I agree. I think a better topic this pic could have covered is why the media doesn't recognize more of these little acts of heroism. Although preventing a school shooting isn't by any means a little act. This article explains the psychology of why the media is dominated by bad news. http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140728-why-is-all-the-news-bad
And yet countries with gun regulation have consistently lower death by gun rates than countries without them. The problem is not the guns themselves, or responsible owners like this, but the ease of access to deadly weapons for people who would use them for things like school massacres.
Yeah, there is still a root issue, but by removing guns, there is a much more complicated route required to cause the same issues. A school shooting isn't as easy to pull off without a gun. The black market will still have guns, but angry students lose the easy access that they have to their parents firearms. If you make it harder to get means to do something, less people will do it
Ever hear of something called "responsibility"? It's the fucked up individual's fault if he shoots up a school, not the gun, not the gun manufacturer, not society, not the RESPONSIBLE gun owners of America. If he steals a gun from his parents because it wasn't properly and responsibly stored, perhaps we could talk about the parents' complicity but that is a whole different can of worms. And I thought from listening to the bleeding heart radicals in the left that guns were easy to get on the "black market" anyway?
Let's take a look at all the motor vehicle deaths while we're playing magician here, shall we? I'd venture to guess that a couple more people die in car crashes than school shootings each year. I could be wrong, but why don't we get rid of cars? It would save a hell of a lot more lives than your gun ban, not to mention all the pollution, congestion, and noise we could eliminate. Oh and by the way, car ownership is not a constitutional right!
Car ownership is different though. We require cars to get around. Without cars, we would have very little options for transportation. You may say public transport, but what about rural townships? Guns are easy to get on the black market because they don't require registration, so all you need to do is buy a gun and sell it to a dealer and it is suddenly on the black market.
I will not argue that there aren't responsible gun owners in the US. However, there are a massive group of irresponsible gun owners. When the Bad outweighs the Good, There is a problem. Thats why cars aren't banned. Per piece, there are easily less car related deaths in the US then there are gun related deaths.
Out of sheer quantity, the bad doesn't outweigh the good. There are far more responsible people than there are psychos. But the responsible people, because they obey the rules, don't take their guns into a gun free zone.
Criminals don't seem to be deterred by the signs. Can't imagine why.
I can't help but feel like we'd be better off without those signs than with them.
@benelenium what are you smoking? There are well over 300,000,000 (estimated) LEGAL firearms currently in the hands of less than half the LEGAL population, and we are pretty damn responsible. No sane person would claim that criminals are simply "irresponsible" gun owners. Since that appears to be your argument I must question your state of mind.
And, by the way, there are absolutely not "easily less car related deaths than gun deaths". Just because you wish it to be true doesn't make it so. According to the CDC's numbers for 2013 if you combine gang violence (which is as common as breathing to those animals), suicides (which will happen one way or another), and "accidents" you come up short of 33,000 firearms related deaths. Automobile deaths in 2014 were over 33,000 (CDC).
Murders and suicides will and do happen without firearms daily, and further dwarf these numbers. Automobile accidents cannot happen without cars. YOU ARE WRONG.
LOOK AT YOUR OWN COMMENTS! "Ever hear of something called "responsibility"? It's the fucked up individual's fault if he shoots up a school, not the gun, not the gun manufacturer, not society, not the RESPONSIBLE gun owners of America." Those are your words. I was simply returning my side of your argument. I had no idea you were such shit drivers. My point is that if you make something harder to get less people will try. The black market will be screwed over if guns are made illegal because they will be bought up quickly. And if you say how will they get people to give their guns back, do an Australia and buy them back. I enjoy how stupid Americans can be. Assuming I am mentally ill because I disagree with your opinion on something where you are in one of the only countries in the world where this happens. I come from a country where more people are killed in car accidents than there are killed in any homicidal act. 421 homicide victims (A.B.S., 2014) and 1,155 road crash deaths (2014)
benelenium, there are far less gun deaths compared to incidents without firearms involved. Far, far, FAR less, they make maybe 5% total of all deaths annually in the states, and that's being generous. It's a problem that very easily gets inflated to be bigger than it actually is, that that's where are the fear about guns comes from. Not even 5%, since the only cases people really get in a fuss about are high profile cases with a lot of poorly handled reporting by the media. And while a school shooting isnt as easy to pull off with guns, there are other cases where nutjobs use OTHER weapons to carry out attacks. Britain doesn't allow firearm carry do they? I wonder why everyone's stabbing each other with knives a whole lot then. The Issue isn't how "easy" a gun makes it to kill people. It's how very naturally enough people will attack others with fatal intent.
I am not British. I wouldn't know their laws. To my knowledge, there are very few countries on this floating space rock that allow you to carry a gun on you at all times. It honestly doesn't make sense to me, but then I come from a much less violent place. I am just going to make a simple point. Guns kill people. Yes, they need to be wielded by a person to do so, but without the gun, the ease of killing is decreased. As I have been saying, Make something harder and less people will try to do it. Not many people will go to the effort of getting a knife and stabbing someone, there is more risk too. There are easy fixes to your laws, without removing guns too, make harsher gun laws. Make mandatory gun registration with serious consequences.
"Harsher gun laws": yep. Criminals aren't obeying what laws we have so let's take away the rights of the law-abiding citizens. Makes perfect sense to me. By the way, we already have thousands of gun laws and... Yeah. Ok.
"Mandatory registration": again, criminals DO NOT FUCKING OBEY LAWS!!!!!!!
You know what a gun registry does do though? It gives the anti-gun politicians an inventory of toys they can come and take away from you. Worked pretty well in Oz. But, oh wait! They would only be able to take the law-abiding citizens' guns because mandatory registration would be a law and, um, seems like there was some kind of saying about criminals and laws... If I could only remember what it is.
Oh yeah, CRIMINALS DON'T FUCKING OBEY LAWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think there are many people in many countries that would disagree with you. Mexico? Brazil? Hell a big chunk of South America. Perhaps some of the former Soviet states see a bit of criminal activity as well.
The difference is that no country in the world is like America. No country was ever founded like America. You cannot accurately compare any other country to America. The only two that are close are Canada and Australia, but neither of them ever got out from under England's thumb so they aren't all that different. The freedoms we were founded with, unfortunately, also give the bad eggs freedom. It's a delicate balancing act that many cities and states get right. Funny how the places with the worst violence have been run by socialist Democrats for a long time. Just a coincidence, I'm sure.
And most of America really doesn't have a lot of violent crime; it's just that what does happen gets played up by the media.
Never got out from Englands thumb you say? We did, but not to the same extent. 01/01/1901 was Australian federation. We pull away from Englands government and formed our own. The only thing we keep was the Queen as the monarch. We got our freedom and kept sane. Violence is different in America.
You are still a British colony for all intents and purposes. Independent countries do not share monarchs with their mother lands. But that's neither here nor there; you did not completely and unmistakably tell Britain to go to hell and start a new country from scratch. You simply separated a British colony from direct British rule. As such, you probably cannot understand what makes America different; hell, too many damn Americans don't even understand it.
My freedoms are the same as the criminal's down the street, and a police state that tries to take his freedoms by force will sure as hell trample my freedoms first since I obey laws and he doesn't. Maybe life might be a little safer with big brother having more power over me, but I'll never take such a chance. I'll keep my freedom, thank you, and anyone, ANYONE that tries to take it will live just long enough to regret it.
The laws are "loose" becuase the Govt shouldn't be able to tell you what you can and can't use to defend yourself. Thomas Jefferson once got a letter from a merchant who used around forty cannons to keep his ship and cargo safe, and asked if it was all right that he had forty or so cannons to protect his ship. Jefferson said he had the right to arm his ship however heavily he wanted so he was able to protect his life and liberty.
EDIT: It was not Thomas Jefferson, it was in fact, James Madison.
And may I ask, when has anyone used an actual fully automatic machine gun or a rpg, or a grenade launcher to cary out mass killings in America? Gun ownership is on the rise, and more and more responsible carriers are out there, and I'd rather have that than a disarmed populace.
You guys understand that the Queen has no real power over the country. My freedoms are greater then the criminal down the street. As he committed a crime that has the result of imprisonment, I have a greater freedom than him.
The loose laws you have are far too much of a risk because of the potential for something to happen. Thats why we have the laws on gun control here. To remove a risk is to remove as much of a chance of something happening as is possible. Your lax gun laws make it far too easy to get a gun, and not have it traceable. I would honestly rather have a disarmed populace than the risk of an irresponsible gun owner among responsible gun owners.
You are incapable of understanding freedom, or what responsibilities come with it due to your indoctrination, perhaps even genetics. Since America was founded mostly by Europeans you're not all hopeless but...
Stay in England, enjoy your soccer and fish and French fries, and we'll deal with the freedom of the assholes while we enjoy our own.
Once again, Not English, Aussie mate.
Secondly, I understand freedom without fear. You understand freedom with fear.
Thirdly, The US was formed in the same way as Australia. You were a convict dumping ground more than we were. I come from SA, The free state. We never had convict labour or any of that shit. We were founded by pioneers. So, Yes, I understand freedom. I understand that there is nothing anyone can do to take it away from me.
Alright, the reference to Her Majesty tripped me up a bit. No we were not a penal colony. We were founded by many groups for many reasons. Ok, actually Georgia was a prison plantation.
Regardless, as a nation the United States was founded much differently than Oz. Mainly in that Australia really wasn't founded; you were a British colony and simply "moved out of mom's basement" when you were middle-aged.
We were created from scratch and our Constitution was drafted to address all the problems the founders lived through under British rule. Our freedoms were so important to our founders that they were spelled out in our Bill of Rights. And in order to ensure EVERYONE had protected rights they felt those rights had to be protected for EVERYONE. Especially those accused of a crime because they knew from experience that anyone could be falsely accused and screwed by those in power.
I didn't notice at first but you seem to be from two countries at once, mate. Are you from Australia or South Africa?
Either way what I said about rights stands. If those accused of a crime, or those who have paid their debt to society can so easily lose their rights any of us can. Criminals' rights must be protected to protect all of us. This unfortunately leads to problems/difficulty fighting crime and punishing criminals, but it's better than the alternative.
If good people with guns save at a faster ratio than bad people take, then why do people die from gun related crimes. Cool story but really not thought out message.
It's a matter of limiting how many die in a set amount of time. Without heroes there would be a lot of deaths. With heroes, some of those deaths are prevented. He is stating that more of these potential deaths are avoided than those that happen.
You know i hate to rain on everyones parade but there is the small matter of total violent deaths....its not just guns that kill people...the hatchet on the train in (i think) Germany...the truck that killed 50 in paris...theres plenty of killing devices...taking away guns just means other things out there will be used...bad people will do bad things
Agreed and with other weapons (bombs, cars, or how about haijacking a plane) then there would be no way to gain control of the situation for any good person. I cary a firearm legaly and its never hurt anyone without my knowledge...
No, we avoid citizens carrying firearms. Only the army and law enforcement are allowed to carry a firearm. Outside of those professions, rules are extremely strict and enforced.
Are you really gullible/ignorant enough to think that the criminals would happily give up their guns and wouldn't get more in your happy little utopian world?????
And once the government has decided who is allowed to carry arms what stops them from passing laws to the detriment of the people? Good will? A consciousness? Morals? They already used those in banning citizens from guns so "they don't hurt themselves". Once the govt gets to pick who gets what and who doesn't, you've lost the right to freedom becuase you've surrendered it and are willing to throw other freedoms with it because those freedoms could be used for terrible things, like political opposition, opposing viewpoints, checks of power, a say in what is going on. Surrendering the right to defend yourself is a personal choice, but once it's made into a law, that becomes a law denying Freedom of Choice and Action, which is no law to me, or to the people who wrote the Constitution.
No, I am not gullible enough to believe Americans will give up their guns. It's about a century too late to start enforcing that. You're stuck with it. And it is one of the reasons I will never consider the US a place to move to.
But maybe you are unaware of the fact that in Western Europe, no citizen carries a gun. No one. And if they do, they have a strict permit for it, and is NEVER allowed to carry it in public. Not openly, not concealed. So, to summarize: only criminals and cops carry guns here.
That sounds terrifying. I would never want to live in a place where the only means I have to reliably defend myself is a phone call (that I might not have time to make) and a police force that is, at best, 5-10 minutes away.
No freakin' thanks.
That's why they've all been invaded so many times over so many centuries.
I once read a European's summation of why America works, especially compared with Europe. I think it was Daniel Hannan MEP in one of his books, but I don't recall which one (could have been in an interview; might not even have been Hannan, but I'm pretty sure it was). He wrote that (I'm paraphrasing) the biggest difference between America and Europe is that Europeans assume that everything is not permitted until they are told they are permitted to do it. Americans assume that we can do anything until we're told we can't.
And, I'll add, when you tell us we can't do it, we'll prove your ass wrong!
With the number of gun fights close to zero, and every single incident that does happen hitting the news, you'd be surprised how terrifying life is around here. I know ZERO people who own a gun. Why would they? Shocking to you, but a different society altogether.
Easy place to invade? That's what our armies and armed police forces are there for. Gun ownership among civilians is not going to stop an invasion - vigilantism is not the backbone of democracy and freedom and can lead to conflicts of interest when unorganised vigilante groups clash.
And no, criminals do not get to freely carry guns, the only owners are licensed carriers who can prove they require them. While the odd one is found on people here the gun laws are extremely efficient at minimising the circulation of such things, and makes it easier to track the sale of a gun from person to person.
No, getting rid of guns will not completely stop violent crime, however it's a lot harder to kill a lot of people with a close range melee weapon than it is to open fire with an automatic ranged weapon. There are just as many stories of unarmed civilians stopping major incidents of murder in europe as there are people with guns in america.
@databunny I was not saying armed civilians would stop your country being invaded; I was saying that your attitude of disdain and mistrust (pretty much all of Europe) towards your citizenry, and worse yet, your citizenry's acceptance of their "proper place" as serfs keeps you weak enough to need us cowboys to pull your sorry asses out of trouble over and over.
And, *sigh* yet again, criminals don't follow laws. That's why they're criminals. Different countries have different criminals, perhaps, but I'm willing to bet that whatever criminal element you have still has their weapons.
I don't give a rip what may or may not work in your particular socialist utopia, in America the bad apples have guns, knives, baseball bats, whatever, and use them against helpless victims daily. You know what else happens daily? Armed civilians refuse to be victimized.
There is a vast difference between a FACT and an OPINION, and you seem to be conflating the two.
In my opinion, guns are cool, collectible, and useful, but that's not relevant here.
The FACT is that criminals Do. Not. Obey. Laws...
Kinda why they're criminals. Even if we somehow descended into Dante's Hell and European style socialism sent the jack-booted brown shirts into our homes to forcibly confiscate our guns, THE CRIMINALS WOULD STILL HAVE THEIRS!
You can pass all the laws you want, but if you think those that are already disobeying laws are going to somehow suddenly play nice you need your head examined.
The plain FACT is that there are goblins out there with less than honorable intentions, and the only way to prevent them causing you to have a bad day is to be prepared to overwhelm them if they come knocking.
Criminals in your country have guns because it's very easy to buy one. If guns are illigal, like in my country, it would be considerably harder, *even for criminals*, to buy guns. The result is: even among criminals, gun ownership is low. In fact, it is so low, that there is no real daily threat. The chances of me ever seeing a gun drawn is almost zero. I'm 41, the only guns I've seen in my life were in cops' holsters.
You are very much misinformed, my friend. Firstly, do you think the criminals are buying their guns legally?
Let me answer that if you're having trouble: NO. The criminals are not buying their guns legally, so it makes no difference whether guns are illegal. Criminals will still get illegal guns illegally and probably do illegal things with them. Laws only affect the law-abiding.
Second let's assume your Hogwarts education paid off and you could somehow magically make every gun in the entire world disappear. What about knives? Bats? Pipes? Axes? Hammers?
What about the 200 pound guy that can easily overpower a 105 pound woman with his bare hands? How does your defense against the dark arts protect innocent victims? Whether the particular piece of excrement in front of you has a gun or not, he's a threat. A firearm in your possession goes a long way toward equalizing the equation.
I'm not misinformed, I just live on the other side of the globe. You didn't read my words, or didn't understand. I said it's considerably harder *even for criminals* to obtain a gun here, because everything is tracked. Yes there are illegal ways of getting a gun, but it's still a long stretch. The stakes are higher. A street thug can't easily obtain a gun, so he's discouraged in doing so. It's too much trouble. He gets a big knife, that's much less deadly. You don't believe that? Fine. End of discussion.
A knife is much less deadly?!? You are just as dead with a knife up your ass as a bullet.
Live (or die) as you please; I will shoot an asshole with a knife just as fast as I'll shoot one with a gun. For that matter he could have a rubber dildo; I'm going home and he's not.
Being able to carry weapons is not a power fantasy, it is the citizens involvement in enforcing and protecting their rights. Much as Europeans mandate voting as a obligation rather than something to do, being able to legally carry a firearm is the same as a European voting to protect their rights. Our country believes it's citizens should have the ability to defend themselves without intervention from another entity since freedom is an inherent right to every human, and they should have the choice to protect themselves. Relying on another to do that necessitates you being under their thumb, following their rules, and obeying them, which not freedom. There have been many countries that rose to oppress their citizens by starting with not allowing them to carry weapons for self-defense. As much as you argue there would be no crime with no guns, there would be no way for others to protect themselves from tyranny without them
That's not the point here, though. The media never report when guns save lives regardless who uses the gun. The media also never report when cops save lives.
Let's take a look at all the motor vehicle deaths while we're playing magician here, shall we? I'd venture to guess that a couple more people die in car crashes than school shootings each year. I could be wrong, but why don't we get rid of cars? It would save a hell of a lot more lives than your gun ban, not to mention all the pollution, congestion, and noise we could eliminate. Oh and by the way, car ownership is not a constitutional right!
I will not argue that there aren't responsible gun owners in the US. However, there are a massive group of irresponsible gun owners. When the Bad outweighs the Good, There is a problem. Thats why cars aren't banned. Per piece, there are easily less car related deaths in the US then there are gun related deaths.
Criminals don't seem to be deterred by the signs. Can't imagine why.
I can't help but feel like we'd be better off without those signs than with them.
And, by the way, there are absolutely not "easily less car related deaths than gun deaths". Just because you wish it to be true doesn't make it so. According to the CDC's numbers for 2013 if you combine gang violence (which is as common as breathing to those animals), suicides (which will happen one way or another), and "accidents" you come up short of 33,000 firearms related deaths. Automobile deaths in 2014 were over 33,000 (CDC).
Murders and suicides will and do happen without firearms daily, and further dwarf these numbers. Automobile accidents cannot happen without cars. YOU ARE WRONG.
"Mandatory registration": again, criminals DO NOT FUCKING OBEY LAWS!!!!!!!
You know what a gun registry does do though? It gives the anti-gun politicians an inventory of toys they can come and take away from you. Worked pretty well in Oz. But, oh wait! They would only be able to take the law-abiding citizens' guns because mandatory registration would be a law and, um, seems like there was some kind of saying about criminals and laws... If I could only remember what it is.
Oh yeah, CRIMINALS DON'T FUCKING OBEY LAWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The difference is that no country in the world is like America. No country was ever founded like America. You cannot accurately compare any other country to America. The only two that are close are Canada and Australia, but neither of them ever got out from under England's thumb so they aren't all that different. The freedoms we were founded with, unfortunately, also give the bad eggs freedom. It's a delicate balancing act that many cities and states get right. Funny how the places with the worst violence have been run by socialist Democrats for a long time. Just a coincidence, I'm sure.
And most of America really doesn't have a lot of violent crime; it's just that what does happen gets played up by the media.
My freedoms are the same as the criminal's down the street, and a police state that tries to take his freedoms by force will sure as hell trample my freedoms first since I obey laws and he doesn't. Maybe life might be a little safer with big brother having more power over me, but I'll never take such a chance. I'll keep my freedom, thank you, and anyone, ANYONE that tries to take it will live just long enough to regret it.
EDIT: It was not Thomas Jefferson, it was in fact, James Madison.
The loose laws you have are far too much of a risk because of the potential for something to happen. Thats why we have the laws on gun control here. To remove a risk is to remove as much of a chance of something happening as is possible. Your lax gun laws make it far too easy to get a gun, and not have it traceable. I would honestly rather have a disarmed populace than the risk of an irresponsible gun owner among responsible gun owners.
Stay in England, enjoy your soccer and fish and French fries, and we'll deal with the freedom of the assholes while we enjoy our own.
Secondly, I understand freedom without fear. You understand freedom with fear.
Thirdly, The US was formed in the same way as Australia. You were a convict dumping ground more than we were. I come from SA, The free state. We never had convict labour or any of that shit. We were founded by pioneers. So, Yes, I understand freedom. I understand that there is nothing anyone can do to take it away from me.
Regardless, as a nation the United States was founded much differently than Oz. Mainly in that Australia really wasn't founded; you were a British colony and simply "moved out of mom's basement" when you were middle-aged.
We were created from scratch and our Constitution was drafted to address all the problems the founders lived through under British rule. Our freedoms were so important to our founders that they were spelled out in our Bill of Rights. And in order to ensure EVERYONE had protected rights they felt those rights had to be protected for EVERYONE. Especially those accused of a crime because they knew from experience that anyone could be falsely accused and screwed by those in power.
Either way what I said about rights stands. If those accused of a crime, or those who have paid their debt to society can so easily lose their rights any of us can. Criminals' rights must be protected to protect all of us. This unfortunately leads to problems/difficulty fighting crime and punishing criminals, but it's better than the alternative.
No freakin' thanks.
I once read a European's summation of why America works, especially compared with Europe. I think it was Daniel Hannan MEP in one of his books, but I don't recall which one (could have been in an interview; might not even have been Hannan, but I'm pretty sure it was). He wrote that (I'm paraphrasing) the biggest difference between America and Europe is that Europeans assume that everything is not permitted until they are told they are permitted to do it. Americans assume that we can do anything until we're told we can't.
And, I'll add, when you tell us we can't do it, we'll prove your ass wrong!
And no, criminals do not get to freely carry guns, the only owners are licensed carriers who can prove they require them. While the odd one is found on people here the gun laws are extremely efficient at minimising the circulation of such things, and makes it easier to track the sale of a gun from person to person.
No, getting rid of guns will not completely stop violent crime, however it's a lot harder to kill a lot of people with a close range melee weapon than it is to open fire with an automatic ranged weapon. There are just as many stories of unarmed civilians stopping major incidents of murder in europe as there are people with guns in america.
And, *sigh* yet again, criminals don't follow laws. That's why they're criminals. Different countries have different criminals, perhaps, but I'm willing to bet that whatever criminal element you have still has their weapons.
I don't give a rip what may or may not work in your particular socialist utopia, in America the bad apples have guns, knives, baseball bats, whatever, and use them against helpless victims daily. You know what else happens daily? Armed civilians refuse to be victimized.
In my opinion, guns are cool, collectible, and useful, but that's not relevant here.
The FACT is that criminals Do. Not. Obey. Laws...
Kinda why they're criminals. Even if we somehow descended into Dante's Hell and European style socialism sent the jack-booted brown shirts into our homes to forcibly confiscate our guns, THE CRIMINALS WOULD STILL HAVE THEIRS!
You can pass all the laws you want, but if you think those that are already disobeying laws are going to somehow suddenly play nice you need your head examined.
The plain FACT is that there are goblins out there with less than honorable intentions, and the only way to prevent them causing you to have a bad day is to be prepared to overwhelm them if they come knocking.
Let me answer that if you're having trouble: NO. The criminals are not buying their guns legally, so it makes no difference whether guns are illegal. Criminals will still get illegal guns illegally and probably do illegal things with them. Laws only affect the law-abiding.
Second let's assume your Hogwarts education paid off and you could somehow magically make every gun in the entire world disappear. What about knives? Bats? Pipes? Axes? Hammers?
What about the 200 pound guy that can easily overpower a 105 pound woman with his bare hands? How does your defense against the dark arts protect innocent victims? Whether the particular piece of excrement in front of you has a gun or not, he's a threat. A firearm in your possession goes a long way toward equalizing the equation.
Live (or die) as you please; I will shoot an asshole with a knife just as fast as I'll shoot one with a gun. For that matter he could have a rubber dildo; I'm going home and he's not.