Guns, Guns Guns

The E wrote:By that logic, any terrorist attack that succeeds must have some form of blessing from God.

Not all "blessings" come from God you know.

[quote="PeterZ"]Not the laws themselves, but a commitment to obey the laws. The advantage all those societies have is a greater commitment to obey the laws its members live under.quote] Yea,Like those Brits who don't even let their own cops have guns. Saw the pilot of "Last Detective" recently.A van parked outside a church, 2 guys loading it up with stuff from inside. As one goes back in for more, a guy (turns out the main character, a police detective) walks up to the other guy and says “your nicked”. The guy looks at him, without saying a word, walks around the other side of the van, gets in & drives off. The detective, telling him to stop. At one point standing in-front of the van waiving his badge and back-pedaling as the van rolls toward him. ROFL - yea very effective policing. Try that in Chicago & someone’s going to be replacing a shattered windshield and a stained driver’s seat with a hole in it! (wont be you)

Daryl's stats focus on gun homicides, but homicides in general are lower in these countries. Granted both Great Britain and downunder have tended to register more assaults than the US. You can't argue that the willingness to use deadly force is less restrained than in those nations he mentions.

I have no issues educating greater restraint in our society as a whole. I have issues with removing the Second Amendment.

MAD-4A wrote:

PeterZ wrote:Not the laws themselves, but a commitment to obey the laws. The advantage all those societies have is a greater commitment to obey the laws its members live under.quote] Yea,Like those Brits who don't even let their own cops have guns. Saw the pilot of "Last Detective" recently.A van parked outside a church, 2 guys loading it up with stuff from inside. As one goes back in for more, a guy (turns out the main character, a police detective) walks up to the other guy and says “your nicked”. The guy looks at him, without saying a word, walks around the other side of the van, gets in & drives off. The detective, telling him to stop. At one point standing in-front of the van waiving his badge and back-pedaling as the van rolls toward him. ROFL - yea very effective policing. Try that in Chicago & someone’s going to be replacing a shattered windshield and a stained driver’s seat with a hole in it! (wont be you)

PeterZ wrote:Daryl's stats focus on gun homicides, but homicides in general are lower in this countries.

Not remotely proportionally however.

https://plithwo.files.wordpress.com/201 ... -vs-uk.png

Granted both Great Britain and downunder have tended to register more assaults than the US.

Under very different definitions of "assault"... US assault statistics tend to only include felony assaults (aka aggravated assault) and omit the significantly larger number of misdemeanor assaults.

But even if they were the same definitions you realize that a lot of what were assaults in the UK or Australia are the exact situations that become homicides in the US *because of* the availability of a firearm when the confrontation occurs which some hotheaded idiot with their temper up can then grab and use in the heat of a fight?

No. because their figh or flight response upon seeing a threat automatically goes to flight, just like the majority of any population does. It takes the minority, or those trained via the military brainwashing of bootcamp to forcefully alter the fight/flight response, to actually engage the fight side.

MAD-4A wrote:[

"I saw a man with what I think was an AK-47 -- anyway, it was some kind of machine gun or submachine gun. So my first reaction was to sit down and hide"this is what the rest of the passengers did, why? because they didn't have a gun.

Spacekiwi wrote:No. because their figh or flight response upon seeing a threat automatically goes to flight, just like the majority of any population does. It takes the minority, or those trained via the military brainwashing of bootcamp to forcefully alter the fight/flight response, to actually engage the fight side.

Brainwashing my... obviously you've never been there. Modern Military Basic training is used to weed out the "flights" and those who have no business in uniform, not "brainwashing". even those with a natural "fight" response tends to have it over-ridden when facing a gun-fight without a gun, it's called the self-preservation response. This can in turn (as in this case) be over-ridden by the realization that not fighting will still not preserve you, they will still come to kill you.

Im using brainwashing as a colloquial term, as used by the multiple military members in my family that describe their basic training: to wash out aspects of civilian life that would be detrimental in military situations, such as the fight/flight response, to allow for basic training to instil new automatic responses. And yes you can over-ride the self-preservation response, but that takes time as opposed to making it automatic and sub-conscious responses to situations. They train until it becomes instinctive, just like martial artists train until the blocks, parries and strikes can become instinctive: its faster and you arent wasting time analyzing the situation, you are acting automatically.

MAD-4A wrote:Brainwashing my... obviously you've never been there. Modern Military Basic training is used to weed out the "flights" and those who have no business in uniform, not "brainwashing". even those with a natural "fight" response tends to have it over-ridden when facing a gun-fight without a gun, it's called the self-preservation response. This can in turn (as in this case) be over-ridden by the realization that not fighting will still not preserve you, they will still come to kill you.

MAD-4A wrote:

Annachie wrote:MAD, those guys on the train showed the fundamental lie in the yay gun lobby in the US. It doesn't take a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun...It just takes a good guy.

No, it takes several good guys against 1 incompetent moron of a bad guy. If he had any competence what so ever then all 3 of the UNARMED men, as well as dozens of passengers would all be dead. where if they had been armed then they would of had a chance against a competent bad guy.

"I saw a man with what I think was an AK-47 -- anyway, it was some kind of machine gun or submachine gun. So my first reaction was to sit down and hide"this is what the rest of the passengers did, why? because they didn't have a gun.

Annachie wrote:but personally I think the farmers are getting careless with them.

Yes, definitely, they are way more carless today, "carelessly" locking up their guns in easy-to-find gun-safes with trigger locks in-place. Unlike 20-30 years ago when they were "safely" left on unlocked wooden racks hanging against the back window of their unlocked pickups or left “well hidden”, leaning in the corner, behind the door. My grandfather had an over&under on a rack behind the head of his bed and a 12 gauge pump in his closet, leaning "safely" in the corner. & my grandmother had a loaded 32 hidden under her mattress. Not like my "carless" brother and his gun-safe.

edited to add in that the laws are from 97 or so
Wow wrong end of the stick big time.

Careless as in not locking them up, leaving them in cars, not locking the bolt up seperate to the gun and seperate to the ammo.

Things that are basically the law down here, but are being ignored due to complacency.

Visited a farmer friend of the wife to pick up something. A .22 (with the nolt in it) was sitting on a swing chair by the back door. 5 years ago that would never happen.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Annachie wrote:Visited a farmer friend of the wife to pick up something. A .22 (with the nolt in it) was sitting on a swing chair by the back door. 5 years ago that would never happen.

A 22? uh...that's a kids toy, had one when we were kids, happened all the time more than 5 years ago, or 100 for that matter - not like an AK-47 or SKS was left on the swing.

Annachie wrote:not locking the bolt up {separate} to the gun and {separate} to the ammo.

Why would you do something stupid like that? If it's unloaded and locked in a safe why would you need to cause more ware on the components by yanking out the bolt every time you lock it up. That's just ridiculous, what's next, you have to remove the barrel and lock it up in a different house?

Annachie wrote:Careless as in not locking them up, leaving them in cars,...

As I stated (sarcastically) that is exactly what is being done now that wasn't before. Never even heard of a "gun safe" growing up, & when I did it was something for rich people (till not so long ago) use-to see pickups all the time with rifles in the back window, don't see any now (people too afraid of some idiot kid taking their gun, shooting someone and them getting sued) so no, your just wrong there.

A 22? uh...that's a kids toy

You call it a kids toy without even specifying which .22 round you´re talking about, how marvelously careless.

And even the common .22 LR, only a fool considers it a "kids toy".

.22LR handguns compete with .357 and .38 calibers for being the most commonly stolen.

.22LR is nearly always in the top 5 calibers used for murders.

.22LR causes around 1/10th of the policemurders.

All statistics from USA, 1979 and forwards.

By the way, another top contender on those statistics, is the .25ACP, which is actually a good bit WEAKER than the .22 LR.
Other common contenders for the top being the .38, .357, .32(another weak cartridge), 9mm and 12 gauge shotgun.

So, the 3 "kids toys" calibers together are behind something like 20-50% of murders in USA depending on year. Not to mention being the preferred weapon of a majority of criminals.

Yeah, totally toys.