I think you should have a look at Nevada's gun/violence history(I would think most of the folk there were Nevadans) and then make a rational point of view.
You guys don't get it. We're not gonna change. And no amount of mass killing, hand wringing or editorializing is going to change that. We've had presidents assassinated, and gravely wounded, that didn't slow gun ownership down. We have 33,000 gun fatalities a year. And when you bring it up, the comparison is, "Yeah, but we have 50,000 auto fatalities a year, and 1/3 of those are alcohol related. Should we outlaw liquor? Cars? lower speed limits??" The NRA, for a long time used, "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." as their slogan for not messing with gun laws. I think that notion is still very well ingrained among Americans. Guns are intertwined in our society, there are, at least by some accounts 300,000,000 legally owned guns in the United States. and 299,970,000 of them are never involved in a human fatality each year. Guys here scream about prying their guns from their cold, dead fingers. Guns, to gun owners, are an ingrained right guaranteed by a document written in 1787 by guys who never envisioned automatic weapons. But hey, the Bill of Rights is untouchable. Even though there's plenty of discussion about what it means, over 200 years later, guns are here to stay. They're not going away. We might reduce the availability of non-hunting weapons, but don't count on it. And finally, yes, we expect sympathy for the victims. and NO, just because they listen to country music they don't all own guns. d
Totally agree with you on all counts. Doesn't change the fact that it's utterly moronic, and equally as outdated as some other ideologies that we do agree on.
With which I agree 100%. Oh, and I AM a gun owner. Not a gun nut, but a gun owner. And if, at some point in time I could really be guaranteed that other NUTS would no longer own a gun, I'd be happy to give my (non-sport) guns up. I don't own any long rifles, but do own a couple of handguns and a shotgun for shooting skeet. And, unlike maybe 95% of the (non-law enforcement) gun owners in the USA, I am properly trained in how to use it, own it, safe keep it, etc. D
Not me , I've never expected any better from them Been arguing on the interweb since 1990 with my US colleagues in DEC ............. super smart people, super dumb attitude towards guns One of those DEC people sells the Unobtainium products on fchat, very nice man
If folk keep bringing on the same old crap re cars killing people in the same breath as gun control,then you know they're grasping at straws. A FIREARM WAS ONLY DESIGNED FOR ONE THING AND ONE THING ONLY.....TO KILL SOMETHING. That's what,it appears,the USA don't 'get'. Apart from the quite new phenomenon of using vehicles AS weapons,around the world...Aussie included,the vehicle was designed for one thing only,transporting people and goods wherever they want to go. Plus,I didn't infer everyone at the concert were guntoting,just that Nevada's has a reputation as firearm welcome state.... http://www.nevadacarry.org
What about the people who like going to the range to shoot a few targets (so they can be better at shooting people) ? IF people had a gun that was locked in at the range that would be fine in my book, but would you trust someone like a mentally affected person to have a gun ? The US makes it easy for them If I lived in the US I'd be in gaol for life by now for losing my temper and shooting EVERYONE
how about we consider the facts for a moment? An Australian white male has a risk of death from firearms homicide of 1.0, for his US counterpart it is only 1.5, for a US Hispanic male it is 12 and for a black male it is 19. Meanwhile, our Northern Territory’s homicide rate is 6.5 per 100,000. In Victoria the homicide rate has risen 30 per cent in the past year. Still feeling superior about being an Aussie?
You bet. Were the NT homicides done with a firearm. Where are your figures of Aussie mass killing using firearms? If you're going to create a discussion,please make it relevant to the initial subject,same as the other folk who want to bring car deaths into the equation...irrelevant.
figures are for firearm homicides. Until recently we held the record for a mass firearm homicide, being the Port Arthur massacre. The Australian numbers are completely relevant to the initial subject. We have the same statistical incidence of psyco/sociopaths in Australia and they can get guns, legally or otherwise.
Since Port Arthur,Ian....come on don't split hairs like that. Aussie has about the best gun control laws in the world,most of the thinking USA politicians agree to that as well.
It's been said before, but this is the most useless, irrelevant thread on Fchat. The US govt and it's citizens can organise their society as they wish. Thanks a lot PP for starting this dumb thread
........and on a different firearms subject... http://www.news.com.au/sport/more-sports/michael-diamond-aiming-for-gold-after-firearm-charges-dropped/news-story/56a0bb06a162b3a62f2761c3a29439b6
2x Gold Medalist. That's proof people use guns for other things besides killing. Nice job killing your dumb argument about guns only purpose.
The NT homicide figure is a disgrace - but 6.5 is still a huge improvement on 19 per 100k... especially since I presume the figures are base per 100k of the ENTIRE population. I'm not sure 'superior' is the correct word, but certainly as an Aussie I feel a whole lot safer and I think our fear factor here is way lower.
I agree about this purpose and greatly admire the bloke and our archers as well,remembering though,any tournament of this kind using weapons,it probably started with how many you killed. as for the rest of your input........