Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 47 of 47

Thread: Red flag law turned fatal less than a month into passing

  1. #41

    Default

    I always find American discussions on guns to be both infuriating and amusing. Here in Australia, NO ONE has guns. And surprise surprise, almost no one dies from guns either. The somewhat obvious correlation between guns and gun deaths is understood by almost everyone... except americans.

    We have a lower crime rate than the USA. we have a lower homicide rate than USA. And no one has guns, largely because no one needs guns because no one else has guns either.

    We have a completely different culture and frankly, a much safer one.

  2. #42

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by sallyanne View Post
    I always find American discussions on guns to be both infuriating and amusing. Here in Australia, NO ONE has guns. And surprise surprise, almost no one dies from guns either. The somewhat obvious correlation between guns and gun deaths is understood by almost everyone... except americans.

    We have a lower crime rate than the USA. we have a lower homicide rate than USA. And no one has guns, largely because no one needs guns because no one else has guns either.

    We have a completely different culture and frankly, a much safer one.
    To be fair I Wouldn't trust Australians with guns to begin with. I mean your military Couldn't even win A war against a flock of birds With full automatic mounted machine guns. Lol

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  3. #43

    Default

    It's not simply due to the guns though, it's due to criminals and the mentally ill, after all THE MAJORITY of gun owners are complying with the law and they dont WANT to shoot somebody dead.

    But here in The United States, we have laws in place in many (not all states) designed to allow armed civilians to protect themselves if they find themselves in a compromising situation; there are many "gun deaths" where the person(s) who died did something to make someone think their life was in danger; while these are still "gun deaths", you cant count them as being as bad as the deaths of innocents due to mass shootings.

    This could be anything from approaching someone in an aggressive manner, outright attacking them (or attempting to) with a weapon drawn (or unarmed), breaking into someone's house in the middle of the night; it comes down to not risking your life and the lives of your family members because you cant tell what the criminal intends to do; if the homeowners "wait and see" they might get killed by a deranged maniac.

    Most of us truly do care that these Mass shootings if innocents happen and they shouldn't, but with the particular situation we have over here an outright gun ban would be hard (basically impossible truth be told) to enforce and wouldn't make a direct correlation to innocent people dying because of 1 thing

    People intending to commit these crimes (either they are outright criminals or in some way suffer in regards to their mental health) don't care about the law anyways, the people already abiding by the law would be the only people punished by harsher gun control laws.

    I mean it's clear there is something at fault over here in The United States, but it isn't the guns as there are some countries that have many guns floating around, and they still don't have the shooting death of innocents quite as bad as we do (some of them may have innocents dying by a different way though).

    Truth be told as much as we all hate these shooting deaths of innocent though, by the numbers it doesn't happen as often as it seems like, and the news doesn't account for the many times armed civilians have no doubt saved innocent people from deranged maniacs
    - like the guy that ATTEMPTED to shoot a bunch of people at a public school supply drive at a public park in Florida; whom could have killed dozens, but he was stopped by an armed civilian before the carnage could take place, harsh gun control would have saw the civilian that shot the maniac disarmed; while the deranged maniac would have found a way to get his gun(s) regardless and many people would have died.

    I know it's easy to say "we dont have many guns in X Country and we dont have many gun related deaths", but if you are going with the "guns are bad" debate you have to look at the individual circumstances in many instances and not just say "look at all these school shootings" while you ignore any instances where people died due to their own stupid actions leading to legal gun owners not having a choice in the matter between allowing innocent people to die or shooting one person dead to save the lives of many.

    Unless you wanna tell me these deaths count the same regardless of the motive/reasons for the shooting(s) that happened

  4. #44

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by sallyanne View Post
    I always find American discussions on guns to be both infuriating and amusing. Here in Australia, NO ONE has guns. And surprise surprise, almost no one dies from guns either. The somewhat obvious correlation between guns and gun deaths is understood by almost everyone... except americans.
    And something that, once again, is overlooked is just how many barriers there are in the United States to legally retracting ownership. There's the Constitutional Argument (and no, changing that isn't just a simple vote in Congress; the actual process requires 2/3 of all Congress Critter to vote for it, THEN 38 State Legislatures have to agree). The practical argument: how to do it and where will the money come from (there's something like 360 million individual firearms in the United States; not a small task at all). The public service argument (unlike Australia, the US has a non-trivial number of citizens that actually need firearms for defense against nature, and they aren't even mostly ranchers). And the philosophical argument: the Constitution was written with the intention that the American People could, at need, forcibly overthrow a tyrannical government - something that requires a state approaching parity of armament.
    An historical trend I'll call attention to: many of the most brutal, violent, and deadly regimes in history have started by intentionally disarming the populace.


    Quote Originally Posted by sallyanne View Post
    We have a lower crime rate than the USA. we have a lower homicide rate than USA.
    Sort of true: Australia has a lower per capita homicide rate, but per capita crime overall is roughly similar (at least according to the last World Bank study I saw).


    Quote Originally Posted by sallyanne View Post
    And no one has guns, largely because no one needs guns because no one else has guns either.
    Deceptive claim: protection against armed humans isn't the sole reason for owning or using a firearm.


    Quote Originally Posted by sallyanne View Post
    We have a completely different culture and frankly, a much safer one.
    Facts not in evidence (and arguably a false claim). I'm not going to get into a pissing match over how to define and quantify "safe", that doesn't contribute anything constructive here.

    I agree that firearms related fatalities in the US really ought to come down. Despite what the media keeps trying to claim, the vast majority aren't random violence against utterly innocent victims. Mass shootings, while more common than anyone would like, are statistically trivial compared to other categories. For various reasons, I don't think a blanket ban on ownership, generally greater restrictions on purchase, or most proposals concerning ownership are the correct approach, though. The vast majority of those efforts only impact the legal and responsible owners/users without making having any truly noticeable impact on illegal use and possession.

    If people really want, I'll lay out my thoughts on a proper response.

  5. #45

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Traemo
    An historical trend I'll call attention to: many of the most brutal, violent, and deadly regimes in history have started by intentionally disarming the populace.
    I firmly believe "disarming the populace" would not have been possible without first denying people the ability to gather together and freely speak out against government policies. There is a reason the right to assemble and to speak comes before the right to carry guns in The Constitution.

  6. #46

    Default

    I’ve lived all over the US from Montana to New York to Alaska to Texas to Pennsylvania to Colorado to Hawaii — each state has different gun laws and requirements— Hawaii’s being the most restrictive. In Hawaii every gun in the state aquired or brought in since 1984 must be registered with the local police department. If you would like to buy a gun, you need to request permission through the Police Department to do so. Unlike the show Hawaii 5-O, there is actually very little gun violence in HI, but there is still a high violent crime rate.
    Alaska probably has the least restrictive gun laws and Texas actually has more restrictive than some other states.
    What some in the countries outside of the US do not realize is how isolated some areas really are. In Alaska it is not uncommon to be over 150 miles from the nearest town (Montana some towns can be as much as 3 hours from the nearest hospital by land)— there isn’t cellular phone service in much of Montana nor Alaska for that matter. In both Alaska and Montana the biggest threat to humans are grizzly bears, which, are now growing in population.
    Another reason for shooting guns, is shooting sports such as trap, skeet, and pistol and rifle competitive shooting.
    Many people in the rural US still hunt, fish, and farm their own food. Usually hunting and fishing occur during a permitted time by calendar dates. However, in Alaska and some other states subsistence hunting and fishing are allowed based on where a person lives.

  7. #47

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Tallen View Post
    I’ve lived all over the US from Montana to New York to Alaska to Texas to Pennsylvania to Colorado to Hawaii — each state has different gun laws and requirements— Hawaii’s being the most restrictive. In Hawaii every gun in the state aquired or brought in since 1984 must be registered with the local police department. If you would like to buy a gun, you need to request permission through the Police Department to do so. Unlike the show Hawaii 5-O, there is actually very little gun violence in HI, but there is still a high violent crime rate.
    Alaska probably has the least restrictive gun laws and Texas actually has more restrictive than some other states.
    What some in the countries outside of the US do not realize is how isolated some areas really are. In Alaska it is not uncommon to be over 150 miles from the nearest town (Montana some towns can be as much as 3 hours from the nearest hospital by land)— there isn’t cellular phone service in much of Montana nor Alaska for that matter. In both Alaska and Montana the biggest threat to humans are grizzly bears, which, are now growing in population.
    Another reason for shooting guns, is shooting sports such as trap, skeet, and pistol and rifle competitive shooting.
    Many people in the rural US still hunt, fish, and farm their own food. Usually hunting and fishing occur during a permitted time by calendar dates. However, in Alaska and some other states subsistence hunting and fishing are allowed based on where a person lives.
    Yes.
    I've had people question my sanity for open-carrying when I enjoy my day hikes (sometimes a full weekend), here in Oregon. I live in a very rural area of the Cascades, and we have bears, mountain lions, (and even wolves in some areas of the State), and worse of all?... Rowdy neighbor dogs that are left to run around w/o a leash OR fence to contain them, always dashing out to chase at cars and harass anyone walking on the public road.
    Carrying multiple options for self defense (from my walking stave, pepper-spray, concert air-horn), I do have a choice of degree-of-injury.
    Most of the troublesome dogs never repeated their behavior once I offered them a doggie treat. There. I do have a heart.
    For the one that STILL wanted to harass/intimidate me? One burst of bear spray sent that cur yowling back home with its tail between it's legs. I enjoyed the conversation I had with his racist, redneck owner, later, when I returned home that evening. Threatening ME with lethal force (said flat-out he would shoot me if I ever sprayed his dog again. All recorded on my Go-pro camera. yay for him), I just smiled and nodded, then informed him I'm an 'Expert' with small arms via my military training, and more than ready to defend myself against some idiot shooting at me. His choice. Make it wisely.

    Animals are a threat, no doubt.
    People are dumber than most animals. Also no doubt.

    I'm ready to deal with either, in whatever degree necessary to ensure my own safety.

    I'm good with that, and intend on maintaining that Right.

Similar Threads

  1. The passing of a friend.
    By Powderhair in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 27-Feb-2012, 21:33
  2. Time passing
    By Newphie in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 13-Feb-2012, 05:34
  3. My take on the DL flag, etc.
    By yourhuggies in forum Diaper Talk
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 11-Mar-2010, 06:20

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.