Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/10/2015 6:11:23 PM   
ifmaz


Posts: 844
Joined: 7/22/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: blnymph


quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz


You keep saying "other civilized countries and "laws". Which countries and which laws are you referring to specifically?



just in case any of you do really not know about those laws in other countries - and for those who want to know ...

look here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation


easily done btw - there are those things called search engines ...


I'm aware of various other countries and their laws but am unaware of which countries and/or laws MusicMystery repeatedly refers to as being "sensible", hence my attempts to have him cite specifics. I took your advice and Googled for "sensible countries firearm laws" and "countries with sensible firearm laws" but got mixed results. I even tried searching for "what country is MusicMystery referring to when he says sensible" but that was mostly a disaster.

Finally I tried "sensible countries", whose first result (at least for me) asserts Switzerland is the most sensible. Per your helpful link, I read about Switzerland's firearm laws. Interestingly, the Swiss seem to require males aged 20-30 to enroll in weapons training and undergo mandatory yearly training on how to handle a rifle, mostly the Sig Sauer SG550 which fires 5.56mm ammunition, much like an AR15. Perhaps the Swiss are the most sensible: I'd fully support an SG550 in every home!

EDIT: I also searched for "civilized countries", whose first result led me to this list of civilized countries. Norway is apparently the most civilized, perhaps due to allowing anyone to purchase a suppressor (aka silencer), something I would also support. In the US, suppressors/silencers fall under the National Firearms Act and require a $200 tax stamp.

In summary, an SG550 in every home and silencers without a $200 stamp. I could really get behind this "sensible gun law" initiative.

EDIT 2: The 420,000 SG550 rifles in private Swiss homes are fully automatic. This gets better and better!


< Message edited by ifmaz -- 10/10/2015 6:28:17 PM >

(in reply to blnymph)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/10/2015 6:31:29 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline 		Alright, you folks are saying the United States Firearm regulations and restrictions don't work because they aren't comprehensive enough to stop stuff like school shootings from happening.

Lets start with the Brady Law.

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Pub.L. 103–159, 107 Stat. 1536, enacted November 30, 1993), often referred to as the Brady Act and commonly called the Brady Bill,[1][2] is an Act of the United States Congress that mandated federal background checks on firearm purchasers in the United States, and imposed a five-day waiting period on purchases, until the NICS system was implemented in 1998.

Back ground checks, score one for the pro gun restrictions.

Problem, the NCIS system is hardly up to date, poorly funded and is independent of the ATF, and the information retrieved is most likely out of date, hence the reason some one arrested for a felony can buy a gun even though, legally they cannot until the case is cleared.

Solution, actually allocate the total amount of funding budgeted for the system, as in, congress budgets 112 million for the system, allocate and insure 112 million actually gets to the program, not the 10 to 12 million of the total budgeted because the money went elsewhere.

In other words, the law is there, the system is there but the money aint. Not a law problem, or a regulation problem, its a financial problem created by the very people elected to office.

So, in essence, there is no new law needed to fix this problem except one that mandates that budgeted amounts actually get spent on what the hell they are budgeted for.

Who cannot purchase firearms:

Felon
Additionally, persons awaiting trial on felony charges are prohibited from receiving firearms.

Drug user or addict - (Often shown where paraphernalia seized, subject tests positive for drugs and/or subject claims drugs were possessed for personal use.)

Alien - (Includes illegal aliens and aliens lawfully admitted under non-immigrant visas, i.e., those aliens not admitted for permanent residence.
This provision does not prohibit aliens who lawfully possess a so-called “green card” from possessing guns or ammunition.);

Is subject to a domestic restraining order
-
(The order must prohibit contact with an intimate partner, or child of the subject, and must have been issued only after a hearing
of which the subject was notified and at which the subject had an opportunity to participate. The order must also find the subject po
ses a threat to the physical safety of the intimate partner or child or must prohibit the use, threatened use or attempted use of physical force.)
;
Has a prior conviction for domestic assault -

Fugitive from justice

Dishonorably discharged from military service.

Now, if the NCIS was properly funded and working, guess what, all these folks would not be able to buy a gun.

Then there are the national firearm acts of 1934, 1968, the restrictions on weapons that cannot be imported, the first assault weapon ban, and the countless other pages of laws that make all this up.

So, the laws are there, in place. No more are really needed, although, admittedly these could use some tweaking, and a shit ton of money so they will actually work.

So, might I suggest that instead of screaming for more laws, how about screaming for the money to make the existing ones work and then see what, if anything, needs to be added.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to blnymph)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/10/2015 7:47:24 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected.

...and school massacres are an excellent example of something that's NOT "in proper working order," "calibrated correctly," or "functioning as expected."

Of course not. Anyone acting in a CRIMINAL fashion is not working "in proper order". Fix them, not the law-abiding citizenry who ARE in "proper working order".

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/10/2015 7:51:54 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

No, its obama derangement gone wild.
Oregon shooters mama got so many guns cos...obama.

As I recall, she did suffer from psychological issues. Not the one you noted though.

Do you have a cite that details when she stated or wrote that statement? That she purchased her guns because of Obama?

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/10/2015 8:28:49 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

...and hence, sensible countries have sensible gun laws, just as in other areas.

Name a country with "sensible" laws that doesn't restrict the vast majority of it's people from owning firearms.

< Message edited by BamaD -- 10/10/2015 8:45:12 PM >

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/10/2015 9:02:57 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3660
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline 		Look at any other country in the world right now, and tell me that Americans & their guns is a primary concern.

There is no freedom of life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness without the freedom to defend them from anyone, government or civilian, that would try to take them.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/10/2015 11:55:39 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Name a country with "sensible" laws that doesn't restrict the vast majority of it's people from owning firearms.

As you have been repeatedly advised Bama, any Australian who wants a firearms license can get one, provided:
* They are of sound character;
* They have a bona fide reason for wanting to own a firearm.
It ought to be crystal clear from the above that the vast majority of Australians can get a firearm is they so choose.

We do have sensible gun laws that ban certain classes of firearms*, and that mandate firearms are stored safely. I would imagine that we are far from alone in this, and that roughly similar laws prevail in most of the industrialised West with the obvious exclusion of the USA. These laws are not a matter of controversy here. Candidates running on gun liberalisation platforms rarely attract more than 1% of the vote and all of the mainstream political parties have no policy or mandate to relax our gun laws. IOW our gun laws enjoy overwhelming support from Australians and there is zero prospect of them being changed.

I do wonder why you continue in routinely presenting false/wrong/misleading points on this issue after you have been repeatedly advised of the relevant facts, and the errors you are making. It appears as though you hold very particular (and particularly self-serving) notions about guns and gun laws and that these notions are impervious to the actual facts of the matter.

* Details on which classes of firearms are permitted or banned can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 10/11/2015 12:09:31 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 12:10:38 AM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Look at any other country in the world right now, and tell me that Americans & their guns is a primary concern.

There is no freedom of life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness without the freedom to defend them from anyone, government or civilian, that would try to take them.



Jefferson, and many of the founding fathers knew their history, and knew it very well.

Republics, throughout history have a nasty habit of failing, the elected governments become corrupt, or one individual becomes too powerful, eventually though, the republics of history have failed, evolving into empires with one supreme ruler.

Thus the idea of an armed public safeguarding the freedom of the people to maintain the republic.

The problem lies not in the form of government, Emperors have been overthrown, kings dethroned, but the people themselves.

There is a quote, most likely bogus, but attributed to Isoroku Yamamoto, which claims he said that invading the US would be a mistake for behind every blade of grass would be a rifle.

Would an armed populace prevented a full scale invasion by Japan from succeeding, probably not, it would have made controlling the country damn near impossible, eventually becoming untenable, not because the American people were armed, but because the Japanese could not have maintained the strength in troops to keep order.

Can an armed guerrilla force defeat a determined enemy, no not without outside help.

History shows Afghanistan has never been conquered successfully, and not due to the determination of the people to resist, but because no two groups in that country can agree to anything except they dont want someone else telling them what to do. Once an invader is thrown out, they go back to fighting among themselves.

So, what then is the benefit of an armed populace? It is simple, and so clear that only fools look to find a complicated reason.

An armed populace believes that it could win back what freedoms are lost. That belief makes the problems of control by a strong central government expensive, both in money and man power, eventually the strong government would succeed, but what would be left would not be worth keeping.

All one has to do to see this fact is to look at the civil wars going on around the world today. By the time the dust settles, there will be nothing left.

Thus fanatic gun owners say that any form of control or regulation is an infringement of their rights, and thus a conspiracy to deprive the rest of the people of theirs.

Then you have people like me, who after wondering around this rock and seeing the way humans treat other humans, firmly believe that humanity is on the verge of a global melt down and civilization will collapse, not because of a world war, or some biblical prophecy, but because some jack ass with more money than common sense is going to wandering into some jungle in some screwed up effort to find his or her true self, and pick up some bug that makes the flu pandemic of the early 20th century look like a world wide case of a bad head cold.

When it is over, little pockets of humans will be guarding what little they have with whatever they have and the best way to protect it is with a gun, or a bunch of guns.

Or it may be because oil actually runs out, despite the fact the diesel engine was originally conceived to run on vegetable oil.

You see, humans have grown too technologically dependent. A pandemic crippling the infrastructures of the major metropolitan areas will lead to wide spread chaos, when there are no longer enough healthy people to run the power plants, electricity will fail, then all the technology we depend on becomes nothing more than paper weights.

So while liberals scream about gun control to make the country safer, I believe it is a subconscious desire to level the playing field. History has shown us what a panic driven mob can do, and lets face it, a few people with guns suddenly have the power to control others.

Then there are the true conspiracy believers, the ones that really believe in FEMA detainment centers, the NWO, and all that nonsense. They look at efforts to regulate guns as the first step toward the massive government gun grab.

Musicmystery has repeatedly said "sensible gun laws."

The problem is that we have sensible gun laws, and have had them for decades. It is not the laws that are the problem, it is the lack of a system that actually can make them work. Guns with full auto capability are strictly regulated, if the system for the back ground checks worked, then people who, by law, are not allowed to buy guns would not be able to buy them.

The liberal solution is more laws, which wont work for the same reason the ones we have now dont work, the system to make them work is not working.

So, writing more gun laws would add to an already overburdened system, that is under funded, understaffed and overwhelmed.

I have spent the last few days reading the Federal statutes on firearms. There is a very clear list of who can and cannot buy guns, there are a long list of penalties for being in possession of a gun if you are not legally permitted to own one, penalties for have a stolen gun in your possession, and very strict penalties for using a gun in the commission of a crime.

Then you have a freaking shit ton of regulations of what guns you can own, what guns you can own with a special license, and what guns you cant own under any circumstances.

Then there are the regulations that dictate just how all of this is supposed to work, the system for background checks, mental health reports that would deny gun purchases to people with history of mental illness prone to violent outbreaks.

All of it dependent on the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) is a computerized database of documented criminal justice information available to virtually every law enforcement agency nationwide, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

So, what makes more sense, passing more laws increasing the load on a system that would work if it were to get the funds that are budgeted for it, or screaming at congress to quite spending money on crap and spend money on the system that is suppose to prevent stuff like school shootings?

The NRA and other fanatic gun rights groups make more money and gain more support by keeping their collective mouths shut about the existing problems, which then gets wide spread media attention, creates great social debate, and then involves every damn person on the planet that think they know more about the problem than we do, especially responsible gun owners.

For the most part, gun control people have not read the laws, have not looked at why the existing laws dont work, because if they did, they sure the hell wouldnt be electing the shit heads to congress who keep agreeing to underfund the stuff that is supposed to make them work.

Hence you get to the basic principle of American Politics. Tell people why they should be afraid, point to a group of people and claim they are the cause of the fear and problems, then promise a bunch of bullshit to fix the problem.

Liberal politicians scream we need more gun restrictions, more laws, etc. Conservatives scream that we have plenty of good gun laws that would work if they liberals would allow them to, and both sides knowing full well the reason they dont work is because the money that is supposed to make them work goes somewhere else.

Neither side wants the individual to find out the truth, and with good reason. If liberal voters found out that their saints of gun control were not allowing the system to work, and the conservative gun owners figured out that the liberals would have no problems for the same reason, none of the assholes in Washington would get re elected. Most, if not all, would be tarred and feathered and then run out of town on a rail.

Then you have those of us, moderates, we are called, although I prefer the term realist, who actually have figured out the flaws in the system, go to great lengths to point them out, just so we can sit back and watch both sides make complete asses of themselves arguing about achieving the same fucking thing.

Laws that make sense and that work.

My handguns are for personal protection and the protection of the home.

My bolt action rifles are for hunting, I prefer them over a semi auto.

The number of semi autos I own are for the nights when I hunt hogs. And the various calibers in those rifles are for the various sizes of feral hogs we have in the area (I blame the feral hog problem on the American obsession with bacon.) And trust me, if I took some of the gun control advocates on this board on a hog hunt and gave them a bolt action, after the first run in with a pack of hogs, they would be threatening me with the bolt action saying I was trying to get them killed.

If I took some of the Europeans on a hog hunt, they might smile and comment about how they have hunted or seen wild boar and they just dont get that big, and that I was clearly following the American tendency to exaggerate.

Then I would show them some of the hog traps a big boar has destroyed that roams this area. I know for a fact I have hit that bastard with .308 rounds and he has kept going. I have seen traps made of corral panels destroyed by that pig. Which is why I dropped a small fortune on a .456 hog gun.

I admit I have rambled on this post, and covered a lot of area, all related.

My hope is that people will not take my word for the problems with existing gun laws, but research for themselves.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 12:42:34 AM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Name a country with "sensible" laws that doesn't restrict the vast majority of it's people from owning firearms.

As you have been repeatedly advised Bama, any Australian who wants a firearms license can get one, provided:

* They are of sound character;
* They have a bona fide reason for wanting to own a firearm.

It ought to be crystal clear from the above that the vast majority of Australians can get a firearm is they so choose..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

What's crystal clear from your link is that the "vast majority of Australians" don't stand a chance of getting a firearms license.

Australia has very tight restrictions on some items which are far less controlled in comparable societies such as New Zealand. Air pistols, elsewhere unrestricted, are as difficult to get as centrefire and rimfire handguns, and low-powered airguns are as difficult as cartridge arms to licence. Airsoft guns are banned in all states and non-firing replicas banned in most.

K.


(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 1:42:10 AM   
epiphiny43


Posts: 688
Joined: 10/20/2006
Status: offline 		I basically agree a huge part of the violence control problem is too many laws and too little enforcement of the very laws that would help most. Missing, a few small items:
Such as the all but universally recognized problem of an all but MIA public mental health system capable of actually dealing with the more disturbed individuals seen everywhere. Much of the Homeless Problem vanishes when you treat the more disturbed people abandoned when the movement to deinstitutionalize those treatable with meds foundered on the NIMBY sentiment. All the small neighborhood clinics that more effectively treat most never happened and nothing came about to replace the large institutions or the never established small drop-in clinics. A Huge FAIL the country is mostly in denial about. The mass killings are just part of the whirlwind we are reaping from all that.
How could anyone conceive of fixing a violence problem in a society that beats small children attempting to teach them successful coping strategies? Want to start a fight at most PTAs? Suggest it's child abuse to spank children. MOST First World countries are already there. The US is dragging ass once again. Every learning professional knows success teaches, not pain and humiliation. Witness the largest and least successful criminal 'justice' system the planet has ever seen, the State and Federal Prison systems.
If as a society we see hitting as solving even instructional difficulties with small children, how are you supposing some fraction of adults won't resort to violence to solve religious, political, social or personal problems?? Wait till the social copy cat phenomena gets a few meldings of IEDs and drones to inspire the weak between the ears. We'll wish for gun violence instead! (Reports are a few companies are working hard on jamming tech to neutralize the more common drones. Which soon becomes an endless tech war like hacking exploits in software is now.)

My take on the Hog problem is the biggest element is Hog Hunters! No effective control measure is allow to be legislated or left unsabotaged physically by those determined to keep hunting frequently no matter what the ecological consequences. Any number of control measures would work. Poison and traps do fine, if allowed to. Apex predators do nicely. Urban soft heads in the name of 'animal rights' stop a lot of programs designed to preserve ecologies at the sacrifice of a few individuals and species. This isn't comprehendable to some micro intellects. Enough to keep funding too low or intermittent to have effect.
Rural people willing to see whole landscapes disappear to exotic plants keep any possible danger to their precious children from being reintroduced. No animal but humans spreads invasive plants better than feral pigs. My opinion is nothing clears children's minds of social programming by consumerist mass media about the value of multi-generational integrated local communities like a few kids each year taken by large predators.

The dangers to urban civilization from pandemics aren't going to be mass energy system vulnerabilities. We are already over the hump on micro generation. Wind and solar and even current battery tech are now sufficient, and would be largely in place minus the huge subsidies that Big Oil still enjoys. With wider awareness of anaerobic pyrolysis of biomass for transportation fuels and the next few generations of battery development to make solar and wind far more competitive than fossil oil, small and medium size communities will largely be off the grid. Already many urban buildings are moving that direction. Large area grid distribution of energy is simply too inefficient to continue.
It's food security and distribution that are the vulnerabilities of large cities. This is only getting worse as the invaluable GMO tech has been hijacked for the monopolistic practices of a few seed and herbicide corporations seeking planet hegemony for their business model. It's already well-established as a non-sustainable agricultural and business model as weeds and insects have far faster generational times to evolve counters to each new technological 'bullet' industrial ag monoculture tries in sustaining itself. Our soil, water and ecologies are diminishing fast under the assault of each 'fix' ag multi-nationals try.

And everyone thinks the planet needs Their baby. The real elephant in the room. We now need 4 Earths worth of resources if everyone is to live the same standard of living as the US enjoys. China isn't going to stop trying to attain our material success. We will soon see how the rest of the world feels about globalization as China's efforts dwarf ours.

As for grinding up the world with revolution, most current turmoil is leftover social dysfunction from the Colonial era and their creation of unsustainable States drawn without any consideration or awareness of cultural, linguistic, religious, ecological or geographic realities. The legacy of this FAIL is no current sustainable states may be possible in large regions due to the geographic mobility and migration as people have sought any form of betterment in impossible situations. Where there is consciousness of country, revolution is largely absent. In societies where loyalties are to sect, clan or language, mischief is simple to start or sustain. Add poverty and some valuable minerals, oil or other extractable resources, that the First World isn't squeamish about buying, and the money to arm violently recruited child armies is always available.
As China moves into these regions with no compunctions about co-opting local corruption to it's materials ends, the disconnect between the marginalized and the privileged only gets more inciting to violence. Interesting times! I'm hoping China learns about ethics and development better than the US hasn't.
When Bernie is the Only POTUS candidate speaking any truth about economic and business realities, hope is damn thin for anyone not in the top 1%. If we don't consciously design our economy and finance as carefully as our cars and buildings for open and equal access and treatment for all, unfettered multi-national competition continues to be the the Metastasizing Cancer of economic systems. By far the 'most efficient' economic system at generating capital, but one that always destroys it's host.

< Message edited by epiphiny43 -- 10/11/2015 1:55:13 AM >

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 3:18:51 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Name a country with "sensible" laws that doesn't restrict the vast majority of it's people from owning firearms.

As you have been repeatedly advised Bama, any Australian who wants a firearms license can get one, provided:

* They are of sound character;
* They have a bona fide reason for wanting to own a firearm.

It ought to be crystal clear from the above that the vast majority of Australians can get a firearm is they so choose..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

What's crystal clear from your link is that the "vast majority of Australians" don't stand a chance of getting a firearms license.

Australia has very tight restrictions on some items which are far less controlled in comparable societies such as New Zealand. Air pistols, elsewhere unrestricted, are as difficult to get as centrefire and rimfire handguns, and low-powered airguns are as difficult as cartridge arms to licence. Airsoft guns are banned in all states and non-firing replicas banned in most.

K.



You are utterly wrong.

Any one who wants to get a firearm can get one provided they pass the character test and have a legitimate reason for obtaining a firearm. The restrictions are focussed on banning certain classes of weapons not making gun ownership per se highly restricted. For instance, it is impossible to get a license for a machine gun. Any one who satisfies the above-mentioned criteria can get a licence for non-automatic rifles or shotguns,or handguns for target shooting.

According to wiki: "As of 2015 about 815,000 people had a gun licence in Australia and there were around 3.5 to 5.5 million Registered Firearms in Australia (pop c22 million). Most people own and use firearms for purposes such as hunting, controlling feral animals, collecting, security work, and target shooting." That's about 3-4% of the population. These numbers prove that gun licences/ownership is not highly restricted.

Any one confused by the claims and counter claims here can check the matter out for themselves here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 10/11/2015 3:19:47 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 3:31:12 AM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
You're not being insulted. These are simple facts.

I posted a ton of data and graphs in one of the other gun threads recently. Go have a look. Links too.


You provided no context for Since sales data has already been shared and ignored, it's clear you're seeking a predetermined fantasy "fact" rather than what's actually happened.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
You cited stock prices, and you quite mistakenly think that indicates sales. It doesn't. You simply don't understand finance. Obviously--not an insult. Simple fact.


I cited stock prices and Ruger's investor relations PDF which shows a loss: Ruger sales, per their investor information, dropped from $688.3M in 2013 to $544.5M in 2014. In your original uncited post the graphics and you yourself mention stock price as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
http://fortune.com/2015/10/08/gun-sales-record-high/
http://thehill.com/regulation/248950-gun-production-has-doubled-under-obama

From 2001 to 2007, gun production held steady at between 3 million and 4 million units a year. It topped 4 million in 2008 but shot to 5.6 million in 2009, held steady in 2010 and then spiked to 8.6 million guns in 2012 and a record 10.8 million in 2013, according to ATF data. September 2015 is the fifth month in a row to set a record for background checks. May, June, July, and August all produced record numbers. The summer of 2015 has seen the most gun sales on record. The FBI’s National Instant Background Check System processed 1,795,102 firearms related applications in September. That represents a new record: 335,739 more checks than the previous September high set in 2012, or a 23 percent increase.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/8/obama-gun-control-push-backfires-as-us-firearms-in/?page=all
http://freebeacon.com/issues/september-sees-record-gun-sales/


Your source says 1,795,102 NICS checks, but the FBI says 1,786,743 (PDF link) for September, 2015. However, none of what you've said provides a reason for the increase in sales, only that an increase has happened. Your hypothesis is the NRA or Obama are using fear to increase sales. The firearm industry has introduced new products since 2007 that could also account for an increase in sales: nearly every manufacturer offers a low-cost AR15-style rifle; lower-cost, polymer-framed pistols are quickly becoming the norm; the rise in shooting sports, etc. Additionally, there are more concealed carry permits in 2014 than 2007 and the relaxation of concealed carry laws. Some of the sales are undoubtedly "panic buying" but it's misleading to label all sales as fear-based while insulting the firearm market as slow-thinking people.

Regardless, I should probably add Ruger to my portfolio.


Look, the argument is superfluous. You site only one company. I suspect car sales will increase in 2015 while Volkswagens will go down.

Furthermore, stock price as a whole in your case may reflect a decrease in sale revenue, stock price more appropriately and almost always reflect a drop in profits. It is actually possible that in the case of just one co., that sales of guns only (they sell other products) may have gone up via a decrease in price or because of new options as you also site, yet enjoyed a smaller margin of profit which may have caused the stock to go down. These things happen often as a result of wall street 'expectations.'

One glaring and somewhat ridiculous example of this is when a few years a ago, IBM enjoyed a record quarterly profit of some $3.3 billion and the stock price went down because that $3.3 billion although a record, didn't meet wall street expectations.

(in reply to ifmaz)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 3:54:15 AM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Pick one. Any one.

And OK...so what's YOUR theory on sales doubling since Obama took office?

Hell, even Bama is on board with that one.


As you are unable or unwilling to cite a country and/or law, lets discuss Mexico, where civilian ownership of firearms is illegal. Please explain how the firearms laws in Mexico have curbed firearm-related deaths.

I don't have a theory on why sales have doubled during Obama's administration.


The massacres and gun deaths in Mexico are primarily drug related and 70% of the guns come from the US, while a few come from other central American countries. Wiki

BTW your site refers to the importation or entering Mexico with guns, not Mexican citizens. Mexicans throughout history, have had gun rights very similar to the US but after several modifications and finally in 1971, Article 10 of the present Constitution was reformed to limit the right to keep arms within the home only." So Mexican citizens can own guns. Wiki

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 10/11/2015 4:11:37 AM >

(in reply to ifmaz)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 4:11:10 AM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43

I basically agree a huge part of the violence control problem is too many laws and too little enforcement of the very laws that would help most. Missing, a few small items:
Such as the all but universally recognized problem of an all but MIA public mental health system capable of actually dealing with the more disturbed individuals seen everywhere. Much of the Homeless Problem vanishes when you treat the more disturbed people abandoned when the movement to deinstitutionalize those treatable with meds foundered on the NIMBY sentiment. All the small neighborhood clinics that more effectively treat most never happened and nothing came about to replace the large institutions or the never established small drop-in clinics. A Huge FAIL the country is mostly in denial about. The mass killings are just part of the whirlwind we are reaping from all that.
How could anyone conceive of fixing a violence problem in a society that beats small children attempting to teach them successful coping strategies? Want to start a fight at most PTAs? Suggest it's child abuse to spank children. MOST First World countries are already there. The US is dragging ass once again. Every learning professional knows success teaches, not pain and humiliation. Witness the largest and least successful criminal 'justice' system the planet has ever seen, the State and Federal Prison systems.
If as a society we see hitting as solving even instructional difficulties with small children, how are you supposing some fraction of adults won't resort to violence to solve religious, political, social or personal problems?? Wait till the social copy cat phenomena gets a few meldings of IEDs and drones to inspire the weak between the ears. We'll wish for gun violence instead! (Reports are a few companies are working hard on jamming tech to neutralize the more common drones. Which soon becomes an endless tech war like hacking exploits in software is now.)

My take on the Hog problem is the biggest element is Hog Hunters! No effective control measure is allow to be legislated or left unsabotaged physically by those determined to keep hunting frequently no matter what the ecological consequences. Any number of control measures would work. Poison and traps do fine, if allowed to. Apex predators do nicely. Urban soft heads in the name of 'animal rights' stop a lot of programs designed to preserve ecologies at the sacrifice of a few individuals and species. This isn't comprehendable to some micro intellects. Enough to keep funding too low or intermittent to have effect.
Rural people willing to see whole landscapes disappear to exotic plants keep any possible danger to their precious children from being reintroduced. No animal but humans spreads invasive plants better than feral pigs. My opinion is nothing clears children's minds of social programming by consumerist mass media about the value of multi-generational integrated local communities like a few kids each year taken by large predators.

The dangers to urban civilization from pandemics aren't going to be mass energy system vulnerabilities. We are already over the hump on micro generation. Wind and solar and even current battery tech are now sufficient, and would be largely in place minus the huge subsidies that Big Oil still enjoys. With wider awareness of anaerobic pyrolysis of biomass for transportation fuels and the next few generations of battery development to make solar and wind far more competitive than fossil oil, small and medium size communities will largely be off the grid. Already many urban buildings are moving that direction. Large area grid distribution of energy is simply too inefficient to continue.
It's food security and distribution that are the vulnerabilities of large cities. This is only getting worse as the invaluable GMO tech has been hijacked for the monopolistic practices of a few seed and herbicide corporations seeking planet hegemony for their business model. It's already well-established as a non-sustainable agricultural and business model as weeds and insects have far faster generational times to evolve counters to each new technological 'bullet' industrial ag monoculture tries in sustaining itself. Our soil, water and ecologies are diminishing fast under the assault of each 'fix' ag multi-nationals try.

And everyone thinks the planet needs Their baby. The real elephant in the room. We now need 4 Earths worth of resources if everyone is to live the same standard of living as the US enjoys. China isn't going to stop trying to attain our material success. We will soon see how the rest of the world feels about globalization as China's efforts dwarf ours.

As for grinding up the world with revolution, most current turmoil is leftover social dysfunction from the Colonial era and their creation of unsustainable States drawn without any consideration or awareness of cultural, linguistic, religious, ecological or geographic realities. The legacy of this FAIL is no current sustainable states may be possible in large regions due to the geographic mobility and migration as people have sought any form of betterment in impossible situations. Where there is consciousness of country, revolution is largely absent. In societies where loyalties are to sect, clan or language, mischief is simple to start or sustain. Add poverty and some valuable minerals, oil or other extractable resources, that the First World isn't squeamish about buying, and the money to arm violently recruited child armies is always available.
As China moves into these regions with no compunctions about co-opting local corruption to it's materials ends, the disconnect between the marginalized and the privileged only gets more inciting to violence. Interesting times! I'm hoping China learns about ethics and development better than the US hasn't.
When Bernie is the Only POTUS candidate speaking any truth about economic and business realities, hope is damn thin for anyone not in the top 1%. If we don't consciously design our economy and finance as carefully as our cars and buildings for open and equal access and treatment for all, unfettered multi-national competition continues to be the the Metastasizing Cancer of economic systems. By far the 'most efficient' economic system at generating capital, but one that always destroys it's host.

You are correct although I might put it in a slightly different way. The erroneously assumed, inevitable genetic and intellectual ascendancy of the human species, is refuted by the greed, venality and need for power that pervades it.

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 10/11/2015 4:14:07 AM >

(in reply to epiphiny43)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 4:44:37 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Look. I'm not parsing point by point with you.

1) ALL other civilized countries have gun control laws -- and far fewer gun fatalities. No point arguing country by country law by law -- that can happen when we're decided WHICH laws are best, not WHETHER we should have them.

2) Parse the numbers anyway you wish -- once you're done, reality, Trumped-Up Obama-Fear is selling guns, and has been, since 2008, and by very large margins.

THAT'S what the discussion is about -- not the silly side quibbling.




You keep saying "other civilized countries and "laws". Which countries and which laws are you referring to specifically?

Additionally, all you have been able to do is show that a record number of firearms are being sold, which you have somehow linked to the NRA or Obama using fear to sell firearms.


It may be of interest to note that, according to this University of Chicago analysis, ' Trends in Gun Ownership in the United States, 1972-2014', the % of US households owing a gun is at or near historical lows, and has been trending down for last few decades.

"The household ownership of firearms has declined in recent decades. Table 1 (left side) shows that the
31.0% of households reported having a firearm in 2014, essentially tying with 2010 for the lowest level of
gun ownership in the last 40-some years. This is a decline of about 17 percentage points from the peak
ownership years in 1977-1980. Similarly, Table 1 (right side) indicates that in 2010 and 2014 about 32%
of adults lived households having firearms. This was a decline almost 19 percentage points from an
average of 51.2% in 1976-1982. Based on an earlier analysis of those who refused to say whether or not
there was a firearm in their household,1 the refusers were reallocated as probably living in a household
with a firearm or not living in such a household. This allocation indicates that just under 35% of adults
lived in a household with a firearm in both 2014 and 2010. This represents a decline of over 16
percentage point from the peak average of 51.1% in 1976-1982.
Table 2 shows that in 2014 22.4% of adults personally owned a firearm. This is up slightly from a record
low of 20.6% in 2010. There has been little change from 2006 to 2014. Personal ownership in 2014 is
down 8.1 percentage points from a high of 30.5% in 1985.
One of the main reasons for the decline in household firearm ownership is the decrease in the popularity
of hunting (Table 3). In 2014, only 15.4% of adults lived in households in which they, their spouse, or
both were hunters. This is the lowest level of hunters since the highest level of 31.6% adults being hunters
or married to a hunter in 1977.2

This decline, which is virtually across the board, is in marked contrast to sales, which are at all time records. The numbers of hunters appears to have halved and US crime rates are falling, which would suggest sales are concentrated on declining numbers of current gun owners are making multiple purchases of weapons.

If the demand from hunters is declining sharply and the need for personal protection appears to be diminishing, one wonders what is propelling existing gun owners to purchase more weapons and fuel the records in sales ......

_____________________________



(in reply to ifmaz)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 6:35:38 AM   
blnymph


Posts: 1598
Joined: 11/13/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz

...

Finally I tried "sensible countries", whose first result (at least for me) asserts Switzerland is the most sensible. Per your helpful link, I read about Switzerland's firearm laws. Interestingly, the Swiss seem to require males aged 20-30 to enroll in weapons training and undergo mandatory yearly training on how to handle a rifle, mostly the Sig Sauer SG550 which fires 5.56mm ammunition, much like an AR15. Perhaps the Swiss are the most sensible: I'd fully support an SG550 in every home!

EDIT: I also searched for "civilized countries", whose first result led me to this list of civilized countries. Norway is apparently the most civilized, perhaps due to allowing anyone to purchase a suppressor (aka silencer), something I would also support. In the US, suppressors/silencers fall under the National Firearms Act and require a $200 tax stamp.

In summary, an SG550 in every home and silencers without a $200 stamp. I could really get behind this "sensible gun law" initiative.

EDIT 2: The 420,000 SG550 rifles in private Swiss homes are fully automatic. This gets better and better!



I have explained a few times that what seems to be some people's wet dream about the Swiss and their gun is quite the opposite - when you know a few more relevant details. I did on other gun threads here, and give another short version again ...

A) the Swiss Army is a militia army - every Swiss man (and volunteering woman) is a Swiss soldier.

B) The gun they (usually) store at home is Swiss Army property, not their own.

C) It is a crime under military jurisdiction if an army weapon is used for whatever non-military use. This begins when it is carried outside safe storage with no military order to do so. Any abuse of a Swiss army gun for a crime (beginning for example with threatening your wife in a domestic quarrel with it) is considered a serious aggravation and will add a few years in jail to any court sentence.

D) (After one mass shooting occured with a military gun involved,) the "Taschenmunition" for servicemen was suspended. The ammonition for the Swiss army gun is since then stored in military armories. One is not allowed to acquire and/or possess ammonition for this gun and store ammonition together with it.

E) This leaves the following what a Swiss soldier is permitted to do with his/her gun when not in military service: Safeguarding, cleaning and maintenance - no carrying, no shooting unless called to duties (happens annually).

F) Switzerland has 2 gun laws: one for civilian weapons, one for army weapons - you ll find that the Swiss gun laws for civilian weapons match those of the neighbouring countries; the one for army weapons is a military law as restrictive as these usually are.


See further:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schweizer_Armee

I would have linked the English version but it does not contain the relevant passage "Persönliche Schusswaffe" (personal weapon).


Interesting for American readers may be though how a country with a militia army for more than 7 centuries regulates its militia army - maybe rather well.

(in reply to ifmaz)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 9:33:37 AM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Look at any other country in the world right now, and tell me that Americans & their guns is a primary concern.

There is no freedom of life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness without the freedom to defend them from anyone, government or civilian, that would try to take them.

I agree. I know, big surprise.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 9:37:21 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: ifmaz It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected.

...and school massacres are an excellent example of something that's NOT "in proper working order," "calibrated correctly," or "functioning as expected."

Of course not. Anyone acting in a CRIMINAL fashion is not working "in proper order". Fix them, not the law-abiding citizenry who ARE in "proper working order".

We're all waiting for the specifics of your magic plan.

IN the meantime . . . metal detectors and background checks at gun shows are not impositions on law-abiding citizens.

In fact, such measures are the mark of a "law-abiding" civilization.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 9:40:09 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Name a country with "sensible" laws that doesn't restrict the vast majority of it's people from owning firearms.

As you have been repeatedly advised Bama, any Australian who wants a firearms license can get one, provided:

* They are of sound character;
* They have a bona fide reason for wanting to own a firearm.

It ought to be crystal clear from the above that the vast majority of Australians can get a firearm is they so choose..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

What's crystal clear from your link is that the "vast majority of Australians" don't stand a chance of getting a firearms license.

Australia has very tight restrictions on some items which are far less controlled in comparable societies such as New Zealand. Air pistols, elsewhere unrestricted, are as difficult to get as centrefire and rimfire handguns, and low-powered airguns are as difficult as cartridge arms to licence. Airsoft guns are banned in all states and non-firing replicas banned in most.

K.



"A common misconception is that firearms are illegal in Australia and that no individual may possess them. Although it is true that Australia has restrictive firearms laws, rifles and shotguns (both of which include semi-automatics), as well as handguns, are all legal within a narrow set of criteria.

"As of 2015 about 815,000 people had a gun licence in Australia and there were around 3.5 to 5.5 million Registered Firearms in Australia. Most people own and use firearms for purposes such as hunting, controlling feral animals, collecting, security work, and target shooting."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe - 10/11/2015 9:43:31 AM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Name a country with "sensible" laws that doesn't restrict the vast majority of it's people from owning firearms.

As you have been repeatedly advised Bama, any Australian who wants a firearms license can get one, provided:
* They are of sound character;
* They have a bona fide reason for wanting to own a firearm.
It ought to be crystal clear from the above that the vast majority of Australians can get a firearm is they so choose.

We do have sensible gun laws that ban certain classes of firearms*, and that mandate firearms are stored safely. I would imagine that we are far from alone in this, and that roughly similar laws prevail in most of the industrialised West with the obvious exclusion of the USA. These laws are not a matter of controversy here. Candidates running on gun liberalisation platforms rarely attract more than 1% of the vote and all of the mainstream political parties have no policy or mandate to relax our gun laws. IOW our gun laws enjoy overwhelming support from Australians and there is zero prospect of them being changed.

I do wonder why you continue in routinely presenting false/wrong/misleading points on this issue after you have been repeatedly advised of the relevant facts, and the errors you are making. It appears as though you hold very particular (and particularly self-serving) notions about guns and gun laws and that these notions are impervious to the actual facts of the matter.

* Details on which classes of firearms are permitted or banned can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Australia

What constitutes a "bona fide" reason for owning a firearm.
What types of firearms are allowed.
Much of my information comes from an Austrailian.
He said self defense is not a valid reason, did he lie to me?
He said semi automatics are outlawed, did he lie to me?
He implied that most repeaters are outlawed, did he lie to me?
Your own link demonstrates that my impression of Australian law it mostly accurate. Much closer than you pretend. Those laws would be a gross violation of the 2nd amendment and the idea that self defense is an invalid reason violates all reason. That said if you are happy with them fine, just keep your nose out of our business.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: America’s Gun Madness, as Seen From Europe Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109