(Closed) Gun control due to terrorism

posted 4 months ago in The Lounge
Post # 61
Member
5002 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: July 2018

mrstodd2bee :  Ironic considering pro gun and pro life usually go hand in hand in the states.  Perhaps not for you personally but lets not pretend that is the norm. 

Also got to love a strawman argument in a gun control thread…

Post # 62
Member
542 posts
Busy bee

NZ is not the USA. And it’s not comparable on any of these levels. Even if there were a program and people brought in their guns and didn’t accept cash. Criminals would not. Additionally, we are not an island and we have HUGE borders touching other countries who don’t have the bans and laws we have or would have. Guys & gals, it’s not even an option to enact something similar. Too big. Too many. Too much. Too long. Take that any way you want to take it, it doesn’t work. There are simply so many people with so many guns, and 1/2 the country will never be able to get the other half of the country to “do what they want.” We have a better chance of working on the mental health aspect than anything. And that’s where we need to focus. Even if it wasn’t guns, the people with true mental health issues that want to cause damage will find a way. That’s where we have the ability to put money and build programs that actually will make a difference. Instead of the right and the left just attacking each other about it. This country is so divided. As to prior posters saying it’s the Republicans that won’t allow bans and the Democrats want it, I invite you to the midwest. Everyone here wants their guns. Rural, urban, black, white, brown, rich, poor, conservative, liberal… EVERYONE. 

 

Post # 64
Member
2768 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: July 2011

If you’re going down that path what are you doing to improve health care in the US where maternal mortality rates are very high for a western country. Or about woman not getting any mandated paid mat leave …. 

no one is saying NZ is perfect mrstodd2bee :  

Post # 65
Member
1349 posts
Bumble bee

mrstodd2bee :  Bahahaa!  Are you seriously trying to throw restrictive abortion laws in new zealand’s face?  Have you looked around?  Pot, meet kettle.  

Post # 66
Member
332 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: June 2018

Savvy.machelle :  THANK YOU! I wholeheartedly agree with you, but polietly disagree with a lot of other PPs. 

Personally, as someone who carries legally, owns multiple guns myself (in addition to my husband) for both sport and hunting) I don’t like the “propaganda” that everyone says guns should be banned/taken away/stricter rules enforced (I can agree to this in some situations)/etc, etc because my thought is this – 

Why punish the law-abiding, respondible gun owners for the actions of others? I use my right to bear arms to 2. provide food for my family (my freezer is stocked full of wild, organic game to which we eat on for an entire year) and 2. provide protection for myself and my family. I would honestly be livid if the US required me to hand my firearms in to them. 

Guns ARE NOT the problem and I fully believe this. Its the people who possess the gun who cause the problem. 

Perhaps you should look at it this way – Military grade assult rifle or semi-automatic AR (I have two of them in my home by the way), hangun or BB gun, whichever you choose. They are inanimate objects that literally cannot move unless a human makes them. My firearms WILL NOT move or cause a mass shooting unless someone puts their hands on them. 

Are we going to ban cars because they *cause* drunk driving? 

 

ETA: This is coming from someone who yes, fully supports lawful gun ownership but someone who also studided abroad in NZ and does appreicate how safe of a place it is, how beautiful it is and I am DEVASTATED by what happened. 

Post # 67
Member
802 posts
Busy bee

Bombs can be easily made (Boston bomber used a pressure cooker). The terrorist in France used a truck to kill 84 people. China had 31 deaths from a knife-weilding terrorist recently. Acid attacks are on the rise. Gun-bans don’t decline mass death/attacks. Gun-bans also don’t ban guns; the UK still has gun crime despite how difficult it may be to obtain one (in fact the BBC reported that UK gun crime increased by 42% in 2016). Just because no one has used a gun for a mass shooting (yet) doesn’t mean someone couldn’t, if they really wanted to. It’ll only be a matter of time. 

 

Although to be fair, my fantasy that there should be “2 responsible people with a gun in every room” isn’t very realistic either. You can’t take any average law-abiding joe off the street, give him a gun and say “here ya go, use this when a bad guy with a gun shows up!” Joe has probably never thought about defense before. Shooting a bad guy in defense sounds good in theory, but honestly it’d be a hard thing to do. It takes the right kind of person to be able to handle that, and frankly most people these days are in no way prepared to (I know I’m not). When push comes to shove I’d do what I gotta do, but I wouldn’t ever want to put myself in that situation. If I only heard gunshots, I’d run. But we need good people who *would* run towards gunshots, prepared to protect. Like off-duty police officers…yet not, lol. Anyway, our society/culture today doesn’t prepare anyone to be unsuspecting heroes. Everyone wants to BE the protected and taken care of, rather than being the protectors or self-reliant. And there’s not many people today who I’d trust with that responsibility anyway. It’d take a generation or two of raising a new mindset to even consider having a community that protects itself as the majority. That being said, I don’t think burying our heads in the sand and sweeping guns under the rug is a solution, either. 

Post # 68
Member
4956 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: October 2017

kiram :  i also want to throw in the element of surprise. Expecting people to stop the shooter means that they need to immediately assess and accept what is going on, pinpoint where the shots are coming from, identify the shooter, and take them down. All in a matter of seconds

Just as I believe that a good guy with a gun theory has complexities, I believe out right banning guns has its own complexities and doesn’t solve the issue.

I don’t believe that more guns is the answer though 

Post # 69
Member
5002 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: July 2018

kiram :  Just because no one has used a gun for a mass shooting (yet) doesn’t mean someone couldn’t, if they really wanted to. It’ll only be a matter of time. 

Do you not see the difference though?  It could maybe potentially happen once vs over and over and over and over.

Also, all the serious incidents you are listing are from wildly different countries not one, so it isn’t that when guns are taken out of the equation that equally serious crimes in equal measure still happen otherwise all those things would be from one country. 

Bombs can be easily made (Boston bomber used a pressure cooker). 

Also, this is just not true. The Boston bombing was quite crude bomb making which is why there were only 3 fatalities and therefore isn’t really on the same level as a “mass shooting”.  Bombs that would cause casualties similar to many of the recent mass shootings are much more complex and certainly aren’t easy, average Joe would struggle. 

But we need good people who *would* run towards gunshots, prepared to protect. Like off-duty police officers…yet not, lol

Serious questiom, why do they need to be off duty? It seems like you are saying more police officers are needed, yet you don’t quite support that. 

Post # 70
Member
7904 posts
Bumble Beekeeper

kiram :  “Just because no one has used a gun for a mass shooting (yet) [in the UK] doesn’t mean someone couldn’t, if they really wanted to. It’ll only be a matter of time.”

Maybe you’re right, but meanwhile in the U.S., it’s not a “matter of time” until this happens – it’s already happening constantly.

I don’t understand why gun rights proponents act like gun control is a failure if there is any gun crime at all in countries with tighter gun laws. There will always be bad people who can get their hands on guns and do awful things…the point is, in countries with stricter gun control, this happens  MUCH LESS FREQUENTLY than it does in the U.S. That is a fact – and that is the whole point.

It seems like the logic is that unless we can enact gun control laws that eliminate 100% of gun crime, there’s no point in even trying. Is that really what you believe?

Post # 71
Member
1138 posts
Bumble bee

kiram :  “Gun-bans don’t decline mass death/attacks. Gun-bans also don’t ban guns; the UK still has gun crime despite how difficult it may be to obtain one (in fact the BBC reported that UK gun crime increased by 42% in 2016).”

Yes they do, they absolutely 100% do, google it. Gun crime in the UK is extremely rare and rarely results in injury, only 3% gun crime offences actually result in a serious or fatal injury. 

The firearm related death rate in the UK (which has some of the strictest gun ownership laws in the world) is 0.23 deaths per 100,000, in the US it is 11.96 deaths per 100,000. That’s 52 times higher. So please tell me how guns make people safer. 

Post # 72
Member
1349 posts
Bumble bee

zzar45 :  Serious questiom, why do they need to be off duty? It seems like you are saying more police officers are needed, yet you don’t quite support that. 

Yeah, I didn’t get what that was about either. 

Post # 73
Member
7904 posts
Bumble Beekeeper

This reminds me…after one of our recent mass shootings in the U.S. – Las Vegas? I’ve lost track… – O’Reilly was talking about the victims and said something along the lines of, “this is the price we pay for freedom in the U.S.” Such a sick, sick mindset – but I actually give him credit for at least being honest about it. At least O’Reilly is admitting that there is a price to pay for the 2nd Amendment, rather than using false logic to try to claim that there’s zero correlation between easy access to guns and high rates of gun-related crime.

Post # 74
Member
1138 posts
Bumble bee

Seriously, do gun enthusiasts actually do any research? Or do they just go around spouting nonsense they heard somewhere even though all readily available evidence (with a mere google search) contradicts it?? 

 

Post # 75
Member
1981 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: May 2016 - Sussex, UK

skunktastic :  Frustrating when you say you are going to make a point but not come back and respond. If you lived in England yes you could have a gun to shoot a wild animal in the garden. My D.H has one as do all his family as they grew up on a farm. You just need a licence and they check every year that it is safely stored.

The topic ‘Gun control due to terrorism’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors