Go Back   Computer Forums > Welcome To Computer Forums .org > Social Lounge | Off Topic
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-07-2017, 07:19 AM   #11
Fully Optimized
 
Celery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 4,873
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

Gun control is virtually impossible because this country based its freedom on guns. We have a constitutional right to do so. The problem is people lacking morals and untreated mental illness.

Also the laws that we have are not enforced because someone's not doing his friggin job. That's the problem. Again the problem is people.

This shooter has no right to possess any firearm because he had a history of domestic violence yet again someone's not doing his job keeping him from getting guns or locked up.

Imagine this scenario: In the old Western days you walk in a saloon intending to shoot up people. Guess what? You'll be full of holes before you empty your six shooter.

To Congress:

I'm afraid that you'll never take away our guns so don't restrict us good citizens from carrying our guns everywhere we go and uphold the laws ourselves because you sure ain't doing it but make more BS laws.
__________________

__________________
I came on a Celeron!
Celery is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2017, 07:33 AM   #12
Daemon Poster
 
TrotterTech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 956
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete.i View Post
And there you have it folks in an absolute nutshell.
You obviously do not understand the US or how we view our freedoms. Trying to ban or confiscate guns here would only disarm those who abide by the law(s) already. It blows my mind that people cannot understand that.
__________________

__________________
Antec 300 Illusion, Antec EarthWatts EA650, EVGA GTX 760, AMD FX 8320 x8, MSI 970A-G43, Sandisk 128GB,
Samsung 120GB, WD Black 750GB, WD Green 1TB, WD Red 3TB, G.SKILL Ripjaws 2x2GB,
Crucial Ballistix Tracer 2x2GB, Win7 Ult 64-bit, Func MS3, CM Storm QuickFire Rapid
TrotterTech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2017, 08:45 AM   #13
Fully Optimized
 
strollin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 2,201
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrotterTech View Post
You obviously do not understand the US or how we view our freedoms. Trying to ban or confiscate guns here would only disarm those who abide by the law(s) already. It blows my mind that people cannot understand that.
You speak as though you are speaking for ALL Americans which is simply not true. Yes, a certain percentage think the way you do but, thankfully, not all.

Frankly, the 2nd Amendment "right to bear arms" doctrine is an antiquated view of things and no longer meaningful.

I'm not against gun ownership for sporting purposes but don't know how to allow that purpose while keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them or would use them for non-legal purposes.
__________________
strollin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2017, 12:47 PM   #14
Daemon Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 544
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrotterTech View Post
You obviously do not understand the US or how we view our freedoms. Trying to ban or confiscate guns here would only disarm those who abide by the law(s) already. It blows my mind that people cannot understand that.
Well I do understand the USA and how you view your freedoms. What I don't understand is the way people like you think.

I do know that there is no point in arguing about it because, one way or the other, what will happen will happen. We will see, eventually, who is right and who is wrong.
__________________
pete.i is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2017, 01:09 PM   #15
Fully Optimized
 
Wallaby Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: United States
Posts: 2,452
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

If you take away the guns, only Criminals will have any guns other than police. It takes sometimes 10-15 minites to get from wherever they are to you, IF you get to call 911. If not YOU could be dead before they (police) get there. Now, i have guns. If they try and break in to my home THEY are dead. Call 911 after. Good guys 1, bad guys 0 !!!
__________________
Then the train was gone,and there was nothing but rails, the earth, the moon, the river and strong silence-and the haunting and immortal visage of America by night
Thomas Wolfe
Wallaby Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2017, 02:17 PM   #16
Fully Optimized
 
Celery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 4,873
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

Damn straight Dan.

Here in the USA there's a barrel behind a blade of grass. We just have to take our lumps but something can be done about it like posting guards during public gatherings.

If laws ain't gonna do it then guard presence will.
__________________
I came on a Celeron!
Celery is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2017, 05:35 AM   #17
Site Team
 
root's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,070
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

Quote:
Originally Posted by Celery View Post
Gun control is virtually impossible because this country based its freedom on guns. We have a constitutional right to do so. The problem is people lacking morals and untreated mental illness.
To some extent I agree, everybody "should" be able to have a gun, and everybody should be able to be trusted to have a gun. But that is not the case.

Once upon a time people were property you had a right to own slaves. then the law was changed and you didn't.
Now it is only the criminals that own slaves.

Once upon a time a husband could not (in the sense of the law) rape his wife. Now it is only criminals who rape their wives.

Sometimes those laws being made that restrict previous freedoms are necessary/right, yet still unpopular.

essentially given that we know that some people should not be able to own guns, (and that is currently the law in the US. why is there such objection to changing the premise from everyone should be able to have a gun, except those people.
to everybody should apply to own a gun, and be allowed to own a gun, except those people that arguable should not. (basically the same people who could previously own guns before could now, and the people who cannot now could not now -the only difference is the oversight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrotterTech View Post
You obviously do not understand the US or how we view our freedoms. Trying to ban or confiscate guns here would only disarm those who abide by the law(s) already. It blows my mind that people cannot understand that.
That is the same everywhere in the world! (if you cannot legally own a gun only the criminals own guns.) yet gun crime is not a significant problem elsewhere.

Besides which, I don't think that anybody has suggested taking guns in entirety, just having better, (and enforced) control. (the idea that the government are coming to take away your personal property is a myth pedaled by people who want unregulated gun ownership.)

As Celery pointed out, the guy should not have owned guns in the first place, someone failed in their job to control guns properly. - I assume that you agree with the principal that criminals and unstable people should not be able to own guns, (else things like this happen.)
I think a part of the problem is that the system is too porous, by which i mean, if you melted all the guns in the US today, more would filter in through land borders with Mexico and Canada tomorrow.
Also, even if you managed to control the flow of guns into the country effectively, there are still sale issues, (as pointed out,) face to face sales are permitted, and pretty difficult to regulate effectively.

A huge part of the problem is that really, nobody knows how many guns are in the country, or who owns them, or who can access those.

-and yes it would take a hugely restrictive law, like a total ban to get a handle on that in a single year, but why would you aim to do it in such a short time frame?


I don't think that the UK has "the best" gun laws in the world.
but, I offer this as a suggestion on gun control.

After a mass shooting (in a school) (I guess a bit over 20 years ago.) where a "pillar of the community" type guy, (really involved, scout master, active in local church type guy.) systematically murders a load of kids, hand guns are essentially banned.

the only people who have handguns now are:
the police,
the military
sporting clubs that are licensed to have them.
criminals.


We have two categories of gun that "anyone" can own, Shotguns, and "firearms".

Shotguns are simple double barrel, break barrel type. we can't have either automatic, or pump-action type shutguns.

the ownership of these is a fairly simple affair.
you apply for a license at your local police
your gun store is inspected by the local police
your application must be supported by a person of "good standing" (i.e a doctor, police officer, solicitor etc.)
you get your license, you buy your shot gun, register the serial numbers etc. and you keep it.
every five years you renew your license.
if for some reason you don't re-new your license, you may still own the gun, but you cannot keep the gun at home, - that means you need to store it at a local gun shop, (where most reasonable size town will have a gunsmith/gun shop. or club.) - I'd be surprised if everyone didn't live within 20 miles of one.

You can go and get your guns and take them hunting... there are a few eccentricities about how you can take them places. (for the purpose of the law your car is a "public place" so you can't throw them into your car and go to a bar. but you can throw them in your car, go hunting, put them back in your car, take them home, unload the guns, then go to a bar...

Firearms, is a bit of a strange classification in UK law, it covers everything from high powered air riffles, (where classification is based on the pressure used to launch the projectile.) to hunting riffles, it used to include handguns, (but now doesn't as they are entirely banned.) I think it includes black powder rifles/muskets, and cannons etc.
(but black powder may be governed by a pyrotechnics licenses.)

We don't have automatic, nor semi automatic firearms in public hands, only the police/military/criminals get those.

the process to get a firearm is more stringent, and takes a little longer. but there is no reason that you would be denied one unless you have a history of criminality or mental problems. (i've a friend who has just been granted his.)
Again, you need to register serials, must have secure storage, that secure storage must be inspected by the police on a regular (five year) basis.

(secure storage is just an all metal gun safe that is double locked and secured to an exterior (brick) wall.)


Quote:
I'm afraid that you'll never take away our guns so don't restrict us good citizens from carrying our guns everywhere we go and uphold the laws ourselves because you sure ain't doing it but make more BS laws.
you already are stopped from carrying guns everywhere you go as there are "gun free zones"

Another peculiarity of the UK is that we don't have gun free zones. I suppose this is due to an expectation that most people just don't have guns.

(so in that small aspect we have more gun freedom than the US!)

my view may be skewed by country living, but I would not find it either alarming or unusual to hear gunshots during the day.
I would not find it alarming or unusual to see a guy stood on the edge of town with a gun, not in a case just being carried.
I would not find it either alarming or unusual to see a person carrying guns in a soft gun case through town. (if they were walking.) possibly going into shops or supermarkets with their guns.

There is no such thing as a carry permit. (either open or concealed)

you either have a gun, (and what's the point in having it if you can't take it places.) or you don't have a gun.


Quote:
Imagine this scenario: In the old Western days you walk in a saloon intending to shoot up people. Guess what? You'll be full of holes before you empty your six shooter.
There is a you tube video about that. where a guy walks into an office with a musket and shoots one person, then stops and spend a couple of minutes reloading whilst everyone runs away.

Also, i'm not really sure that history was actually like spaghetti western films where everyone was murdered and whoever was left in the bar just went back to their drinking.
__________________
I didn’t fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian…
Im sick of people saying 'dont waste paper'. If trees wanted to live, they'd all carry guns.
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; The inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2017, 09:40 AM   #18
In Runtime
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 496
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

Not too many people advocate for taking guns away from everyone. Most people seem to be in favor of simple common sense regulations. Like, if you're a felon, you shouldn't be allowed to buy a gun, whether it's from walmart or your neighbor. The problem is with the implementation and accountability.

If there were an inexpensive and easy way for Joe Citizen to run a background check on someone before they sold a gun to someone, most people would happily run the check. Like, if there were a website, that runs background checks for like 5 bucks, how great would that be? Responsible gun owners responsibly selling to other responsible people. If you don't want to run a background check, fine, but then you'd be held just as accountable if that buyer used the gun for a crime.

Heck, while were at it, why not put a mandatory minimum sentence on any crime where a gun was used. Rob a liquor store of $12 with a gun, 20 years minimum. Break into a house with a gun in your possession, 20 years minimum. Surely harsher penalties would deter people from using firearms in the commission of a crime.


I know the canadians require people wanting to buy guns to take a class and pass a test. Making sure people know how to use a gun before they are allowed to purchase one; that sounds reasonable, right? Plus a 3-4 hour course on a sunday at least gives the trainers a chance to find out if someone is a nutjob.

Also, i don't see any reason would need to buy and receive a gun right away. Is there any reason most people couldn't wait 2-3 days to get their gun after purchasing it? Sure, there could be some extenuating circumstances, like death threats etc. but those aren't common, and could be dealt with on a case by case basis.

And before someone says that the second amendment GUARANTEES the right to own guns, you're not completely correct. I'm not saying you're wholly wrong either, just that there are limits to ALL the rights enshrined in the constitution. For instance, you can't lie to a judge, or scream fire in a theater, or defraud people and claim it's free speech protected by the first amendment. There are limits to the rights we have.
__________________
CPU: Ryzen 1700 GPU: MSI R9 480 4GB
RAM: 16gb DDR4 Disk: 128SSD + 2x1TB
Power: 750w asus prime b350m-a uatx mobo
Cortb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2017, 11:12 AM   #19
Fully Optimized
 
Celery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 4,873
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

Usually, giving harsher punishments would deter crimes but it doesn't. Why? They get paroled after a few years.

Quit the parole crap and the system will work in two ways.

One, if you get 20 years you get 20 years, no ifs ands or buts.

Two, you're off the street for 20 years.

Also quit giving them TVs, internet access and snacks. Prison is supposed to suck so make it suck.

The criminals will think twice about it. We are making it too easy for them and us taxpayers are paying for it. We shouldn't be paying for their comfort, we should give them hard times.

Your lives means nothing to them so why should we care? Piss on them, throw them in a hole and bury em.
__________________
I came on a Celeron!
Celery is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2017, 11:40 AM   #20
Fully Optimized
 
strollin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 2,201
Default Re: Mass shooting too close to home

Quote:
Originally Posted by Celery View Post
....
One, if you get 20 years you get 20 years, no ifs ands or buts. ...
This sounds good in theory but the reality is that we would go broke very quickly trying to build and staff enough prisons. The major reason convicted people get paroled or otherwise released early is more about economics than whether they deserve it. It's sad but true.
__________________

__________________
strollin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0