Off Topic Messages

Re: Gun-sale checks rejected in USA

Wed Apr 24, 2013 3:06 pm

Pete Dube wrote:
ColinB wrote:
paulsweeney wrote:I can do the same thing in Canada. I just don't have to. That's the beauty of the Great White North Jak.
You need your guns because there are 299 million other guns out there.


Exactly.

The intruder is likely to be armed because he knows the householder is !

Measures to take the guns out of the equation would break this vicious circle.

But try telling that to the NRA or Republican conservatives...................


No, the intruder is likely to be armed because he's a criminal, and a gun makes it easier for him to commit crime against the defenceless!


Well, no, we have criminals too, but they'd be unlikely to be toting guns, because they know householders won't be so armed.........

Re: Gun-sale checks rejected in USA

Wed Apr 24, 2013 4:15 pm

ColinB wrote:
Pete Dube wrote:
ColinB wrote:
paulsweeney wrote:I can do the same thing in Canada. I just don't have to. That's the beauty of the Great White North Jak.
You need your guns because there are 299 million other guns out there.


Exactly.

The intruder is likely to be armed because he knows the householder is !

Measures to take the guns out of the equation would break this vicious circle.

But try telling that to the NRA or Republican conservatives...................


No, the intruder is likely to be armed because he's a criminal, and a gun makes it easier for him to commit crime against the defenceless!



Well, no, we have criminals too, but they'd be unlikely to be toting guns, because they know householders won't be so armed.........


Which is why the Tories get away with what they do! :)

Re: Gun-sale checks rejected in USA

Wed Apr 24, 2013 4:40 pm

ColinB wrote:
Pete Dube wrote:
ColinB wrote:
paulsweeney wrote:I can do the same thing in Canada. I just don't have to. That's the beauty of the Great White North Jak.
You need your guns because there are 299 million other guns out there.


Exactly.

The intruder is likely to be armed because he knows the householder is !

Measures to take the guns out of the equation would break this vicious circle.

But try telling that to the NRA or Republican conservatives...................


No, the intruder is likely to be armed because he's a criminal, and a gun makes it easier for him to commit crime against the defenceless!


Well, no, we have criminals too, but they'd be unlikely to be toting guns, because they know householders won't be so armed.........


Yes, this is how it is with intruders.

In the UK, some gang members, when asked why they carry knives or walk around with certain breeds of dogs, reply self-defence - their foes in other gangs do the same, so they have to do it to survive.

Imagine if UK citizens were allowed to bear arms.The same aforementioned groups will chuck the knives and their dogs and instead pick up guns. Because that's what others are doing. They are all in a mess, and they know it. So, they get into this sad spiral.

We can be thankful we have not gone down that slippery slope that guarantees anyone the right to own or bear arms. I don't think the UK has ever given that right. The consequences bear out the wisdom of that old approach.

Re: Gun-sale checks rejected in USA

Thu Apr 25, 2013 12:18 am

jak wrote:
ColinB wrote:
jungleroombear wrote:
ColinB wrote:
jak wrote: Colin
You have a Glock 17! My god that's a wonderfull weapon. Im so proud of you :wink:


As you well know, I was simply acting out the scenario as described by jungleroombear...


So, if you had the shot, would you take it? Or would you leave the pistol in the drawer?

What should this woman have done different? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQK2BscIg


Well, I wouldn't have a gun in the first place, and I'm not trained to use one.

The woman could have used other methods to incapacitate her attacker that didn't require her to kill him.


Colin
That woman didn't stand a chance against that guy. He was a career criminal and was coming back for seconds. Guys like him are vicious predators. He got what he deserved. He put himself in that situation.
I live way out in the country with my wife. I leave for work at 3am for my hour long drive to work. I worry about my wife being alone way out here. I take her out behind the house regularly and train her with a Glock 40. I can't imagine her staying out here without that gun. The guy in my avatar is also here to protect her.He will give her time to get prepared. I have told her over and over never be hesitant to use that gun. If somebody ever tried to get in the house I tell her to keep pulling that trigger until its empty.

I understand that to confront a mentally unstable person breaking in to your house with a gun you also have to have a gun in your house to protect your family, I mean this is just common sense! But the big question is why is this necessary in America in the first place, why isn't it necessary to own a gun in situations like this in other country's like Britian ? I think to find the answer to this we have to look at the root of the problem and that starts in how we are brought up.

Jak by reading your posts in this thread (haven't read all) I get the impression that most american cities and neighborhoods are a war zone! Maybe you should move to a more friendly neighborhood? just sayin 8)

By the way I'm not gonna say anything about your current choice of avatar ! :lol:

God what happened to the human race why cant we love each other and be fruitful and multiply and stop all the killing!

Re: Gun-sale checks rejected in USA

Thu Apr 25, 2013 4:48 am

If all the people who legally own guns were to turn them in,
does anyone here think the criminals would do the same?

We could expand that to nuclear weapons. I'm sure the rest
of the world would follow the U.S. if we were to dismantle our
nuclear weapons, right?

Re: Gun-sale checks rejected in USA

Thu Apr 25, 2013 6:29 am

iplayastrat wrote:If all the people who legally own guns were to turn them in,
does anyone here think the criminals would do the same?

We could expand that to nuclear weapons. I'm sure the rest
of the world would follow the U.S. if we were to dismantle our
nuclear weapons, right?


Australia did it, why can't the US deal with their clusterfuck gun problem?

http://news.yahoo.com/australias-gun-co ... 53180.html

Re: Gun-sale checks rejected in USA

Thu Apr 25, 2013 5:22 pm

jak wrote:"So there is no check as to whether you are on some kind of mental health register then?"

The question is asked if youve ever been treated for mental illness. I cant recall the exact wording. Of course youre on the honor system. I dont think there is any kind of mental health register. That issue is the toughest one. How do you distinguish someones mental health? I dont know how you could go about that. I do think that it would be justifiable to include any mental health issues on the background check if you were treated. I guess you could have a database acuired through mental health records compiled? Then again,youre medical records are private I think. Believe me, I am all for background checks and some gun control.


The fact that America is about twenty years behind many developed nations with regards to mental health only proves my point that there are two issues that need to be dealt with here. To my knowledge, anyone with a history of clinical depression (as opposed to depression because of a bereavement, for example), bipolar, schizophrenia (and I'm sure many other conditions as well) are on the mental health register in the UK, and the information is updated on a yearly basis in a brief interview with your doctor. Part of the purpose is to prevent issues - information is registered on a number of things such as alcohol and (illegal) drug intake, who to call in emergencies etc. From what i remember you can also give permission in advance for intervention if things ever come to that - but I'm not sure how that works, or how it was phrased. It's certainly not something that can be accessed by the public, but I'm assuming it can be checked by organisations for various reasons - as a USA one would be checked for gun sales.

Re: Gun-sale checks rejected in USA

Thu Apr 25, 2013 7:06 pm

jak wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
jak wrote:"So there is no check as to whether you are on some kind of mental health register then?"

The question is asked if youve ever been treated for mental illness. I cant recall the exact wording. Of course youre on the honor system. I dont think there is any kind of mental health register. That issue is the toughest one. How do you distinguish someones mental health? I dont know how you could go about that. I do think that it would be justifiable to include any mental health issues on the background check if you were treated. I guess you could have a database acuired through mental health records compiled? Then again,youre medical records are private I think. Believe me, I am all for background checks and some gun control.


The fact that America is about twenty years behind many developed nations with regards to mental health only proves my point that there are two issues that need to be dealt with here. To my knowledge, anyone with a history of clinical depression (as opposed to depression because of a bereavement, for example), bipolar, schizophrenia (and I'm sure many other conditions as well) are on the mental health register in the UK, and the information is updated on a yearly basis in a brief interview with your doctor. Part of the purpose is to prevent issues - information is registered on a number of things such as alcohol and (illegal) drug intake, who to call in emergencies etc. From what i remember you can also give permission in advance for intervention if things ever come to that - but I'm not sure how that works, or how it was phrased. It's certainly not something that can be accessed by the public, but I'm assuming it can be checked by organisations for various reasons - as a USA one would be checked for gun sales.


I would be for that 100%. These steps are what I believe to be sensible gun control. Having that mental health database seems completley logical. I didnt realize the UK even had this. I dont know why anyone would be opposed to it. Im sure the privacy issue wouldnt be hard to work around.


privacy wise it's no different in many respects to having your credit rating checked when you get a loan.