NCO Club: Off Topic Discussions => The Aisles: Non-military News and Snippets => Topic started by: Koen on 14 December 2012, 19:25:37



Title: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 14 December 2012, 19:25:37
Multiple Fatalities Reported in Shooting at Connecticut Elementary School

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/nyregion/shooting-reported-at-connecticut-elementary-school.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/nyregion/shooting-reported-at-connecticut-elementary-school.html)

and again some tough guys wil say the right to carry arms ensure a safer community.... f*** you guys.... how many shooting have there been in the US in the last 20 years?

Newtown, Connecticut School Shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary: Parent Interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epJo_ic_wds#ws)


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 14 December 2012, 20:09:42
How bad this may be, if you do a search on this item here at WaT you will find a report I have posted somewhere in another topic.

A group of lawyers in the US investigated the relation between firearms, crimes and law per state for the anti-firearm lobby.
They made a shocking discovery.
In states where tough laws were enforced on buying and selling firarms the number of crimes with deadly use of firearms was the highest, states with a liberal approach to guns saw much less crime with use of deadly force.
It doesnt matter what law you have.
If people want to get a gun they buy it somewhere, a law doesnt stop people from buying a firearm.

I saw a remark from somebody after the Columbine shooting that made me thinking....
He said: "if you live in a country with more weapons than people how come none of those targeted people returned fire?"
So others will say, hey if any of those victims had a gun he could have defended him or the others.
Tests have been done with students carrying a gun.
In most tests they did not react or reacted to late because of shock and stress or simply fear.
And there we are back at your remark.......

Here we have tough laws for firearms, did they prevent the 100's of murdered people past year and the tragic shooting in the mall?
The only solution may be to have manufacturers sell guns to law enforcement only but that is impossible I am afraid.






Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Rattler on 14 December 2012, 20:15:38
Well, it is now at least 27 kids around 7-8 yrs killed, and three "patients in hospital", one gunman dead and the hunt on for a 2nd.

Fact is that in Spain, England, the Netherlands, Germany, etc. such things do not happen with such a frequency (extremely rarely if at all, I rmember two such incidents in Europe, one in Germany the other in Switzerland where everybody has a gun), and that is probably due to the strict gun control in Europe.

FWIW,

Rattler


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 14 December 2012, 20:31:47
Henk,

I do know that these things happen in every country around the world but how many times it happens is the question! (I need no search button and I've been following/reading news around the globe for years now)

And how people react is another thing, when certain shootings happened here in Belgium (nothing compared to the ones in the US) all parties realised we needed to change things.

And 100% doesn't exist. No law will stop the killing but saying that we don't need laws??????? And statements as: "no gun kills, only people who fire the guns kill" is another prove of stupidity and lack of 'balls'.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 14 December 2012, 21:52:52
Well, in a way guns dont kill people but the people who hold the gun and pull the trigger.
Valid remark.
The real problem lies in the fact that people can buy guns to use.
Why, because the gun manufacturers simply make to many and because we have a problem with our society.
Thousands of people use guns what they are for, to hunt and for pleasure in private clubs shooting at paper targets, are we going to punish them because 1 guy cant handle his problems in a normal way?
Here, we had what is named the post modern pacifistic trend. In short it means children grew up without any form of discipline or authority for the past 20 years.
Authority, and discipline were seen as dangerous.... conscription for the army was abandoned. Social security was cut in its funding, many youthclubs were closed, less police in the streets.
Now we have created several generations of teenagers who dont give a damn about any form of authority, they do what they want because the law gives them the "right" to do what they want.Often they forget that they also have obligations to the community.
A new breed of people who are tought that they are the only ones who are important, selfish, greedy and lacking any social skills, the more they have the better.
Compare that with a fragmented society where social controll is not existing anymore, thats causing problems together with a lack of moral values.
Lack of moral education and education in general.
Its my opinion that more crimes will happen in the near future by kids younger and younger and far more bloodier.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 14 December 2012, 22:59:45
Quote
because 1 guy cant handle his problems in a normal way?

it's NOT 1 guy... it's 1 guy EVERY time this shit happens...

guns should be limited to professional and trained users, police forces and military.

no guns should be allowed as hobby in any kind of way neither should military personnel have guns at home

there's no 'right' in the right to carry arms, there's only the right to live


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Rattler on 15 December 2012, 00:28:20
Both of you are right, but from my POV dont pull the right conclusions:

Yes, its people who pull the trigger. That is not the point:

People kill people, people walk around with a grudge, people go crazy, all this might end in a shortcut and lead you to get agressive and kill. But! If you got a baseball club or a knife you will do great harm (that ends in the news paper), people will be duly shocked, though: With an M16 I clean a whole village square crammed with people if needed, in an instant. THAT is the difference. Gun control forces those dumbasses to resort to baseball bats or knives.

Now, you might say, but people can get guns here in Europe anyway (true, I have two small caliber rifles, and if I go to Son Banya tomorrow with 500 Euros will carry a .38 pistol or revolver when coming out). Again, this is not the point:

People with military training, or police training, or almost whatever training on arms (we are talking bodyguards, all Swiss males, Mafia killers, (European) armed robbers etc.) will NEVER make headlines for a news paper be it for going on a killing spree derived from depression or also as far as accidents are related, they treat guns from a "professional" POV, they are "tools" for specific labours.

In consequence we need two things: Tough gun control (let the mafia killers buy them all they want, they wont harm the general public) and profound gun education. Point one means no guns at home, point two means: Yes, professional gun training, for everybody who wants to own one.

An Arms Race in society will never lead to good port.

Ah, and authority or discipline attitude in a society is a different theme which I see to have no connection to the question of gun control.

Thats my take,

FWIW, Rattler

Well, in a way guns dont kill people but the people who hold the gun and pull the trigger.
Valid remark.
The real problem lies in the fact that people can buy guns to use.
Why, because the gun manufacturers simply make to many and because we have a problem with our society.
Thousands of people use guns what they are for, to hunt and for pleasure in private clubs shooting at paper targets, are we going to punish them because 1 guy cant handle his problems in a normal way?
Here, we had what is named the post modern pacifistic trend. In short it means children grew up without any form of discipline or authority for the past 20 years.
Authority, and discipline were seen as dangerous.... conscription for the army was abandoned. Social security was cut in its funding, many youthclubs were closed, less police in the streets.
Now we have created several generations of teenagers who dont give a damn about any form of authority, they do what they want because the law gives them the "right" to do what they want.Often they forget that they also have obligations to the community.
A new breed of people who are tought that they are the only ones who are important, selfish, greedy and lacking any social skills, the more they have the better.
Compare that with a fragmented society where social controll is not existing anymore, thats causing problems together with a lack of moral values.
Lack of moral education and education in general.
Its my opinion that more crimes will happen in the near future by kids younger and younger and far more bloodier.



Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 15 December 2012, 11:34:09
Nicely said Matt.
However two days ago in China a man stabbed 22 children with a knive......If you close a door to a class you can kill those children with a knive in a few minutes too.
Same happened in Belgium btw.
Gun control is not the option, it simply doesnt work. If people cant get a gun they pick up something else.
Banning crime and teaching people not to kill eachother are better in my point of view.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Rattler on 15 December 2012, 12:00:45
Stoffel,

gun control *does* work:

We had in summer the case here in Mallorca that a perturbed Hitler and Columbine Massacre fan had planned to commit a massacre in the University of Balearic Islands (UIB) here in Palma at Hitlers birthday 20th of April, 2013.

The story on how they caught him is very long and has all the twists for a Hollywood movie (someone in Japan read the blog of the guy and tried to communicate this to the Majorcan Police - who did neither speak Japanese nor English - and though all the protagonists were not aware of it - it worked, the information was processed and with FBI and CNI they started following up the guy, finally after 5 month of investgation they caught him for bying lot of material to produce explosives over internet).

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fultimahora.es%2Fmenorca%2Fnoticia%2Fsucesos%2Fultimas%2Fpolicia-nacional-detiene-imitador-masacre-columbine-dispuesto-sembrar-bombas-uib.html&act=url (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=es&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fultimahora.es%2Fmenorca%2Fnoticia%2Fsucesos%2Fultimas%2Fpolicia-nacional-detiene-imitador-masacre-columbine-dispuesto-sembrar-bombas-uib.html&act=url)

The interesting part of the story is that (he wanted to copy the Columbine Shootings initially):

Quote
...During these months of investigation, JM tried repeatedly illegally acquire several weapons, according to information provided by the Police Department...



He did it the way I would have done (and described it yesterday), by going to "Son Banya" with 3.000 Euros and trying to aquire steel, of course without stating his intent. Did not work, he got nothing from the gypsies, and what is more, news spread through the illegal canals that he was not to be sold a gun. Point is, if *I* went I *would* get a gun.

So finally, the guy had to resort to fabricating his own explosives in Oklahoma style with fertilizer but got followed up in his Internet bying spree and detained when he recived the material.

This is what I call gun control, and it shows it *does* work: By forcing a potential buyer into illegal canals, you pass the problem to the streetwise sellers, they do the best psychologic profiling and react accordingly (at least in Europe), as they do *not* want to see their business affected by raids or whatsoever.

Gun control works.

Actually, yoou yourself were giving the hint: The China guy stabbed 22 kids in school, but *did not kill one*.

FWIW,

Rattler


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 15 December 2012, 19:22:16
Than please tell me.
Of most crimes committed here in Holland almost none were committed with legally registered weapons, accept the one in Alphen.
Most murders with firearms are being committed by criminals who gives a rats ass about a law.

In fact if I violate the law I risk 1 year in prison, if I get caught with an illegal weapon ( ie like a Minimi) I face 6 months......
I think its a social problem, sane people do not kill their neighbours, family or others.
I dont think  a law would stop them.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 15 December 2012, 20:05:03
Than please tell me.
Of most crimes committed here in Holland almost none were committed with legally registered weapons, accept the one in Alphen.
Most murders with firearms are being committed by criminals who gives a rats ass about a law.

In fact if I violate the law I risk 1 year in prison, if I get caught with an illegal weapon ( ie like a Minimi) I face 6 months......
I think its a social problem, sane people do not kill their neighbours, family or others.
I dont think  a law would stop them.

all these comments are not convincing me that we shouldn't try to stop the sale of arms, small or big, automatic or not

a weapon is build to kill
a knife/hammer/axe isn't (except the ones we know who were)

the logical step with things that are build to kill is:
to let them only be used by professionals in safe conditions (or war etc)
to sell them only to police and army
not to sell them to people for hobby purposes

when people do not have a gun in the house they can't use it
you can tell me that "if they want a gun they'll find one" but thinking about using a gun and going out to buy one is a big step.

when I get furious on Karine and want to shoot her I have 2 options:
1.I take the gun in the kitchen and shoot her, this takes a couple of minutes
2.I search on the net where I can buy one, hide my internet search, lie to her every day, go on a ride to get the gun, return and then shoot Karine. Any idea how much time and effort this will take? By then my anger on Karine will probably be gone

Yesterday some 10km's from here a man got pissed on his son and wanted to shoot him but in the action shot his wife instead and killed her. Now I dare you to tell me the outcome when he didn't had a gun.

Ofcourse you'll tell me that him owning a gun was illegal so the law doesn't work. Sry bulls****! The harder you make it to own a gun the less people will own one.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 15 December 2012, 23:13:38
The harder you make it to own a gun the less people will own one.


Ok, you make it very hard like in my country.
Let me explain you.
If I want to buy a gun here I need to see a policeman for interviewing, everything will be checked.
Than when I get one I am subject to random visits.
My gun needs to be in a closed safe in a lockable room, same goes for the ammo.
I have to report a route to my shooting range and a reserve one in case there is a problem down the route I take.
If I violate one of these rules I face a 1 year prison sentence.
Off all the murders committed in my country few were done by guns, most of these were done by knifes, poison, tools and strangling, fire and suffication.
These were all  "normal" people prior to become a murderer.
Most registered users with guns are hunters, police and people who visit shooting clubs ( btw new rule forbids the last category to have a weapon at home)

Only criminals use guns for robberies, killings of other gangsters and so on.
They buy their guns on the black market, thats where the problem is.
They laugh for punishment, its only 6 months max.
A law doesnt stop people from buying a gun.
Just like a law doesnt stop people from getting speeding tickets.......



Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 16 December 2012, 10:35:23
true, a law doesn't stop people from buying a gun but that doesn't mean you shouldn't make as many laws as possible to prevent

what makes me sick is the discussions in the US after each killing

some will say that they need armed guards at every school.... well, if you don't get the stupidity of such statements.....  hdbng

2 weeks ago I saw a TV report on the arms issue in Texas where guns are sold and exported immediately to Mexico where you can't count the killings anymore...

when they interview sellers they reply: I'm a businessman, I don't kill people, I only sell guns...

OR

there's a law that says we have the right to carry arms, true but, as also mentioned in the report, that's a law from a time there was no police or other kind of structured society...

all those people in the US supporting those stupid statements are also responsable for the killings, not only the shooter.

when you can go into a shop, buy semi-automatic weapons and go out shooting people there's is something wrong with the complete system

and not 1 politician has the balls to change this because they're afraid of loosing their job

what will they say to the family of the children and teachers? sorry? sorry for what? for not having the courage to do the necessary?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9746935/Teachers-sacrificed-themselves-to-save-their-pupils.html# (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9746935/Teachers-sacrificed-themselves-to-save-their-pupils.html#)

Quote
Authorities have identified principal Dawn Hochsprung, 47, school psychologist Mary Sherlach, 56, and 27-year-old Victoria Soto, a young first grade teacher, as three of the eight adults found dead at the Sandy Hook Elementary School on Friday.

A fourth teacher, Lauren Rousseau, 30, a substitute teacher who had been working at the school since October, was also reported to have been killed.

Twenty eight people died in the shooting spree, including 20 young children between the ages of five and ten. Six adults also died in the attack on the school.

It has been reported that Miss Soto sacrificed herself to save her students – throwing her body in front of the young children.

Some of the teachers took cover beneath tables when the murderer, Adam Lanza, opened fire inside the school in suburban Newtown, Connecticut – but the Mrs Hochsprung and Mrs Sherlach didn't hesitate, according to reports.

They ran into the hallway to confront the danger – and were murdered "execution-style" as a result.



Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 16 December 2012, 18:45:48
Well, to be honoust I dont like people with guns either.
And I hope I can live in a society free of killings and weapons.

Unfortunately its not going to happen.
To many people earn money with this industry.
Politicians dont want to ban them. hdbng

I have no solution for it.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 18 December 2012, 19:52:56
Obama says: the whole nation supports you and is praying for you
Obama says: we need to review the arms law
the nation reacts: +20% sales in arms

now who's sick?


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Rattler on 19 December 2012, 10:24:05
-snip-
Obama says: we need to review the arms law
the nation reacts...


Yep, they now have all kinds of school body armour out:

Bulletproof Backpacks:

(http://mjcdn.motherjones.com/preset_51/backpacks_main.jpg)

Quote
"Basically, there's three models," says Derek Williams. "A SwissGear that's made for teens, and we've got an Avengers and a Disney Princess backpack for little kids."

Williams is the president of Amendment II, a Salt Lake City-based company that manufactures lightweight body armor for law enforcement and military use. But lately they've moved into a different market: body armor for kids. Six months ago, Amendment II introduced a new line of backpacks, built with the company's signature carbon nanotube armor, designed to keep kids safe in the event of school shootings. Since Friday's massacre at a Newtown, Connecticut, elementary school, sales have gone through the roof. "I can't go into exact sales numbers, but basically we tripled our sales volume of backpacks that we typically do in a month—in one week," Williams says.

With thoughts of defenseless children seared into the national consciousness, the company doesn't plan on letting the crisis go to waste. "We want to be sensitive to how we do that, but we are gonna try to get the word out that this product does exist that there are ways to at least provide our children with some protection," Williams says.


(http://www.motherjones.com/files/Larue.jpg)

Tactical vests and body armour for kids are mulled over whether to become obligatory in US schools:

(http://www.motherjones.com/files/kevlar_vest.jpg)

You tell me about sick, man...  ???

The US is more and more becoming a territory I not only would not want to live in, but I more and more have come to not even want to visit anymore.

Rattler


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 19 December 2012, 10:58:54
Now I miss the head protection like kevlar helmet and bullet proof goggles??


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Alan65 on 19 December 2012, 18:09:39
Just like most Americans need more information on the reality of living in Europe, most Europeans need more insight to what life in the US is like.

The US didn't have a problem (regarding mass murder by private citizens) for the first 185 years of our Republic.  Something else has changed in this society besides an increase in gun ownership/use.  Gun violence and most crime are down in the US in the past 30 years.  Look up the biggest mass murders in the US and they're not done with guns. (box cutters/planes, dynamite, fertilizer) Look up gun murder with the most victims and you'll find it 's not in the US.

When your emotions have cooled down ["f*** you guys"? I know the first response to such an act of evil is going to be emotional but you know there are those who now claim it's open season on shooting NRA members and those who defend them so Koen may be engaging in "hate speech"  :o], I'd like to engage in a discussion about what laws designed to limit these mass murders might work in the US because I think some here have more knowledge about the specifics of certain fire-arms capabilities (magazine capacity, types of ammunition, etc.) 


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 19 December 2012, 19:21:04
my writings have nothing to do with 'hate', you know me for a long time now, maybe even the longest off all members here...

what I write are my thoughts on how I see people react in the US on weapons, shootings and dead ones

I didn't write about mass killings, I comment on the school shootings

I don't understand how people react by buying guns 1 day after a lunatic shot a bunch of children with a gun...

I don't understand how people take their children to a shooting range on sunday and/or buy them weapons as a present...

I don't understand that some dudes are now making an effort to sell armed backpacks... just for the dollars....

I didn't talk about killing NRA members, I never promote killing, harming or whatever negative action...


I just don't get that in 2012 people refer to laws from 200 years ago
I just don't get that people buy guns as a solution because someone else with a gun killed someone


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Alan65 on 19 December 2012, 20:39:52
Understood, Koen! I know your stance on hatred and violence.  But understand the reaction of some in light of what's happened--it's more violence against some for their beliefs and 'f*** you' is one of their responses.

I don't understand the armored back-packs either.  But I never heard of them nor saw anything about them until the ad was shown here by a European.  I honestly doubt that this business will succeed.  (I also doubt that this product was a result of last weeks' shooting.)  I guarantee that 99+% of Americans see it as in bad taste. 

Regarding a 200 year old document, I'm proud that we've had only one republic in 236 years.  There is a way to amend our Constitution and I have no problem with attempting--let alone achieving--change via this method.  (it's been done nearly 30 times.)  However, the only amendment which was subsequently removed by another amendment was an amendment banning a product (alcohol.)  Franklin Roosevelt also outlawed the possession of gold by private citizens.  This was later un-done, too.  It also didn't work (people held on to some of their gold).  

From an American perspective (my perspective, but also many more although of course another may chime in here that they're also an American and do want a ban) a ban won't work.  Think of all the things that are already illegal and the amount of possession/use/action that is still done with these items/ideas.  The American 'mind-set', if you will, and theory of our government has been to emphasize individual liberty as opposed to central government power.  Our history has shown that when individual liberty is coupled with responsible citizenry (morally and intellectually), freedom is better than limits imposed by government.  People are happier, economic times are better, more innovation takes place, etc. I'm not talking of material happiness nor material innovation alone, either--a sense of individual liberty allows creativity to flourish in all spheres of human endeavor.  I'm of the opinion that all of human history shows this to be true.

The murderer in CT attempted to get a gun through legal channels and was legally denied so he ended up stealing a legal firearm stored illegally.  Most of the talk in the US this week has focused on mental illness not gun control.  As I stated before, guns are less prevalent today than in our past; all crime is down and trending down; guns were never an issue in our country before so something else has changed.  School children have 'lock down' drills once/month in my kids' school.  We also have fire drills and earthquake drills (in Seattle, earthquake drills are necessary!.)  All US schools are 'gun free zones', 'drug free zones', too (there are signs stating so)

I would urge my European friends to read the wikipedia article on 'open carry' States in the US.  Look up homicide rates in the US vs. Europe--2 Baltic countries have a higher murder rate than the US as does the capital of Luxembourg; Amsterdam approaches ours. Look up the states with the most restrictive gun laws and then the list of cities/States with the highest murder and crime rates.  The same locations will be at the top of both lists.    

In the US, there are two types of "gun cultures"--one with kids at shooting ranges on Sundays, safety classes, etc.--and one with gang members doing 90+% of US gun deaths, glamorizing guns/drugs/degradation of women/etc.  One gun culture promotes liberty and crime prevention and one gun culture promotes all of the bad things you're seeing in the news you get about life in the US.

Here's my list of things I don't understand:
I don't understand how Europeans can use alcohol so freely and share it with their children. (this is actually a very good analogy to US views on guns, our 2 gun cultures)
I don't understand how Europeans (and Asians and Africans) can allow oppressive governments to come to power and engage in genocide and wars which have killed 100s of millions in the last 100 years. (it's why we have our 2nd Amendment)
I don't understand why Europeans smoke so much.
You all seem to have reached some sort of accommodation with it and aren't bothered so I won't worry to much about it.
I don't understand how Americans can abort 50 million baby humans in the past 40 years, spend $billions on "entertainment" which glorifies moral bankruptcy and death, or why a near majority of registered voters never vote.
All of the above on my list cause more death (well, except voter apathy) than anything on your list.  It happens in a 'frog in warming water' way though--it's not flashy and sudden so we ignore it, we don't jump out of the boiling water.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms
Post by: Alan65 on 19 December 2012, 20:47:09
and again some tough guys wil say the right to carry arms ensure a safer community



I'm not a 'tough guy' but here's a Valparaiso Law Revue article proving that law-abiding US citizens being allowed to carry concealed handguns does decrease crime:
http://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1853&context=vulr&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bing.com%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dvalparaiso%2Blaw%2Brevue%2Bconceal%2Bcarry%2Blaws%26q%3Dvalparaiso%2Blaw%2Brevue%2Bconceal%2Bcarry%2Blaws%26src%3DIE-SearchBox%26Form%3DIE8SRC#search=%22valparaiso%20law%20revue%20conceal%20carry%20laws%22 (http://scholar.valpo.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1853&context=vulr&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bing.com%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dvalparaiso%2Blaw%2Brevue%2Bconceal%2Bcarry%2Blaws%26q%3Dvalparaiso%2Blaw%2Brevue%2Bconceal%2Bcarry%2Blaws%26src%3DIE-SearchBox%26Form%3DIE8SRC#search=%22valparaiso%20law%20revue%20conceal%20carry%20laws%22)


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 19 December 2012, 21:17:37
I am 'for' liberties and I do acknowledge that although some (few) can't handle liberties not a complete community should be punished by seeing their liberties restricted

But is a 200 year old 'law' still 'actual'? Yes, freedom of speech is also old and actual but that has not the same effect as carrying a gun. Speech doesn't kill although people have been killed when they use that right.

I'm also aware of the disaster of the alcohol ban in the US in the 30s but still I'm not convinced it's comparable.

Now I read about the thoughts on the 'clips' and I really start to wonder if they're gonna start a 'math' contest:

*how many people may/allowed a shooter kill with 1 clip?============ let's say 2 bullets for 1 kill ============= 5victims means 10 bullets========= is that ok?

*are we deciding on the size of clips by the number of victims a killer may shoot?


--------------------------------

as with your European questions:

Europe is NOT what US citizens probably think it is... as a Belgian citizen I see France/UK/Netherlands/Germany/Luxembourg/Austria with the Scandinavian countries as 1 part of Europe

Italy/Spain/Greece/Portugal as another part

the Baltics as a 3rd part

and there are more....

There is no Europe when we talk about the same rules and/or standards so it's impossible to talk about Europeans as you see it.

***alcohol IS an issue - I think that on a certain point it's similar as the US guns when people start seeing it as 'normal'
***another issue in Europe and maybe I should say 'Flemish' since it's something you feel from the inside is the lack of discipline.... at school teachers can't be tough anymore or they end up before a court.... no army times anymore... parents are too busy with paying off too many bills so they don't have time anymore to educate their children... and certainly not to take a stand prohibiting booze or smokes...
***how do you think we feel when we look at Greece where a neonazi party is having it's best time ever? we feel sick! when I see docus about them I see poor people who will do anything to get some food... even sign up for a neonazi party! and NO, the ones who caused the disaster are NOT punished but bankers seem to be protected by higher powers... money will get you anything!

no, we aren't 'accomodated', not at all...

how do you think I feel when I see starving children at TV when a bit later a Flemish discotheque pays 500.000€ at Paris Hilton to do a Belgian appearance?


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 20 December 2012, 10:05:43
Sorry but Amsterdam might have some murders its nothing in comparision with a normal US town.

number of deaths in masterdam 2012 were 31 which is not much.
Numbers of deaths in Us towns are wel over 1000 to 2000 for most cities where total number of deats were 250 only in my entire country.....
Now I did a search in the justice files and found this.......

39% of kills were done by guns, almost all of them murders among criminils like liquidations and drugrelated crimes.
32% poeple killed by knifes , large part of that were family dramas, few are done with guns.
10% by baseball bat or similar type.
The rest of the murders were done by using poision, cars, drowning and any other way you can think of to kill somebody.

This shows two important things.
Most murders arent committed by guns. (39%)
In many cases people use weapons of opportunity like knives or stranglation(61%).
Guns are often only used by criminals and in most cases are illegal.Exceptions with guns are the shooting of a family by the father and the shooting in the Mall in Alphen which were done by people who were mentally ill.
That shows gun control and tough control on who carries them work.
Therefor gun manufacturers should be the ones who shouldnt make more weapons than needed by law enforcement.
A better way would be to come up with a chip or an other device that can track every weapon.( like we use in the army)
If thats implemented on a weapon after buying a policeofficer can bring in an owner for questioning once his gun is missing or when he fails to show it or when he has disabled the chip.
That also has a positive effect because a weapon will be more expensive and the gun wont turn up on the black market that fast :)
And also very important, you have to undergo a thorough test at a policestation which includes a check on your mental state of health.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 20 December 2012, 10:41:32
Quote
A better way would be to come up with a chip or an other device that can track every weapon.( like we use in the army)

I had to chip my dogs so......... are my dogs then more dangerous then an assault weapon?


Title: Re: the right to carry arms
Post by: Alan65 on 20 December 2012, 17:28:34
Koen, about the clips:  that's exactly what politicians in the US are saying; that's why I ask.  The thinking is that a 3 round capacity will stop a burglar [heck, an empty gun will stop one] but not slaughter 20 kids in school (although, why a psycho couldn't just carry 5 guns to get his massacre is not clear.)  Politicians are also talking about restricting the rate of fire allowed (some of which is already done)  So, yes, US politicians and many citizens discussing this are "using math."
The US Constitution was written with the idea that responsible citizens would be living under these laws and obviously, our education system isn't doing a good job in preparing young people to become happy, healthy and responsible old people.

Stoffel, my figures were comparing the US national average to Amsterdam's.  Of course, New York City, Chicago, L.A., Miami have more.  I did that because the site I found showed rates for each European country alongside that nation's capital city.  Amsterdam had nearly 4 murders per 100,000 population and the US national average is 4.35/100,000.  Luxembourg City is over 4 and Estonia and Lithuania were both at 6 and 8 per 100k, respectively.  [Edit:  I think chips are a good idea.  if you can find your stolen car with one, you should find one with a gun.  would probably take several chips or a chip integrated to the most important parts so criminals don't/can't change them.)]

I just heard in the US, about 2/3 of murders are with guns, so it's obviously the 'weapon of choice' for murder.  I bet it's mostly because of gang activity and organized crime.  I've also heard that males are more 'successful' at suicide since they choose a gun to attempt it while females take pills, use gas, etc.

Oh, here are the sites with US crime rates:  http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm (http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm)
Here's the site I used for European figures: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Crime_trends_in_detail (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Crime_trends_in_detail)


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 20 December 2012, 17:57:57
There is a big problem with those numbers for Amsterdam.
Most of those are criminals, and of those many come from abroad and dont live in Amsterdam.
Thats why I mentioned only 250 in the entire country.Thats 1 on 80.000.......and of that total 61% isnt killed with a gun.

A chip will work, to compare it with a dog is a bit silly Koen cause its something totally different.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 20 December 2012, 18:25:53
There is a big problem with those numbers for Amsterdam.
Most of those are criminals, and of those many come from abroad and dont live in Amsterdam.
Thats why I mentioned only 250 in the entire country.Thats 1 on 80.000.......and of that total 61% isnt killed with a gun.

A chip will work, to compare it with a dog is a bit silly Koen cause its something totally different.

ofcourse it's silly, that's why I referred to it! when it's possible and forced by law to inject your dog with a chip..... isn't a gun more dangerous???????


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 20 December 2012, 19:13:16
LOL, a dog can be a dangerous weapon to....... :whistle:


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 21 December 2012, 19:09:09
Just saw the NRA spokesman...interesting that they blame the media.
Ideal way to avoid the realquestion, doi  they do enough to stop gun usage and to make America safer?

Their Idea to place armed cops in the schools is interesting to.
I learn if you want to secure a building you need at least 4 men to guard every corner.
That makes 12 men if you put them there for 8 hours a day.
Another question will be , what do you arm them with?
Do they carry a pistol only and by doing so making them a target to for guys armed with assaultrifles?
Or do we give them an M4 or MP5, where you run the risk that they attract people?
Or even worse that future killers start wearing bodyarmor or take bombs with them

Personally I dont think thats a good choice, and also important in times of budgetcuts its simply not affordable.
Now look at the number of buildings involved which are probably thousands.......
But I am sure the NRA will pay for that idea.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 22 December 2012, 20:52:12
and it doesn't stop: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/22/us/gunman-kills-3-in-central-pennsylvania.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/22/us/gunman-kills-3-in-central-pennsylvania.html)
Quote
3 Fatally Shot By Gunman In Rural Area
A gunman fatally shot three people on Friday morning, including a woman who was hanging Christmas decorations inside a church, during a bloody rampage that spread terror along a stretch of two-lane country road in central Pennsylvania.
...

an interesting page with numbers: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/opinion/blow-on-guns-america-stands-out.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/opinion/blow-on-guns-america-stands-out.html)

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/12/19/opinion/1220OPEDBLOWforweb/1220OPEDBLOWforweb-articleLarge.jpg)

next page is a picture page with pics of people preparing for doomsday: have look and tell me what you think when you saw all pics
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2012/12/preparing-for-the-end-of-the-world/100427/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2012/12/preparing-for-the-end-of-the-world/100427/)


Title: Re: the right to carry arms?
Post by: Alan65 on 24 December 2012, 23:27:37
thanks for the chart, Koen.

from a mathematics perspective, if guns caused gun violence, we would see similar homicide rates for areas with similar guns/person statistics.  We don't, ergo, guns don't cause gun violence!  :o

I also think that the NRA's response (solution) isn't a good one from either an implementation stand-point or a public-relations viewpoint.
We do have junior and senior high schools with metal detectors at the door and armed security and gunman do not walk into those schools and do this sort of thing.  These school are generally urban and poor with another set of problems besides gun violence.  Psychos will simply find another way to kill and another venue in which to do it if you secure schools. (I'm not saying don't make schools more secure!)


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 26 December 2012, 11:29:35
Those numbers dont tell the story either.
If you compare France , Sweden, Finland and some others.
You see a high number of guns per 100 citizens.
Some 4 times higher than in my country, where the number of kills is just slightly higher.
I think in those countries many people have hunting rifles, shotguns and  so on.
And yes in countries with a high level of criminal activities there are more murders.

To me the numbers prove that the problem lays with people themselves.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Mad_Russian on 27 December 2012, 15:02:33
The problem is that this is the United States we are talking about here. Not some other country.

People buy guns for 3 reasons.

1) For hunting.
2) For self protection.
3) For protection against the government.

A large part of the population hunts.

In the United States any citizen is capable of taking the law into their own hands. Anyone can make a citizens arrest. That includes the right to defend one's life, limb and property. Most Americans will take care of an issue on their own property if they can before calling the police.

This is the United States. This country was born out of a revolt against a repressive government. They have never forgotten that and the lessons of an unarmed civilian population continue daily. Egypt, Libya, Syria...all unarmed and having to have somebody else give them weapons so they can defend themselves from their own government.

You will not diminish the right of gun owners in the US. Since you can't do that, then what can you do? That's the question that they still haven't answered.

1) You must take soft targets like schools off the easy access list. However you do it schools must not be first on the list of undefended targets where the people are not armed.  Notice that shooters don't go to places where the people are armed and can defend themselves. They go where there are defenseless people or in this case defenseless children.

2) There needs to be more mental health care. If you notice, rarely is the shooter what anyone would call a stable person, that just got upset and started shooting people. No, the shooters are, for the most part, mentally unbalanced.



Good Hunting.

MR





Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 27 December 2012, 15:32:17
Steve,

The two points you mentioned are vailid for me either.
But, as I said, what to do at a school, armed students arent a solution.
Thats already been tried, tests showed they failed in almost every situation (giving an attacker an extra gun).
Putting armed policemen there is economical not affordable for your government, specially rightnow.You would need thousands of men.
What do they carry around, a pistol, an MP5, an M4 with scopes and all, maybe give them a Minimi?
Triggering an arms race in schools where policemen have to be armed better than a possible attacker, an other problem is that these men are for sure to become the first targets.

And yes you are right in mentally sick people doing this.
What drives people to do acts like this?
The answer to the problem isnt an easy one.....I havent got one at the moment.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Mad_Russian on 27 December 2012, 16:53:35
The problem is not an easy one or it would have been solved long before now.

Those with a one line answer seem to think the rest of us are just plain stupid.

"Just take all the guns away!"

"Stricter gun control!"

"Arm the teachers!"

If it was as simple as a single line answer don't you suppose it would have been done long ago?

That's because it's not simple, and attack rhetoric like "F*** you!" only shuts down discussion, not promotes it.

Good Hunting.

MR


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 27 December 2012, 17:13:45
I know, Allan did already comment on that title.
We all have our opinions and sometimes we get upset.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 27 December 2012, 18:22:46
Sure, I got upset and still get upset... people are killing children... hello? anybody home? ? ?

When you don't get upset when reading/hearing this kind of 'news' you're sick!

Does this mean I wrote "f*** you" in a moment of 'weak state of mind'? NO. I knew exactly what I wrote.

And until now we had a very informative civil discussion, thx to all participants!

Sometimes I read stuff here at WaT and on other sources and it comes so clear to me that people have big problems with 'discussing' issues. Seems that in many occassions people fall into hate and discussions end. (and in some cases it doesn't end with ending a discussion).

So guys, really, enjoy the fact that here at WaT we have freedom of speech as long you don't get personal or write just for the sake of bashing.

What about the petition in the US to deport a CNN reporter? Now.... really.... isn't 'freedom of speech' also written down as a "right"? Or is the "right to carry arms" more important?

http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/cnn-anchor-now-faces-double-deportation/ (http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/cnn-anchor-now-faces-double-deportation/)

Isn't 'freedom of speech' a "right"? What about the countries those voters also condemn where there's no freedom of speech? Aren't they voting for the same? The loss of freedom of speech?
I find that voting so ridiculous and undemocratic.... I still need some prove that it's really happening.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Mad_Russian on 28 December 2012, 02:39:39
Yes, freedom of speech is a right.

Petitions mean nothing. All 50 states petitioned to leave the US after Obama was reelected. Means nothing.

That's an example of a peaceful protest. They know he's not going to be expelled for saying what he thinks.

One of the things that concerns me about the US at the moment is how polarized the country is getting. There seems to be no middle ground. No place for compromise any more.

All I'm saying Koen, is your statement was inflammatory. That you could have said the exact same thing, without the rhetoric, and gotten your point across without possibly alienating some people at the same time.

Good Hunting.

MR


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 28 December 2012, 12:44:58
Steve,

There you caught the biggest problem of our modern society.
Last generations children are thought that they are always right, need to get (steal) as much money as they can get (which is never enough) and dont need to think about the needs of someone else, immorality rules.Most of them are spoiled to the bone and have no respect for authority whatsoever.
Rights are something only meant for them, duties expected from them are unknown.
Helping people is something ugly and will only be done if it makes you more money.

This is a huge problem and it will not be solved overday.
It causes more and more social problems, and more unrest more people will get killed because of it.
Electronics are the new morale, children get phones at age 6 allready, interhuman contacts are unknown to them. You can do everything with your phone.
Facebook is the number one source for spoiled, bored and angry kids to hurt others.
It let to children committing suicide and the first murder ( by knife) of a 15 year old girl because sdhe said something about another girl.
And it getting worse every day.
Its these children that go into schools and kill others, and they dont need an excuse either in most cases.

Somaybe its time for a third war, a really big one so we can start all over again.
Rebuilding not only our houses and transportation but moreover our social and moral community which is allready bankrupt.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Mad_Russian on 29 December 2012, 17:39:49
Here is how most people feel about what happened in Connecticut.

I didn't write this but it seems to be the pervasive feeling in the country at the moment.

I've been giving the "gun ban law" some thought, and here it is: this person steals guns, (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), shoots and kills his own mother (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), transports these guns loaded (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), brings guns onto school property (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), breaks into the school (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), discharges the weapons within city limits (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), murders 26 people (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), and commits suicide (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW).

And there are people in this country that somehow think passing another ANOTHER LAW banning guns would protect us from someone like this. If you haven't noticed, people like this are not concerned about breaking laws - they only care about fulfilling their own twisted agenda. The only people that a gun ban law would impact are the LAW ABIDING CITIZENS, which will only serve to cripple the ability to protect ourselves.

Good Hunting.

MR


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 29 December 2012, 18:10:46
Which is what I said somewhere in this topic.
Laws dont stop people, after all its forbidden to drive on when your trafficlight is red......people do that as well.
2 bicyclists got killed by cars today, aged 21 and 34.

Many more people die in traffic accidents each year than by criminal actions.
And we still accept this to, time to get a law to forbid the use of cars.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 29 December 2012, 18:27:45
Steve,
thx for your intel.

May I ask another question?

When I go shopping to Leuven, Hasselt, Gent (3 major cities in Flanders) I have a hard time to find a gunshop. For me this is normal in a community where owning a gun is considered as: "why should I?"

When I see reports from within the States I see MANY gunshops and they are PACKED with guns... not only the small ones but BIG guns with the hundreds....

Isn't it a matter of how people grow up? When I see videos or pictures from kids/teens who get guns as a present for X-mas my stomache turns....


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 29 December 2012, 18:56:38
I have been tought if I need a gun I should go to Belgium.
In fact a lot of guns used here come from FN........

I know plenty of shops to find in Belgium.
And in some of them the owners dont care about laws either, only about selling.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Mad_Russian on 30 December 2012, 03:01:04
There is no question that the US has a different attitude, concerning all things firearms, than the rest of the world.

My Grandfather was a gun smith. I was given my first gun as a Christmas present when I was 10. I was expected to be responsible for all things concerning that weapon.

When I went hunting it was up to me to contact the land owner. It was my responsibility to use good judgement with it. I had access to dozens of weapons from age 10 on. My Grandfather had a large collection of firearms. Many of them military weapons. I've shot several types of WWII firearms from various nations. While in the service I shot more military type of weapons including machine guns.

The issue is that I've yet to kill my first person and no gun I've ever owned has killed a person. Nor did the weapons I was issued in the military ever kill a person while they are assigned to me.

That's why so many Americans are quick to point out that guns don't kill people. People kill people.

There are literally millions of gun owners in the US and only a very small percentage of those every use a fire arm in a fashion that is not responsible.

In the US I would think that gun ownership is broken down into something like this:

80% for hunting. Very few automatic weapons or pistols in that group. Most owned by people in rural areas.

15% for personal defense. Not counting those who own guns primarily for hunting, because those can be used in self defense as well, but just talking about those who own the gun specifically for self defense. Most of these people live in urban areas. These include a lot of hand guns. Some assault weapons and shot guns.

5% for personal freedoms from the government. This group is very heavily armed and has large supplies of ammunition and multiple weapons of large caliber and military style assault weapons.

As I said before the US is a very different society when it comes to gun ownership.

The issue is not the gun ownership. It's what happens when someone that is mentally unstable gets a gun and wants to use it for a violent purpose. I'm not sure what the answer is but making schools something other than defenseless has got to happen. Whatever it takes, we have to make it so dangerous for a shooter that they choose another target. The last 2 shootings have been with guns the shooters didn't buy or own. Tighter restrictions wouldn't have stopped them from happening. The last one was against firemen. They shoot at people that can't shoot back then when police respond they kill themselves.

Not sure what the answer is. It's not a simple problem to solve.

Good Hunting.

MR


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: Koen on 30 December 2012, 10:01:40
I have been tought if I need a gun I should go to Belgium.
In fact a lot of guns used here come from FN........

I know plenty of shops to find in Belgium.
And in some of them the owners dont care about laws either, only about selling.

I was NOT saying that there are NO gunshops in Belgium.
I AM aware of the existence of FN.
I also know that Belgian UN soldiers are demining in Lebanon AND at the same time thousands and thousands of landmines in the world are of Belgian origin.


Title: Re: the right to carry arms? f*** you!
Post by: stoffel on 30 December 2012, 15:18:56
See there you get my point, how can FN sell so many guns (besides the hunting rifles and police/army) thats falling into the hands of criminals?
Because we have governments that allowed them to, why, its big bussiness.
Guns and power go together, selling guns mean big profit and with that profit comes power.......

Today 2 guys got killed in Amsterdam, probably a criminal action, firefights in the middle of town with automatic weapons.(probably AK's)
2 motorcops were shot at as well when they tried to follow one of the suspects cars.
And here is the biggest problem we face in Holland.
Policeofficers only carry a small sidearm, the Wather PKK.
We have mp5's like most other countries, but the average policeman is not allowed to carry that weapon anymore.
We expect the government to protect us but that same governments justice department has a lot of left winged politicians who think that guns are dangerous.
They ordered that the new policeofficer should be able to solve problems with his mouth.....violence is something dirty.
If you draw your weapon today you have to fill in thousands of papers why you did that, and may god help you if you fire a single round with that gun.
In contradiction to a criminal who is unguilty until proven otherwise a policeofficer here is always guilty untill proven otherwise.
Even I as security have to fill in a lot of paperwork whhen we have to use violence to get a violent guy out of  a stadium.
Every criminal knows that, they get better armed every day they even use bodyarmor.
Our officers dont go out anymore to those calls unless they are with many together. (nice example is the massacre at Alphen)
Number of killings will rise and I think that the illegal handling and selling of guns will rise as well, simply cause we dont have to expect help from the police anymore.