More kids and guns

[GlenW]

Ban vans too then?

Nantes van attack: Dozens injured after man shouting 'Allahu Akbar' ploughs van into Christmas market - Mirror Online

Ban knives too?

A knife attack every 4 minutes; 130,000 per year - but ministers still insist crime rates are falling | Daily Mail Online

Because laws about carrying them only matter to people who don't intend to use them in the first place.

+1

I currently own four shotguns and three rifles .22 lr, .243 Win and .270 Win, I've never injured anyone with any of my weapons, apart from myself when I nipped my palm closing an old Webley shotgun. However, I have put four people into hospital, one for three days, with cricket balls.

[FatLazyContractor]

+1

I currently own four shotguns and three rifles .22 lr, .243 Win and .270 Win, I've never injured anyone with any of my weapons, apart from myself when I nipped my palm closing an old Webley shotgun. However, I have put four people into hospital, one for three days, with cricket balls.

Ban cricket balls

[SueEllen]

Were you being ironic about Canada?

Canada Edmonton: Eight killed in 'senseless mass murder' - BBC News

Nope.

It made the news like other countries with more guns than the UK but gun control because it's extremely rare for it to happen in Canada.

On the other hand we kind of expect a US high school shooting a few times a year.

[NickFitz]

Ban vans too then?

Nantes van attack: Dozens injured after man shouting 'Allahu Akbar' ploughs van into Christmas market - Mirror Online

Ban knives too?

A knife attack every 4 minutes; 130,000 per year - but ministers still insist crime rates are falling | Daily Mail Online

Because laws about carrying them only matter to people who don't intend to use them in the first place.

Because all those things are exactly like each other

[SueEllen]

What is bizarre is that people would feel the need to take a hand-gun to the supermarket.

If you ask an American who is in to guns why they have one they start going on about their need to protect themselves. When you ask what from they start going on about their constitutional rights. If you ask any other person from any other nation they will give you a logical reason.

[EternalOptimist]

Thing is, we have the notion of an 'acceptable casualty rate' for some things , like cars, because we see them as necessary. The economy would go bust without road transport.

trains, planes, mining accidents. we don't ban boats.

In this country, we don't see much benefit in allowing most folks to carry guns in their handbags. so we get horrified.
I am horrified too, btw

[Platypus]

a fundamental right to bear arms.

Always make me think of:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gCwA3qCVZA

[SpontaneousOrder]

Thing is, we have the notion of an 'acceptable casualty rate' for some things , like cars, because we see them as necessary. The economy would go bust without road transport.

trains, planes, mining accidents. we don't ban boats.

In this country, we don't see much benefit in allowing most folks to carry guns in their handbags. so we get horrified.
I am horrified too, btw

That's because we also see being raped & mugged, or suffering burglaries while we're asleep at night (as opposed to when we're out of the house), as an 'acceptable casualty rate' too - i.e. you have to suffer it first and then call the police after.

I'm sure many women in the united states would be horrified to be told that they aren't allowed to carry protection while they walk the streets at night.

It's all just, at this point, a normalcy bias. Probably many of the the Jews in America would be horrified to be told that they were to be disarmed just as they were disarmed by Hitler back in '38.


I know stats from different countries are measured differently, but the official stats show that the UK has a higher violent crime rate than the US does. Yet the US has all of those guns. On the big assumption that those stats are roughly compatible, then what seems horrifying to me is that we are prohibited from taking steps to defend ourselves from violent predators, even though we have measurably higher violent crime rates than countries which do allow it's citizens to defend themselves.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Because all those things are exactly like each other

What does that even mean? The implication is that one can choose any weapon to go on a killing spree if they want to. What's not exactly like anything else about that?

[SpontaneousOrder]

What is bizarre is that people would feel the need to take a hand-gun to the supermarket.

Would you possibly find it less bizarre if you learned that in pretty much all of the mass shootings in the states, in recent history, he shooters all made significant efforts to seek out soft targets in the form of 'gun free' zones? E.g. the batman cinema shooter went to the sixth farthest away cinema to commit the crime - and that one happens to be one where guns are not allowed while the 5 closer ones all allowed guns?