If you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…

On May 26 2018 15:13 KwarK wrote:

I feel like there is pretty definitive proof on the whole "is the UK in the grips of a knifing epidemic" question.

On May 26 2018 12:32 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:

If a person dies in the US due to gun deaths, it is reported and logged. If you are convicted of murder in the UK, it is logged. Unsolved murders or missing persons could be a case for that error. I can see his argument in that way. But still, it's hard to compare the two and say the UK is anywhere close to the US.

If we compare gun related crimes, to knife related crimes, then maybe the UK is on par.

We also have to be careful to not include involuntary manslaughter into that. Just trying to give super some benefit of the doubt here.

On May 22 2018 11:29 superstartran wrote:




England's gathering of fire arm statistics are vastly different from how the United States gathers there statistics which leads to significant differences in how numbers are reported.


Not to mention the U.S. is a very different country from England population make up wise and culturally. It's like wondering why Mexico has so much more crime then Japan.

On May 26 2018 15:42 IgnE wrote:
wasn't jack the ripper english and didn't he go on a knifing spree?

On May 26 2018 14:11 Nebuchad wrote:


"Look at the swiss system, it works, so clearly it's not about the guns it's about the culture."
"So would you like to change the culture to get to something that works, like the swiss system?"
"Oh no of course not."

On May 26 2018 13:29 superstartran wrote:



The current approach for fully automatic weapons in the U.S. is much more strict than in Switzerland.

Also, you cannot with a straight bold face tell me you want to ban assault weapons/ban bump stocks/high capacity magazines, etc. but suddenly be ok with laws that are arguably more laxed in some ways then even the U.S. laws. Silencers for example are almost practically impossible to get in the U.S. Not saying you, I'm saying everyone else here who is suddenly pro-Swiss gun laws which wouldn't have prevented most of the mass shootings in the first place.

And he did say "bring on fully automatic weapons the police can deal with them."

Requiring a 6 week mandatory course before getting a gun would probably be the first step into accomplishing that goal.

On May 26 2018 17:15 iamthedave wrote:


He was and he did. 5 confirmed kills, maximum of 11 (some were believed to be copycats and not the original killer, or weren't attributed for various reasons).



This summarises everything. He's only in the game to rubbish any suggestion, equivocate and diminish any attempt to regulate guns in the US. Doing nothing is preferable to doing anything because muh gunz and muh 2nd amendment.

The Trump administration is forging ahead with a previously sidelined plan to allow U.S. gun manufacturers sell their products abroad more cheaply and easily.

The proposed rule, published Thursday in the Federal Register, would shift control of U.S. firearm exports from the State Department to the Commerce Department, in a move the regulatory language said is aimed at reducing “procedural burdens and costs” on American gunmakers doing international business.

The plan would also save the U.S. government money by simplifying the licensing process, according to the proposal.

As a result, gun companies would likely be able to expand foreign sales of popular civilian firearms and accessories that have attracted controversy in the U.S. These include semi-automatic military-style guns like AR-15s, .50 caliber rifles, scopes and certain high-capacity ammunition magazines.

On May 26 2018 19:08 warrenberners2020 wrote:
So the solution is lobbying other countries to make gun laws less restrictive?

Great idea, can you imagine what Europe would look like if everyone had a gun? We can't even get enough police personell today because the risk to their lives double since 2015, now imagine the black market is flooded with guns...

On May 26 2018 14:04 evilfatsh1t wrote:
i have to give massive respect to superstratran for standing up for his opinions. youre literally playing 1 v everyone in this thread, in my opinion, getting dumpstered, and youre still arguing. good for you mate

On May 26 2018 17:24 r.Evo wrote:
"You can't tell me with a straight bold face that you want to ban cars driving faster than 60mph but then tell me you would be okay with cars being able to go 120mph if we introduced regulations that would result in them being able to cause less deaths than what we have right now."

That's exactly how it works. The goal of people arguing like this isn't to take your weapons away. The goal is to have policies that reduce gun violence, less armed people on the streets, more restrictions on when and where they can be firedand push a toxic gun culture into one that respects deadly weapons as precisely that. The goal is less people being shot to death. The goal is less kids considering school shootings something that just happens.

You just said "regulations such as this wouldn't work with how we interpret our constitution" - maybe, if you yourself consider the Swiss approach a better one than the one in the US to achieve the above goals, this is where you should start arguing that Americans should ask themselves why they don't want what the Swiss have de facto: A well-regulated militia with the goal to have a civilian population that can defend itself when needed.

Great idea, how are you or other pro-gun advocates in the US like the NRA trying to lobby for such a change?

On May 26 2018 15:13 KwarK wrote:

I feel like there is pretty definitive proof on the whole "is the UK in the grips of a knifing epidemic" question.

On May 27 2018 01:58 NewSunshine wrote:
Banning all guns outright is an ideal. And yeah, it would sure make things easy if it could be done with a snap of one's fingers. However, to say that an argument over the validity of Swiss gun laws and culture compared to the US is therefore an insidious attempt to ban all guns ever seems a bit... Insincere. People are saying what they are because they know that the way things are in the US, the last thing that's going to happen is a gun ban. The most realistic measure is to argue for sensible gun laws that aren't actually a ban. Hence the discussion on Swiss laws. Am I missing something here, why does there necessarily have to be some twisted motive behind it? That doesn't strike me as arguing in good faith.

On May 27 2018 02:05 NewSunshine wrote:
I mean, just saying that repeatedly doesn't make it true. From where I'm sitting, I've seen a lot of people try to honestly listen to, and have a discussion with you. The mere fact that they argue the opposite side to you does not make them bad faith actors.

On May 27 2018 02:39 superstartran wrote:
all I've heard from the Europeans/gun control advocates in general from this thread is how the U.S. is a terrible place because we allow mass shootings to take place.

On May 27 2018 02:41 NewSunshine wrote:
I personally don't think an inside and out knowledge of guns is required to understand that they are a great enabler of violence. I don't see how lording that knowledge over others is particularly useful to a genuine discussion. Nor does looking for the first thing they get wrong, or the first thing you disagree with, and throwing your hands up and abandoning the discussion. Surely you can understand how that might look like a dodge.

And yeah, mass shootings are pretty terrible. I have a hard time imagining how I'd handle one as a survivor. Or as their family. Or maybe I would've been one of the ones who died. That's something we just continue to accept.