That's a fair point, and well put. Thank you for pointing it out in a reasonable manner to me. :yep: What if the person who checked on the gun safes was not a LEO though, and had no powers to arrest or detain anyone but just report on the condition of your gun storage? Would that make it any better?


I just fail to see what the problem of every American being a responsible gun owner by law is. Isn't that what the NRA wants? Every American who owns a gun to be a responsible gun owner?

Fair point

:haha:

That's a capitalistic problem though, the noose which we've made for ourselves in that things to make life safer are priced so that only the rich can be safe. Some way of subsidising to force the prices down might help, perhaps the NRA could have some say in this, I mean how much does the NRA receive each year? What about firearms manufacturers? That's a market that's got to be a good earner, surely they could put a bit aside to subsidise either cheaper guns safes and/or research into safer storage systems.

It's the way in which people shrug their shoulders when a school gets shot up that frustrates me, as though no-one really wants to try and stop it any more because of the fear that in trying to do so the 2nd Amendment will be infringed in some way.

I guess you could build ten foot walls around schools, iron gates with metal detectors on them at the start, armed guards at the front, razor wire on the top of the wall. That's about the only way you could stop someone with a gun walking into a school unmolested. You could arm teachers, I guess, but then what is to stop one of them going postal?

The thing is, I don't think that anyone could actually be serious about confiscation in the American government because they know that it would lead to a civil war, it's about the only thing that would lead to a civil war and state succession is if someone tried to repeal the 2nd Amendment. It's suicide and anyone who knows America knows this.
I'm all for fixing and preventing school shootings in every and any way possible, although I'd rather it be done without turning schools into prison complexes, but I guess if that's what it takes then that's what it takes.

Well, yeah, the Hood is going to take a little more tactical approach to it, armed LEOs and that, but those kinds of areas are probably used to armed LEOs paying them regular visits anyway.
The training for concealed carry and hunting licenses are good, and I mean I think that's the kind of training that should come with any gun for any reason. I mean showing someone you can shoot straight should be the minimal task for even thinking about owning a gun. I sure as hell wouldn't want to own a weapon until I knew that I could handle it without hurting myself or anyone around me who I didn't intend to hurt.

Pity...it should be at least considered as an optional school activity.
It is tricky though because of how some kids are in this day and age, once upon a time you could teach firearms as part of building discipline and skills...but now you're just as likely to get a kid shoot his teacher with it. :/\\!! That comes down to something we did agree on earlier on how society and culture has changed and not necessarily for the better.
Trouble is, it's very difficult to change society, it tends to happen spontaneously.

I don't mean so much linking firearm access to mental health, although obviously that should be a factor, but more improving access to mental health care in general, so if a parent has a concern about their child they have the ability to get treatment for them quickly. Of course, that in itself is a problematic situation because you have to balance out effective treatments versus medication. Last thing you want to do is raise an army of zombie children, but equally you want to prevent them from going postal. I mean, we can identify a number of factors which can lead to someone going postal, but it's getting to those people before they do.
Can such people be reformed? Some can, I think, but others may need to spend the rest of their lives removed from society.
Does this include veterans? Some, perhaps, but certainly not all. I mean out of all of society you're probably only looking at a maximum of 30% of people with metal health problems, out of which probably only 4% need permanently keeping away from others.

I mentioned earlier three things that I think need looking at in America, one and only one of them was access to firearms, the other two was mental health care and accidental media glorification. Of course, with the first point you run into the 2nd Amendment, and the third point you run into the 1st Amendment, so it's not an easy thing to look at.

Surely though, both pro and anti gun people can agree that the number of school and college shootings in America needs to be reduced? I mean, surely that's one thing we can agree on, even if we can't agree on the how or why, we can agree on the what.

At the very least they should not be allowed to hide the sadistic bastards, if a priest is fingered for sacramenting a boy, let him feel the law.

Honestly, I don't care in what form harm comes to a child, it should all be stopped. Rape, Murder, Physical and Mental abuse, Indoctrination, Car accidents, UFO abduction, whatever. Children deserve the chance to live their lives without adult issues and problems infringing on it and ruining it. If a kid wants to dress up as a princess, let them, if they want to learn how to fire a gun, let them, if they want to learn about different religions, let them, let them be whatever they want, within reason, and that reason being that it doesn't harm another child. If a child wants to own a gun, give them a nerf gun, not a rifle. If a child wants to molest or hurt another child, then that needs to be stopped, and the reason why investigated.

Yeah, I get that it's not a black and white world, heck I've been saying that about many things for many years, but I think that if we have the possibility of improving things, especially if it improves things for our children, then we really should try.

It just wouldn't work like that. You know how we always tend to overdo things. Somebody would get a hair across their butt and we'd have armed standoffs and SWAT raids all around the country. Remember people here guard their privacy rights as jealously as any other.

Fourth Amendment:
What would be the probable cause that a gun owner is committing a crime that would justify these intrusive searches?

So what's to stop them now? A sign on the wall saying it's a gun free zone? A zero tolerance policy? I seriously doubt that a teacher or other school employee who has gone postal is going to care at all about that stuff other than to be reassured they won't be hindered by somebody shooting back.

I have to go get some work done now but i'll respond to the rest of your post later. As you Brits say cheers!

I remember when my religion was banned.
We used to worship nature, harmony in life, peace after it.
Then christianity came.

Ah, 4th Amendment...I was not aware of the particulars of that one. Hmmm, that does make things complicated. But you chaps understand the goal I'm driving for, would there be other ways of going at it, in regards to getting all gun owners to house their guns in a manner in which their children can't get to them? :hmmm:

Well, don't they have metal detectors that people, including staff, have to go through on the way into school? :hmmm: Would that not pick up any hidden firearms? Although I think there's only one detector at the front door, isn't there? So the average shooter usually goes in through another entrance.
That could be something to look at. Likewise windows perhaps need to be upgraded to bulletproof or resistant glass to stop outside shooters shooting in. :hmmm:

No probs. :up:

Could you imagine PETAs outrage if we started feeding Christians to lions again? Wouldn't be worth the hassle. :nope:

August & Oberon, I admire your endurance on this subject and very much enjoy reading this thread. Both make very goods points. :up:

But you are too drunk to understand them.:O:


:D

I'm drunk, but what has that go-..


What was the topic again?

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/ho...y-emoticon.gif http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/pict...536131&thumb=1 :arrgh!: Precisely why I joined Subsim!

Quote:

Originally Posted by oberon Well, don't they have metal detectors that people, including staff, have to go through on the way into school? :hmmm: Would that not pick up any hidden firearms? Although I think there's only one detector at the front door, isn't there? So the average shooter usually goes in through another entrance. That could be something to look at. Likewise windows perhaps need to be upgraded to bulletproof or resistant glass to stop outside shooters shooting in. :hmmm:

Anything fixed in-position is defensive and may be circumvented by an attacker. The secret is to think of it and assume your proactive opponent is already waaay ahead of you; knowing the 'chinks' in your own armor, and making suitable accommodation thereof, is the best remedy.

Satan has nothing to do with Slavic paganism :O:
We have Chernobog

http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/...20140607021908 Well he's more interesting than Belobog!

Oops sorry, that was an asinine arguement, silly me.

Btw, back in the day I managed to qualify 1st string on the rifle team in high school. We shot the Mossberg M44 U.S. Military trainer. We were pretty damn good too, learned firearm and range safety, respect for our instructors, and the rifle, shot paper targets at 25 yards

Now days kids practice shooting people while watching realtime over the top graphic video games cussing each other out over chat while mommy is away. And people now think the solution is more government, licensing and mental health care. Kee-rist on crutch :/\\!!

So, what, we ban video games? :hmmm:

We can't we be responsible gun owners without another useless law trying to mandate it? The overwhelming majority of firearms owners certainly are responsible and we're the only ones who would pay any heed to such a law. Not to beat the car analogy to beyond the grave but in my research on firearms fatality rates I saw a stat that says around half of the child deaths in vehicle accidents were related to them being improperly or completely unrestrained in spite of laws to the contrary. So if someone is so irresponsible as to allow a child to get their hands on a firearm what makes you think that they would care how the state says they should store them?

That's a typical socialist answer. Pick one group of people to pay for the sins of another group. Why should I subsidize every jerk who acts irresponsibly? The NRA conducts far more gun safety classes than any other organization including the government yet that's not enough they must pay for it too? As I mentioned above what makes you think passing law 20,001 is going to make anyone act more responsibly and use those safes instead of pawning them for another crack rock?

What is causing these incidents is a flaw in our society, not the presence of an inanimate object that existed in peoples hands long before they started happening. What you interpret as a lack of caring about the incident is really the expression of frustration that once again any other possible cause is immediately ignored in the controllers zeal to once again move the bar a step closer to their goal of banning gun ownership.


That'd be real poplar with the Black Lives Matter folks but it's not just the Hood. There are plenty of others who wouldn't put up with it either.
I can't think of a better trigger for that civil war you mentioned

Tricky is an understatement when even biting a pop tart into the shape of a gun earns a kid a suspension. That's a sign of some serious paranoia over firearms that predates these incidents and I believe actually contributes to them.

I know that's certainly what gun owners want, we'd much rather go back to arguing among ourselves over the merits of 9mm vs .45acp in letters to the National Rifleman (the NRA monthly), but I'm starting to wonder about the other side, the purely political organizations like the Bloombergs and the Bradys. They need these incidents to keep their gun control cause alive because without them they get ignored. It's why their public support never lasts very long after these incidents. People realize how their solutions never actually target the problem itself (universal background checks are a prime example of this) and their momentum withers. They even pre-plan their responses to the next incident from what i've read, spending far more on lobbying and media efforts than the NRA could ever hope to match which is not nearly as rich as has been portrayed by the anti-gun media.

Well just remember that things have already improved enormously in a comparatively short period of time for our species. While I agree we should always seek to improve more, not being able to achieve perfection does not mean that we haven't been really trying to get to (and keep) this point. It's not so far away from either of our countries that childrens lot in life is far far worse.

Agreed, but there are careless accidents and the like that a law might help stop. I mean it's the difference between advising that you wear a seatbelt and making it law to wear a seatbelt. If you are concerned that there might be a law based penalty to your actions then it makes you more focused to do them. Yeah, it's a bit stick rather than carrot, but like you already say, most of the people already do this, so it'll be second nature to them, and it will punish the idiots who don't, preferably before the child gets the gun and shoots someone.

Eh, I'm a socialist so I give a socialist answer. I must admit I've always struggled to understand the mindset of "I'm alright Jack, let the others hang" that seems to be prevalent in many American responses to situations. It's strange because Americans can be the most caring and giving people in one moment, and the most selfish in the next, I guess it runs with most countries but it seems to be more noticable in responses from Americans. At least it has been on here, perhaps a wider viewpoint is needed sometime, to see if it's just a GT thing. :haha:
But, again, it's surely in the best interest of the NRA to do everything and anything it can to avoid and stop mass-shootings? Therefore, if it is proven that such a scheme would work then it should be looked at by them, IMHO anyway.

I wouldn't go as far as to take the inanimate object out of the equation completely, because it's far far easier to kill a scattered group of people with a gun than it is to use any other weapon except perhaps high explosives. A knife requires you to get in close, likewise anything like a bat or sword, a bow and arrow requires arm strength and has a relatively low rate of fire except for in the hands of a specialist, and even then unless you hit specific areas, an arrow will do less damage to the human body than most bullets, a car requires a run up to the target and is only really good in wide open spaces, you can't really get a car down a school corridor...well, unless you use a Peel P50 but you'd probably just cause a few broken toes with that. With a gun though, especially with the more recent weapons which have reduced recoil as much as possible (I think of the AA12 assault shotgun, I mean that thing is a beast, good rate of fire, minimal recoil, and very reliable) it's a case of point towards the target and fire, it's so simple that a child can and will operate it in an effective manner with very little training.
In a way, the gun is the ultimate killing device, probably the one of the most lethal devices mankind has ever created, and one of the most simplest in basic function to operate. I mean I could shoot a gun, quite easily, but I doubt I would hit anything with it at range, but close range how could I miss? When you add automatic burst fire to that, with multiple bullets within a fraction of a second and anything in front of you is going to have a bad time of it.

Of course, I'm not going to say that it's completely down to the firearm, that would be nonsense. Until our attack drones gain sentience and turn the firearms on us, it's all just inanimate objects, and yes I agree absolutely that the fleshy bit holding the inanimate object is at least 70-80% of the problem, but it would be wrong to dismiss the firearms role in it completely.

Eyeah...that's a fair point. Still, on the upside, at least the firearms will be safely stored during the civil war! :yep: :dead:
I think both sides have gotten so entrenched and so paranoid about the possible actions of the other that anything is going to be viewed as a direct attack.
I guess that's another part of the frustration, like a lot of things in the US at the moment, there's absolute deadlock with no way forward, and people will suffer because of it.

I dunno, I think they would probably say the same about your side. That whenever there's a shooting, the fear of a law being passed to ban or restrict firearms means that there's a mass purchasing of ammunition and firearms. I wouldn't be surprised if the pro-gun forums also pre-plan their responses to the next event because let's face it, we both know that there's going to be a next event, and in the age of 24 hour rolling news media, whoever gets their actions out there in the right window of time (not too soon to be seen as capitalising on the tragedy but not so late that the other guy gets their word in first) gets their fans approval. Because, at this late point in the day, the NRA aren't speaking to anti-gun people any clearer than anti-gun people are speaking to pro-gun people, they just speak to their own crowds and try to rope in whatever people in the middle ground that they can. I don't suppose though that there's many left in the middle ground which probably resembles Verdun by now. :haha:

That's true, that's very true. I think that even if we cannot achieve perfection, we should always strive to get as close to it as we possibly can. In a way it's what humanity as a whole has been doing since we discovered fire, always trying to make life better, safer, and easier for ourselves. Of course, as a socialist, I think that we should focus on spreading that better life to as many people as we can, so that every child can enjoy a standard of life equal to our own, but as a realist I also realise that that is something that isn't going to happen tomorrow. :03:

This has been a good talk, August, and I'm glad that you realise that despite my occasional acerbic language (for which I do apologise) that I'm not trying to attack the pro-gun position, nor am I a staunch believer of the anti-gun crowd. I can see the valid points raised by both sides and I think that to abolish the 2nd Amendment would be a massively foolhardy endeavour and cause a national divide not seen since 1861.
The American viewpoint is at times strange to me, as a Brit and a European, just as I suspect that the European viewpoint is confusing to an American at times. I'd like to think we agree on more things than we disagree, but of course in a place like this, a forum, most of the time we discuss things on which we disagree. Heaven knows, my viewpoint can be strange to some Europeans at times...one only has to look at the migrant thread to see that. :03:
Still, guns or no guns, America is still an awesome place with awesome stuff, so keep being awesome America.