon that ensures they can kill multiple people quickly.

This is not to totally degenerate gun owners but a properly regulated gun control system is a must.

 

[Helicopter Punt]

That's the argument used in the US and Brazil yet the murder rates in these countries are amongst the highest in the world.

The number of nutters does not change much between countries I'm sure yet the easy access to weapons means that when these people snap they have easy access to a weapon that ensures they can kill multiple people quickly.

This is not to totally degenerate gun owners but a properly regulated gun control system is a must.

The problem is most of the nutters keep their guns - ie. OP - and the law abiding citizens obey and hand theirs in. If I was going to make a 'living' by robbing people, home invasions etc. I would thank Howard - it's so much safer to do so now.
Switzerland would be an interesting counterpoint to your argument re Brazil & US.

Perhaps the key here is 'nutters' rather than guns.

 

[CAS79]

The problem is most of the nutters keep their guns - ie. OP - and the law abiding citizens obey and hand theirs in. If I was going to make a 'living' by robbing people, home invasions etc. I would thank Howard - it's so much safer to do so now.
Switzerland would be an interesting counterpoint to your argument re Brazil & US.

Perhaps the key here is 'nutters' rather than guns.

Im prepared to listen to argument. But I need to do better than hear because he's got a gun I need a gun argument, that is the line of the nutter to me. Though for gun control to be successful needs to be police not just motherhood statements either.

Though to be prepared to listen to argument what is the rate of gun ownership in Switzerland and what sort of guns do they have?

 

[omit]

Typical naive comment.

I distrust the average politician far more than the average gun owner.

Domestic gun ownership is the ultimate form of democracy.

Democracy (noun): A government by the people; especially; rule of the majority

explain to me again which part of gun ownership is democratic

 

[Brad Roo]

That's the argument used in the US and Brazil yet the murder rates in these countries are amongst the highest in the world.

The number of nutters does not change much between countries I'm sure yet the easy access to weapons means that when these people snap they have easy access to a weapon that ensures they can kill multiple people quickly.

Do you think it's possible that the U.S. have the highest number of unregistered guns in the world?

As for Brazil, you can lay blame squarely at the feet of "democratically" elected politicians for that basket case.

This is not to totally degenerate gun owners but a properly regulated gun control system is a must.

The current rules show murder by firearm figures have plummeted by 60% over the last decade whilst the population adjusted figure for legal gun ownership has remained fairly constant.

Lawful gun ownership is not the problem.

As for unlawful weapons, attempting to abolish them is as futile as attempting to abolish drug importations.

 

[Brad Roo]

explain to me again which part of gun ownership is democratic

An armed populace is a democratic populace.

 

[Brad Roo]

The problem is most of the nutters keep their guns - ie. OP - and the law abiding citizens obey and hand theirs in. If I was going to make a 'living' by robbing people, home invasions etc. I would thank Howard - it's so much safer to do so now.
Switzerland would be an interesting counterpoint to your argument re Brazil & US.

Perhaps the key here is 'nutters' rather than guns.

I know of one person that took in some bits and pieces from different types of pistols which included a spring from an old washing machine and then handed this assembly of odds and ends in during a gun amnesty.

He was paid $800 by the government for this mish mash of bits and pieces.

He went straight out and bought a brand new shotgun with his amnesty payment.

 

[CAS79]

An armed populace is a democratic populace.

It's true people, in Somalia decisions are made by the people with the most number and biggest guns, not votes. Fair system if you think about it.

 

[patsmith]

Just came back from Luke & Sam Willis's funeral in Newcastle

How did the person who murdered these 2 brothers ever get hold of a .38 calibre revolver.

What is wrong with gun control in our society

As sad as it is that these two blokes have been killed, you do understand that Australia has the best gun control in the world? An isolated incident shouldn't overshadow that.

As others have said, someone who wants a gun can usually find one (legally or otherwise).

 

[BarneyBent]

Banning guns isn't going to reduce organised crime, thought out murders, etc. As people have said, if a person wants a gun, they will be able to find one, legally or illegally. What it can/will stop is the more rash murders, spur of the moment stuff. Husband walks in on wife sleeping with another man, heads straight for the draw, pulls out a gun, boom. Car cuts another off causing an accident, offended driver pulls handgun out of glove compartment, boom. Hell, thief breaks into a house, resident pulls a gun on him, taking the law into his own hands instead of calling the police, boom.

Banning guns doesn't make guns unavailable, but it does make them LESS available, and that leads to less gun crime, as only those who really want a gun will get one.

And the argument for being safer if you've got a gun is bullshit. Just say a burglar breaks into your home, and he's got a gun. You don't realise this, and confront him. He points the gun at you. Now, if you're unarmed, he's probably going to go about his business and leave you unharmed, he's just here for the loot. He might tie you and your family up or something just to be safe, but he's unlikely to hurt you. If you've got a gun, however, bullets might start flying, and that doesn't benefit anybody.

 

[CAS79]

Banning guns isn't going to reduce organised crime, thought out murders, etc. As people have said, if a person wants a gun, they will be able to find one, legally or illegally. What it can/will stop is the more rash murders, spur of the moment stuff. Husband walks in on wife sleeping with another man, heads straight for the draw, pulls out a gun, boom. Car cuts another off causing an accident, offended driver pulls handgun out of glove compartment, boom. Hell, thief breaks into a house, resident pulls a gun on him, taking the law into his own hands instead of calling the police, boom.

Banning guns doesn't make guns unavailable, but it does make them LESS available, and that leads to less gun crime, as only those who really want a gun will get one.

And the argument for being safer if you've got a gun is bullshit. Just say a burglar breaks into your home, and he's got a gun. You don't realise this, and confront him. He points the gun at you. Now, if you're unarmed, he's probably going to go about his business and leave you unharmed, he's just here for the loot. He might tie you and your family up or something just to be safe, but he's unlikely to hurt you. If you've got a gun, however, bullets might start flying, and that doesn't benefit anybody.

Very well written and very good points.

 

[Brad Roo]

It's true people, in Somalia decisions are made by the people with the most number and biggest guns, not votes. Fair system if you think about it.

Why don't you go ahead and exaggerate a little further?

What does an armed population have in common with a lawless population?

 

[Brad Roo]

As others have said, someone who wants a gun can usually find one (legally or otherwise).

Absolutely.

Any one with the intent can fashion a cartridge firing weapon from plumbing store supplies.

 

[Brad Roo]

And the argument for being safer if you've got a gun is bullshit. Just say a burglar breaks into your home, and he's got a gun. You don't realise this, and confront him. He points the gun at you. Now, if you're unarmed, he's probably going to go about his business and leave you unharmed, he's just here for the loot.

You need to get yourself a bit better educated.

1) Burglars, by and large, don't carry guns. It tends to get them put in jail for triple the sentence.

2) Burglars that do carry guns will use them.

He might tie you and your family up or something just to be safe, but he's unlikely to hurt you.

He might also torture you and/or blow your brains out because you have seen him. It's a chance I wouldn't want to take with an armed criminal.

If you've got a gun, however, bullets might start flying, and that doesn't benefit anybody.

No offence BSA, but you are a victim waiting to happen.

Hows that saying go? "It's better to be judged by 12, than carried by 6."

 

[Fire]

There's nothing "extreme" about gun ownership.

That is 100% PC wankage.

Disagree, and I don't see how political correctness even comes close to fitting into their discussion. Also, I note that you seem to think that banning firearms based of majority opinion is somehow undemocratic. I think you are interchanging the words 'democracy' and 'freedom'. It shows that while you certainly have an opinion, you don't really know what you are talking about.

The reason why I view it as extreme is because it is a policy that places its philosophy (i.e, true freedom is the freedom to own items of your choice, and to defend yourself in any means you chose) above that of the practical reality (that while statistics will show that such policies do lead to slightly lower crime rates, they also point to an increase of homicides and accidental firearm related deaths).

Personally, I'd rather be robbed than shot in the face.

As soon as anyone puts a philosophical view above that of it's practical reality, then it becomes extreme. You believe in a fantasy.

 

[Fire]

Cant stop the real loons owning the guns, you never will with how freely available they are around the world, best thing you can do is deter most psychos with strict gun controls (we do have some strict controls, however when it was only played in about 20 years ago people are still going to own some unlicenced guns)

No, you can;pt,. but you can restrict their access using gun control.

Its not a silver bullet, and the fact that it doesn't cover all possible bases does not mean its a failure and not worth persisting.

While the big bad guys will still have access to their black market weapons, such people are far less likely to use these guns on innocents than, say, a crackhead frantically robbing a petrol station in search for his next fix. Who will have a much harder time making the contacts to get those guns. It means that daddy's paranoia won't lead to his son accidentally shooting his sister when he leaves the gun cabinet open. It means that an emotionally unstable teenager can't break into his paranoid uncles' gun cabinet to kill as many of his students and teachers as he can.

You don't hear of too many gangs involving themselves in drive by stabbings. Why give such people easy access to the tools that will allow them to carry out such heinous actions?

 

[Brad Roo]

Personally, I'd rather be robbed than shot in the face.

This is primarily where we differ.

I'd rather defend myself than be shot in the face. I'm happy to take the risk of being shot defending myself, rather than take the chance that I will end up a defenseless statistic.

You are free to live without a gun and I am free to have one. We can both be happy.