English pal of mine had a girlfriend who lived in Oakland. Guy broke into her apartment, she had a gun under her mattres.....he appeared in her bedroom doorway and she shot him stone dead! No further action taken.
I would say that is a justified homicide .. if she had not had a gun she could (or probably would have) been raped and/or murdered
This is an incident whereby gun ownership was a life saver. American cities are still crime ridden and many criminals are armed with guns or knives and have no respect for human life. Law abiding citizens have a right and many may feel the need to own a gun and to know how to use it. There is little or no justification though for anyone owning a rapid fire machine gun or the like
I have friends and relations in the states, some own guns, some don't .. a lot has to do with the area where they live and their own state of mind. To the gun owners it's just like owning a necessary tool
Gun ownership doesn't make life safer and there's no evidence to back that up - the stats on the gun violence archive are horrifying. 545 children(0-11) killed or injured this year.
Trusting your population to use guns responsibly is naivety bordering on gross stupidity. If you own a gun it makes it much easier for you to kill someone and for someone to kill you with it.
Fear is an easy sales pitch and every time there is a mass shooting in the US gun sales go up and the problem gets worse.
My mum's fella has a cabinet full of them. He is into clay and black powder shooting. He is vetted and licensed yearly, as should be. He lost hundreds of pounds in the amnesty a few years back. This is a hobby.
My hobby is Charlton Athletic (a mere after thought lately I admit).
The whole gun violence issue is separate from the above I think we all agree? What you do when it is so ingrained into the national psyche, I haven't a clue. Such a sad waste of innocent life in the USA.
as a side note when in vegas a couple of years back a few freinds went to one of these gun ranges, wont pretend i know loads about them but they could shoot a 50 calibre sniper rifle, think its quite a serious bit of kit.
that's there website when you look at the arsenal of weapons on there its ridiculous, and there's not 1 or 2 of these places there's shit loads of them.
couple of freinds have shotgun licences here, both of which there guns are stored at home in approved cabinets and are used for sports shooting ( clays ) as far as im aware as opposed to live targets.
They are hard work to get those licences, I'm into clay shooting (not into using a shotgun to blast wildlife into a dozen pieces) and it's more aggro than the cost saving of having to hire a gun at a shoot as opposed to owning and storing my own.
America is big on its freedoms and before 2001 it was a very very free place indeed.
They have no desire to control gun ownership, be that because of economic reasons and pressure from the NRA or firearms manufacturers or because of that outdated 2nd amendment to base arms. That was prove after sandy hook. The powers that be in the states are ok with kids being massacred.
My mum's fella has a cabinet full of them. He is into clay and black powder shooting. He is vetted and licensed yearly, as should be. He lost hundreds of pounds in the amnesty a few years back. This is a hobby.
My hobby is Charlton Athletic (a mere after thought lately I admit).
The whole gun violence issue is separate from the above I think we all agree? What you do when it is so ingrained into the national psyche, I haven't a clue. Such a sad waste of innocent life in the USA.
Interestingly enough I was just trying to do some reading on the gun laws/licenses over here to see what you have to do to own a gun. Our government also took specific action after dunblane and hungerford
But as others have mentioned, we have a completely different culture to the U.S when it comes to this
I'm not saying they ban it, because I get it's in their constitution etc, I'm just amazed they can't get more stringent limits and restrictions to pass
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The NRA and the other gun lobbies hang on to the second bit as if it is in isolation, which it clearly isn't. The right to bear arms is inextricably linked to the 'well regulated militia'. There is nothing 'well regulated' about gun availability in the US. In 1791 there was no US Army, Navy or Air Force so the 'minutemen' were the only defence against an invasion by a foreign power (specifically Britain).
The most powerful arms at the time were muskets capable of a single shot at a time and with the best musketeer able to reload and fire 3 times a minute, and with a range of about 50m. How did we get from that to there being weapons such as the M249 SAW available?
English pal of mine had a girlfriend who lived in Oakland. Guy broke into her apartment, she had a gun under her mattres.....he appeared in her bedroom doorway and she shot him stone dead! No further action taken.
I would say that is a justified homicide .. if she had not had a gun she could (or probably would have) been raped and/or murdered
This is an incident whereby gun ownership was a life saver. American cities are still crime ridden and many criminals are armed with guns or knives and have no respect for human life. Law abiding citizens have a right and many may feel the need to own a gun and to know how to use it. There is little or no justification though for anyone owning a rapid fire machine gun or the like
I have friends and relations in the states, some own guns, some don't .. a lot has to do with the area where they live and their own state of mind. To the gun owners it's just like owning a necessary tool
Gun ownership doesn't make life safer and there's no evidence to back that up - the stats on the gun violence archive are horrifying. 545 children(0-11) killed or injured this year.
Trusting your population to use guns responsibly is naivety bordering on gross stupidity. If you own a gun it makes it much easier for you to kill someone and for someone to kill you with it.
Fear is an easy sales pitch and every time there is a mass shooting in the US gun sales go up and the problem gets worse.
Indeed. The first thing that happens when you buy a gun is that statistically you are 30% more likely to be killed by a gun. Now of course that statistic is massively skewed by the fact that a lot of criminals and gang members have guns and die in gun related incidents, but the underlying point stands. American's buy guns in order to feel safer whilst the opposite is actually true.
It would appear this bloke used whats called a bump stock, which in affect allows him to fire at near automatic levels. I would assume this type of device is more likely to be restricted or banned in Nevada or USA.
English pal of mine had a girlfriend who lived in Oakland. Guy broke into her apartment, she had a gun under her mattres.....he appeared in her bedroom doorway and she shot him stone dead! No further action taken.
I would say that is a justified homicide .. if she had not had a gun she could (or probably would have) been raped and/or murdered
This is an incident whereby gun ownership was a life saver. American cities are still crime ridden and many criminals are armed with guns or knives and have no respect for human life. Law abiding citizens have a right and many may feel the need to own a gun and to know how to use it. There is little or no justification though for anyone owning a rapid fire machine gun or the like
I have friends and relations in the states, some own guns, some don't .. a lot has to do with the area where they live and their own state of mind. To the gun owners it's just like owning a necessary tool
as a side note when in vegas a couple of years back a few freinds went to one of these gun ranges, wont pretend i know loads about them but they could shoot a 50 calibre sniper rifle, think its quite a serious bit of kit.
that's there website when you look at the arsenal of weapons on there its ridiculous, and there's not 1 or 2 of these places there's shit loads of them.
I went to the SHOT (Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Show) in Vegas a few years ago for work, on one of the stands you could win a .50 cal sniper rifle in a raffle!
If mass shootings are seen as a problem by lawmakers then there will be more regulation but we have to conclude that it's not really an issue for them.
If a right to bear arms in a constitution written in 1791 that obviously belongs to a different age and set of circumstances is beyond debate it suggests unnecessary loss of life doesn't really matter.
The gun lobby in the US are beyond rational debate.....
English pal of mine had a girlfriend who lived in Oakland. Guy broke into her apartment, she had a gun under her mattres.....he appeared in her bedroom doorway and she shot him stone dead! No further action taken.
Bit different having one gun under the pillow for protection, than 45 automatic weapons stashed in your spare room
Oh yes of course shine......it's entirely different.
The number of people dying falling out of bed shocks me more than the gun deaths!
Armed Toddlers 21, bloody hell thats says it all for me.
My kids are scary enough with water pistols and nerf guns! If there are real guns around the house it's pretty much inevitable that they will end up being used by kids unless they're kept so securely that they would be worthless in the event of a home invasion, which is the reason that a lot of Americans give for having a gun.
Maybe what they need is a spate of assault rifles mowing down members of Congress and Judges. Maybe then it will hit home that the people that are being killed are more important than their political careers.
There was an incident when a shooter was taking pot shots a team of congressmen playing baseball last year
Maybe what they need is a spate of assault rifles mowing down members of Congress and Judges. Maybe then it will hit home that the people that are being killed are more important than their political careers.
There was an incident when a shooter was taking pot shots a team of congressmen playing baseball last year
The congressman in question is still in favour of guns by the way.
Someone needs to have the balls to explain to the American public that the Second Amendment does not under the right to own arms.
No, John Q. Guntoter, you don't have the right to own a gun. The Second Amendment allows you to bear arms, but says nothing about owning them.
Once law-makers can get their heads round that issue, gun control becomes possible. Starting by making it illegal to pass ownership of a gun to a third party. Then massively reducing the amount of ammunition an individual is allowed. Then making private ownership outlawed entirely, and, instead, enabling guns to be leased by reputable, licensed gun clubs, who lose their licence if any of their guns is used in a crime.
Use a gun in a crime and you lose your right to bear arms. Lease a gun to someone who uses it in a crime and you lose your licence and income.
It's a start. But sadly, because the NRA is so powerful and the wrong man is in the White House, it's a start that's a long way away.
It would appear this bloke used whats called a bump stock, which in affect allows him to fire at near automatic levels. I would assume this type of device is more likely to be restricted or banned in Nevada or USA.
Surely all the little rocket man needs to do is change his own constitution to give him the right to keep and bear ICBMs then Trump will leave him alone
if a president brought in a law banning assault rifles say whats to stop individual states from challenging this as they have with Trumps "immigration reform/travel ban" ? mind you if 60/70% of the States went along with it then you have still brought in an element of gun control
if a president brought in a law banning assault rifles say whats to stop individual states from challenging this as they have with Trumps "immigration reform/travel ban" ? mind you if 60/70% of the States went along with it then you have still brought in an element of gun control
Washington and New york tried to bring in stricter controls and it was thrown out by the supreme court
if a president brought in a law banning assault rifles say whats to stop individual states from challenging this as they have with Trumps "immigration reform/travel ban" ? mind you if 60/70% of the States went along with it then you have still brought in an element of gun control
Washington and New york tried to bring in stricter controls and it was thrown out by the supreme court
Which i9s a reminder that things are broken root and branch. The NRA/Gun Lobby is so influential that they ensure super pro-2nd Amendment judges are the only ones appointed by Republicans. And because our legal system works on precedent, it means that once those judges have rules it's hard to undo it.
If mass shootings are seen as a problem by lawmakers then there will be more regulation but we have to conclude that it's not really an issue for them.
If a right to bear arms in a constitution written in 1791 that obviously belongs to a different age and set of circumstances is beyond debate it suggests unnecessary loss of life doesn't really matter.
The gun lobby in the US are beyond rational debate.....
English pal of mine had a girlfriend who lived in Oakland. Guy broke into her apartment, she had a gun under her mattres.....he appeared in her bedroom doorway and she shot him stone dead! No further action taken.
Bit different having one gun under the pillow for protection, than 45 automatic weapons stashed in your spare room
Oh yes of course shine......it's entirely different.
You have a hand gun to protect your home, you have 45 automatic weapons if you want to start a fkin malitia.
he's probably proud of the way that everyone rallied round to help each other, just like obama, may, khan and others before them have said when atrocities occur, which this is.
he's probably proud of the way that everyone rallied round to help each other, just like obama, may, khan and others before them have said when atrocities occur, which this is.
Agreed some people jump on anything. Trump is a dick, but nout wrong with that tweet.
Continuing his long-standing tradition of being completely incapable of empathy and having no ability to understand a sombre atmosphere.
Obama cried during the aftermath of Sandy Hook and tried to do something about it...Trump tweets saying how proud he is about the state of his country. A state that allowed the pointless deaths and 100's of injuries to completely innocent people.
A normal, rational person, in a position to actually make a difference but choosing not to, might feel shame rather than pride.
Comments
Trusting your population to use guns responsibly is naivety bordering on gross stupidity. If you own a gun it makes it much easier for you to kill someone and for someone to kill you with it.
Fear is an easy sales pitch and every time there is a mass shooting in the US gun sales go up and the problem gets worse.
My hobby is Charlton Athletic (a mere after thought lately I admit).
The whole gun violence issue is separate from the above I think we all agree? What you do when it is so ingrained into the national psyche, I haven't a clue. Such a sad waste of innocent life in the USA.
https://www.battlefieldvegas.com/pages/a-la-carte-landing-page
that's there website when you look at the arsenal of weapons on there its ridiculous, and there's not 1 or 2 of these places there's shit loads of them.
America is big on its freedoms and before 2001 it was a very very free place indeed.
They have no desire to control gun ownership, be that because of economic reasons and pressure from the NRA or firearms manufacturers or because of that outdated 2nd amendment to base arms. That was prove after sandy hook. The powers that be in the states are ok with kids being massacred.
But as others have mentioned, we have a completely different culture to the U.S when it comes to this
I'm not saying they ban it, because I get it's in their constitution etc, I'm just amazed they can't get more stringent limits and restrictions to pass
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The NRA and the other gun lobbies hang on to the second bit as if it is in isolation, which it clearly isn't. The right to bear arms is inextricably linked to the 'well regulated militia'. There is nothing 'well regulated' about gun availability in the US. In 1791 there was no US Army, Navy or Air Force so the 'minutemen' were the only defence against an invasion by a foreign power (specifically Britain).
The most powerful arms at the time were muskets capable of a single shot at a time and with the best musketeer able to reload and fire 3 times a minute, and with a range of about 50m. How did we get from that to there being weapons such as the M249 SAW available?
Utter, utter madness.
His intention was rape by the way.
one of these:
From twitter
No, John Q. Guntoter, you don't have the right to own a gun. The Second Amendment allows you to bear arms, but says nothing about owning them.
Once law-makers can get their heads round that issue, gun control becomes possible. Starting by making it illegal to pass ownership of a gun to a third party. Then massively reducing the amount of ammunition an individual is allowed. Then making private ownership outlawed entirely, and, instead, enabling guns to be leased by reputable, licensed gun clubs, who lose their licence if any of their guns is used in a crime.
Use a gun in a crime and you lose your right to bear arms. Lease a gun to someone who uses it in a crime and you lose your licence and income.
It's a start. But sadly, because the NRA is so powerful and the wrong man is in the White House, it's a start that's a long way away.
Continuing his long-standing tradition of being completely incapable of empathy and having no ability to understand a sombre atmosphere.
You have a hand gun to protect your home, you have 45 automatic weapons if you want to start a fkin malitia.
A normal, rational person, in a position to actually make a difference but choosing not to, might feel shame rather than pride.