On August 28 2012 09:30 PaqMan wrote: From what I've read somewhere, because Switzerland has no standing full-time army, all men are required to go through some form of military training throughout their lives, a few weeks a year. Men between the ages of 21 and 32 are given M-57 assault rifles and 24 rounds of ammunition which is required to be kept at home. If someone from Switzerland could please confirm this?
I don't buy that "GUNS ARE THE REASON FOR VIOLENCE" and "blame gun control" bullshit. America just has a higher ratio of fucked up people.
On August 28 2012 08:34 tomatriedes wrote: For all the 'people kill people; guns don't make any difference because they could just use knives instead' crowd-
Recently there were three rampages in S Korea where people were randomly attacked in public places by crazies wielding knifes. Several people were injured but the total number of deaths? Only one. Can you really, honestly say that if they had been wielding guns rather than knifes the death toll would have been that low?
Let's pretend a serial killer breaks into your house. Because he is a serial killer and takes joy in murdering people, let's assume his favorite tool is an extremely sharp knife. Because your government took away your gun, the only thing you have left to defend your wife and kids is a baseball bat in your closet or a knife all the way in your kitchen. The chance of you defending your family against him with no one getting hurt is extremely low.
I'd rather have a gun.
You're falsely comparing gun ownership and gun control. In Switzerland it is very difficult to get permits so you can carry guns in public. The regulatory systems are completely different. High gun ownership does not equal lax gun control.
Edit: Given the choice between taking on serial killer with knife and serial killer with gun and your weapons provided. I would go with baseball bat vs knife any damn day.
I'm sure if someone in Switzerland was planning on a mass-shooting he would care less about obtaining a permit to carry a gun in public.
On August 28 2012 09:30 PaqMan wrote: From what I've read somewhere, because Switzerland has no standing full-time army, all men are required to go through some form of military training throughout their lives, a few weeks a year. Men between the ages of 21 and 32 are given M-57 assault rifles and 24 rounds of ammunition which is required to be kept at home. If someone from Switzerland could please confirm this?
I don't buy that "GUNS ARE THE REASON FOR VIOLENCE" and "blame gun control" bullshit. America just has a higher ratio of fucked up people.
On August 28 2012 08:34 tomatriedes wrote: For all the 'people kill people; guns don't make any difference because they could just use knives instead' crowd-
Recently there were three rampages in S Korea where people were randomly attacked in public places by crazies wielding knifes. Several people were injured but the total number of deaths? Only one. Can you really, honestly say that if they had been wielding guns rather than knifes the death toll would have been that low?
Let's pretend a serial killer breaks into your house. Because he is a serial killer and takes joy in murdering people, let's assume his favorite tool is an extremely sharp knife. Because your government took away your gun, the only thing you have left to defend your wife and kids is a baseball bat in your closet or a knife all the way in your kitchen. The chance of you defending your family against him with no one getting hurt is extremely low.
I'd rather have a gun.
You're falsely comparing gun ownership and gun control. In Switzerland it is very difficult to get permits so you can carry guns in public. The regulatory systems are completely different. High gun ownership does not equal lax gun control.
Edit: Given the choice between taking on serial killer with knife and serial killer with gun and your weapons provided. I would go with baseball bat vs knife any damn day.
Baseball Bat gives you way more reach... I don't understand why you want the knife in this situation unless you feel your way stronger than the serial killer and can just brute force overpower him(even then you can take a fatal wound pretty easily)? Distracting serial killer with baseball bat, giving chance/time for your wife/kids to run is much better than them running and getting shot in the back,
for threads like these i will often read and use sources to back up my opinions, but this time im just going to post based on my experiences as a US citizen.
i dont think stricter gun control laws are the main problem. stricter ones, with more attempts to look into, monitor and possibly offer help to alienated loners could thwart mass shootings before they occur. but that would really only be addressing the symptoms.
the problem, imo, is that we have too many people who become alienated loners in the first place. there's a spirit of individualism and competitiveness in the US that, while positive in many respects, can manifest itself in ugly ways.
going to school here in the US, whenever there was a kid who had just failed at something (often socially), or was just sad or fat or didn't fit in, the most common response was 'what a loser' often followed by 'lets shun or pick on him to express our contempt.' i think that is probably less common in other countries.
i think other nations, like in the EU, much as we bash on them for their commie socialist ways, have a system and culture that reflects more care and concern for others.
i don't like the example of the norway shooter here, he was a terrorist driven by fanaticism rather than a tormented, impotent nobody lashing out at the world. that's a key difference i think people tend to either downgrade or overlook.
On August 28 2012 03:30 Twinkle Toes wrote: What is motivating this?
Fail gun laws that grant easy access to weapons.
oiii here we go again
Yea, sadly that's the foundation of all those shootings. If noone had weapons, those shootings wouldn't happen (as much). Those crazy people are being encouraged by the media, get a weapon and go at it.
At the shooting in Times Square, police shot more innocent people than the gunman.....
(CBS/AP) PERRY HALL, Md. - Police said a student has been shot and a suspect is in custody at a Maryland high school, CBS Baltimore station WJZ-TV reports.
Baltimore County Police are investigating the confirmed shooting at Perry Hall High School. Students told WJZ-TV that the suspect was a student, but it hasn't been confirmed whether the suspect attended Perry Hall.
"It appears this was a one-on-one grudge situation," a police source told CBS News, adding that police are "99 percent sure there is just one suspect."
Gerald Roman, an 11th grader, told WJZ-TV that a student came into the school cafeteria and shot another student. Teachers then tackled the gun-toting student, and a shot was fired at the cafeteria ceiling, Roman said. By then, a police officer entered the cafeteria and assisted the teachers who took down the student.
A patient is seen on a stretcher after a shooting at Perry Hall High School in Perry Hall, Md., Aug. 27, 2012.
The injured 17-year-old student was flown by medevac to Shock Trauma. The male student's condition is critical.
"It's horrible," said Roman. "I mean, you would think the school would have better security than this, maybe metal detectors."
A young man without a shirt was seen by WJZ-TV's helicopter being escorted to a police cruiser in handcuffs.
Calls started coming in Monday shortly before 11 a.m. Fire crews and police cars are on the scene. In the air, sharpshooters and helicopters can be seen. After the shooting, the school was put on lockdown for almost an hour.
Students were seen leaving the school in an orderly manner. Some are being evacuated to Perry Hall Shopping Center across the street from the school, where parents can meet them. Other students are also being diverted to Perry Hall Middle School and Joppa View Elementary School.
Monday was the first day of school in Perry Hall. About 2,300 students attend the school. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan visited the school last week.
Perry Hall is a middle-class community along the Interstate 95 corridor, northeast of Baltimore city.
Please read the report above to have a context on the discussion.
tldr: A 17-year-old student at Baltimore’s Perry Hall High School was shot on the first day of classes and taken to an area hospital, while the shooter has been apprehended by police.
Going back, just from memory, I can name a few recent shootings: the Alabama shooting by a university professor, Colorado shooting at a TDKR premier, the most recent one before this in the Empire State, the one in Arizona injuring Congressman Gliffords.
What is motivating this? Shootings have happened before, but they seem more frequent now. Or do they seem more frequent only because media is so pervasive now (tv, internet, phones) that anything can be reported in real time? Or does media contribute to this phenomenon, encouraging shooting and desensitizing the would be shooters to it, whether they intend to shoot at a random mass or to a specific person? What is your opinion?
Nothing is motivating this. They are not more frequent. They are just in the news more. In 2009 there were nearly 11,500 deaths from firearms. Did you see any of it in the news? Nope. Why not? It wasnt a hot topic.
On August 28 2012 03:30 Twinkle Toes wrote: What is motivating this?
Fail gun laws that grant easy access to weapons.
I'm getting pretty sick of reading mindless posts about this sort of complaint. Gun laws don't necessarily demote or promote the use of guns. People who want to use guns will always have them unless you have some sort of communist 100% no guns available to citizens.
US has always had a loose gun law. Arguing that that is the reason doesn't make much sense as we are talking about a recent upswing in shootings. We even have a president in office who is in favor of more gun control. Why is this happening?
Either there really is a rise in shootings, or there is a rise in shootings being reported by the media. It begs the question, do the major media corporations have too much power, being able to selectively report whatever they want to influence the populous?
Three words: Gun free zones. I don't remember the last mass shooting that happened where people are allowed to concealed carry. As for non-mass shootings, I believe they have been decreasing steadily over the last 15 or so years though I'm not sure how the bad economy has effected crime rates since 2008. I attribute this decrease in violence to the widespread adoption of shall issue, concealed carry weapons permit policy that has occured over the last two decades.
On August 28 2012 11:02 SayGen wrote: Sigh I'm so tired of every thread that involves guns being turned into 'US has loose gun laws'
IT IS EASIER TO OBTAIN AN AK47 IN GERMANY THAN IN THE US.
Us gun law, isn't as loose as everyone likes to think it is.
But people will always beleive what they want to- never challenging any idea or concept that is in-line with their core beliefs.
Depends what you mean by AK47. If you're referring to the true automatic assault rifle, that may be true, but all that is required to get a semi-auto AK variant is a couple hundred dollars and a clean background check. US gun laws are relatively non-strict, but I consider that a good thing.
On August 28 2012 09:30 PaqMan wrote: From what I've read somewhere, because Switzerland has no standing full-time army, all men are required to go through some form of military training throughout their lives, a few weeks a year. Men between the ages of 21 and 32 are given M-57 assault rifles and 24 rounds of ammunition which is required to be kept at home. If someone from Switzerland could please confirm this?
I don't buy that "GUNS ARE THE REASON FOR VIOLENCE" and "blame gun control" bullshit. America just has a higher ratio of fucked up people.
On August 28 2012 08:34 tomatriedes wrote: For all the 'people kill people; guns don't make any difference because they could just use knives instead' crowd-
Recently there were three rampages in S Korea where people were randomly attacked in public places by crazies wielding knifes. Several people were injured but the total number of deaths? Only one. Can you really, honestly say that if they had been wielding guns rather than knifes the death toll would have been that low?
Let's pretend a serial killer breaks into your house. Because he is a serial killer and takes joy in murdering people, let's assume his favorite tool is an extremely sharp knife. Because your government took away your gun, the only thing you have left to defend your wife and kids is a baseball bat in your closet or a knife all the way in your kitchen. The chance of you defending your family against him with no one getting hurt is extremely low.
I'd rather have a gun.
You're falsely comparing gun ownership and gun control. In Switzerland it is very difficult to get permits so you can carry guns in public. The regulatory systems are completely different. High gun ownership does not equal lax gun control.
Edit: Given the choice between taking on serial killer with knife and serial killer with gun and your weapons provided. I would go with baseball bat vs knife any damn day.
I'm sure if someone in Switzerland was planning on a mass-shooting he would care less about obtaining a permit to carry a gun in public.
Yeah, it's funny that people think the recent adoption of concealed carry would have anything to do with crime. People who get licenses and carry guns legally are protectors, not criminals. Cases of anything bad happening involving legal CCW holders are very rare. If someone is going to commit a crime with a handgun, he's not going to care whether or not it's legal for him to carry it in public.
I have a financial question though: If there was to be some sort of crackdown on firearms.. would there have to be funding for a whole new department of the government? Or would a different one take over? It all sounds like a good idea when the logistics of it are not very efficient.
The US just have a lot more people compared to the overall population.
Unless stuff like the Batman shooter don't count in countings like this.
you know that the US (amongst many other countries) are not listed in this statistic because it is from an european institute? In 2006 there were 206 murders in Germany, and it has slightly more than 1/4 of the population of the US (which is crazy if you compare the size of the country). So it does not depend on the amount of people living together. According to this site: http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm in 2006 there have been 17,030 cases of murders in the US. So if i calculated correctly, the US should be at around 54 killed people per 1 million inhabitants. Now go compare to the other western european countries
That puts us at #5 on the European list. Suck it Ukraine! If this recovery stays bumpy Estonia better watch out too.
On August 28 2012 07:04 Zandar wrote: A search for "shootings" on TL, I wonder why there are so many, almost all, from a certain country where it's legal to have a gun:
Since about 90% of weapons used by the cartels come from the USA, might as well include anything about the Mexican Drug War in your search. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09709.pdf
Despite the well grounded "people kill people, not the thing that makes it really fucking easy" argument it sure seems like the lax gun laws in the US have helped mass murders in other countries (Norway shooting ammo) and gone a ways towards destabilizing our southern neighbor.
Plus the US has very high rates of gun violence and homicides but its just our culture... right? So does that mean there's nothing we can do about it?
Complete myth created by government officials for the purpose of furthering their gun control agenda. They even set up an operation (Fast and Furious) in which they purposefully allowed guns to be smuggled into Mexico so that they could blame Mexico's violence on American gun laws resulting in the death of an American border patrol agent. http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-and-90-percent-myth
As for what can be done about it, legalize drugs to combat organized crime and encourage the concealment of firearms in public to prevent mass shootings.
On August 28 2012 11:33 Trevoc wrote: I have a financial question though: If there was to be some sort of crackdown on firearms.. would there have to be funding for a whole new department of the government? Or would a different one take over? It all sounds like a good idea when the logistics of it are not very efficient.
Here are your logistics: Civil war. The banning of guns is not a step towards dictatorship that America is ready to make.
If I recall correctly, the USA always had gun ownership - the problem is not guns but the society itself. You have increasing amounts of desperate, angry, bitter and drugged-up people - this is what is causing the killings.
In my opinion, restricting gun ownership will help reduce killings - because these people are borderline psychotic - making it harder for them to obtain lethal weapons means they will be less prone to snap actions. However, as I mentioned, guns are not the problem - it is the society - restricting guns will merely reduce the symptoms but never solve the cause.
The US just have a lot more people compared to the overall population.
Unless stuff like the Batman shooter don't count in countings like this.
you know that the US (amongst many other countries) are not listed in this statistic because it is from an european institute? In 2006 there were 206 murders in Germany, and it has slightly more than 1/4 of the population of the US (which is crazy if you compare the size of the country). So it does not depend on the amount of people living together. According to this site: http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm in 2006 there have been 17,030 cases of murders in the US. So if i calculated correctly, the US should be at around 54 killed people per 1 million inhabitants. Now go compare to the other western european countries
That puts us at #5 on the European list. Suck it Ukraine! If this recovery stays bumpy Estonia better watch out too.
On August 28 2012 07:04 Zandar wrote: A search for "shootings" on TL, I wonder why there are so many, almost all, from a certain country where it's legal to have a gun:
Since about 90% of weapons used by the cartels come from the USA, might as well include anything about the Mexican Drug War in your search. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09709.pdf
Despite the well grounded "people kill people, not the thing that makes it really fucking easy" argument it sure seems like the lax gun laws in the US have helped mass murders in other countries (Norway shooting ammo) and gone a ways towards destabilizing our southern neighbor.
Plus the US has very high rates of gun violence and homicides but its just our culture... right? So does that mean there's nothing we can do about it?
Complete myth created by government officials for the purpose of furthering their gun control agenda. They even set up an operation (Fast and Furious) in which they purposefully allowed guns to be smuggled into Mexico so that they could blame Mexico's violence on American gun laws resulting in the death of an American border patrol agent. http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-and-90-percent-myth
On August 28 2012 11:33 Trevoc wrote: I have a financial question though: If there was to be some sort of crackdown on firearms.. would there have to be funding for a whole new department of the government? Or would a different one take over? It all sounds like a good idea when the logistics of it are not very efficient.
Here are your logistics: Civil war. The banning of guns is not a step towards dictatorship that America is ready to make.
I saw a documentary about the criminal cartels in Mexico and one of cartels themselves talked about how they get most of their weapons from South America and that they weren't dependant on US for guns. Either way though, the US needs to step up their border security, it's way too easy for people to travel back and forth on both sides.
The reason a lot of politicians including the President of the US are not pushing for more gun control/laws right now is because the election is coming up and they know it's an unpopular idea in the US to push for more gun control/laws, most Americans favor the 2nd Amendment.
On August 28 2012 11:40 Azzur wrote: If I recall correctly, the USA always had gun ownership - the problem is not guns but the society itself. You have increasing amounts of desperate, angry, bitter and drugged-up people - this is what is causing the killings.
In my opinion, restricting gun ownership will help reduce killings - because these people are borderline psychotic - making it harder for them to obtain lethal weapons means they will be less to snap actions. However, as I mentioned, guns are not the problem - it is the society - restricting guns will merely reduce the symptoms but never solve the cause.
EPT
