No chance Barack -

[observer]

Following the US school shooting, one would have thought sense would prevail and at least semi and automatic weapons with high mag content would be banned. But no, assault rifles are now being bought in even higher numbers. But what was particularly depressing, was a news item on a training range for primary school aged kids, to learn how to use handguns - crazy or what?

[Mary]

What can I say the NRA are very powerful PAC group and the Republicans seem to back it. You can have Democratic President and still not be able to control things.

[asperity]

I understand that Chicago has the most stringent gun control laws in the USA but still has one of the highest murder rates.

[wolfie]

Still easier for a 20 year old to buy a gun than alcohol.

[Bazj]

Did you know that kinder eggs are banned in the USA on safety grounds!!!??

[observer]

Asp, they buy them in a more laxed State and bring them home. On the south side, school kids are joining "gangs" and carrying handguns and the answer seems to be, tool up the other kids so they can all shoot it out - what a sick and rotten society.

[Stallard12]

Just a few facts:   There are almost 300 million existing guns in the US, so getting rid of them all would be impossible.    Gun laws are only effective with people who obey the laws.  70% of the population believes in the 2nd Ammendment, the right to bear arms, the NRA has nowhere near that membership, so it is not the major factor.  

Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country and they have no effect.  The problem is drugs and gangs, if they didn't have guns they'd use a knife or a baseball bat.  Obama started as a Community Organizer in Chicago and then became a Senator there, he did absolutely nothing about the problem.  The mayor of Chicago is Rohm Emmanuel who resigned last year as Obama's Chief of Staff and he is doing nothing - he actually blamed it on global warming.   

No one would ever belittle the recent attorcities, but taking guns away from responsible citizens will do nothing to resolve those acts.  Identifying pyschopaths early would be a much wiser course to take. 

Obama is just grabbing a terrible event and using it to make political points with his liberal base, he knows that the Congress will not vote for it, but , as usual, he'll never let a good crisis go to waste..

In most cases, the States that allow concealed weapons have much lower gun crime rates than the States that don't.  

[observer]

I take the point about the gun not being the killer, but the person who pulls the trigger.  However, the 2nd ammendment was written in the days of muzzle loaded, single shot firearms - we now have military style assault weapons, capable of multi-victim offences, which surely can't be condoned in any civilized society. I also take your point about causation, so perhaps the richest nation in the world could afford to do something about it?

[Peter T]

Out of interest, how many actually use their guns to defend themselves?

 

I can understand them not wanting to get rid of them, bot NO-ONE needs guns that fire hundreds or rounds a minute, unless they are in the forces. Surely there is NO reason why a ban on selling those can't happen?

[asperity]

What Stallard said. Banning guns only takes a means of defense away from law abiding citizens, but doesn't deter the criminals.

[wolfie]

Obama is just grabbing a terrible event and using it to make political points

The NRA can raise vast amounts of money from gun manufacturers, distributors, retailers and users, and with vast amounts of money comes tremendous political power, as shown when they backed Ronald Reagan. Obama may well be responding to a terrible event and may well know that Congress may not vote for gun control but imo he has shown guts to try and take on the NRA.

[observer]

Well, "the West" is still "wild" it seems; with LA cops hyped up by a rogue cop on the loose, fired on a car carrying two women, wounding them !   The logic of "deterents" eventually leads to upgrades (hence the military style weapons) - eventually they'll be riding round in tanks!

[Lt Kije]

Completely agree with Wolfie

[Stallard12]

As with most discussions on topics related to the US, it's important not to base your opinions on the circumstances surrounding your way of life.   America may have an almost common language, but American society is vastly different, not better or worse, but different than most of Europe.  What might seem like a simple solution in your society may not work in the US.

The reason that Congress will never vote to take guns away from qualified citizens, is not because of the NRA, but because, as I said previously, almost 70% of the country believes in the right to own a gun.  No Senator will ever risk the chance of voting for total control because it would almost certainly cost him his seat.  That's how it should be, government recognizing the will of the majortiy of the people, not the other way round.

The 'slippery slope', is the reason for objecting to the assault type rifles and clip-mags.   Remember when the Government introduced VAT at 10%, then "we have to move to 15%', then to 17% ..........    Rightly or wrongly people don't trust the government and are unwilling to let them get a foot in the door, cos you know what happens.

Obs, the type of weapon doesn't matter, the world today is probably more dangerous than it ever was back in the 1700's.  I think that the 2nd Ammendment is more applicable today than ever.  If someone breaks in my front door, I don't want to be cowering in a corner with my family waiting for the first shot.  Course, if it was in Warrington, the cops would probably be there instantly.... (lol).

Yes it happens all too often.  There was an instance a couple of weeks ago involving a young mother alone with two kids.  Guy broke in and she hid in the bedroom and got him in the chest as he forced his way in.   Store owners in the urban areas have to fire weapos on a weekly basis, mostly at gun-wielding druggies trying to rob them.  See what I mean about not thinking with a European mind.

[Bill]

What a load of old tosh.

 

Sorry don't want to even enter into a debate like this.

 

Bill

[observer]

Stall, as I said, I can understand, if not condone, widespread gun ownership - EG for self defence, defence of the home or buisiness, or for hunting for food. BUT, 6 rounds in the mag should suffice for that surely?  I listened to the pro-gun arguement from an NRA rep tonight; talking about resisting "tyrrany" etc by Government; but he seems to have ignored the fact that in the US Government is elected by "the people", presumably on a mandate?  However, with several Presidents succumbing to gun shots in the past, one shouldn't be surprised by such surreal ideas.

[asperity]

I believe that the US Homeland Security Agency has stockpiled enough ammunition to shoot every US citizen 10 times over. If I was a US citizen I think I would want some protection against my government!

[Mary]

Looked at over a period of time, Americans view on gun control remains rather stagnant. In fact, opinions on gun control from 1993 to 2012 show that it’s nearly a dead heat between those who want to control gun ownership, and those who want to protect it.

 

At the start of the Bill Clinton administration in 1993, 57 percent of Americans polled by the Pew Research Center said it was very important to control gun ownership. That rose to a whopping 66 percent in favor of stricter gun control by the time he left office in 2000. It remained relatively stable even throughout the eight years of President George W. Bush.

 

Only when Obama took over did the mood start to change. It went from 60 percent in favor of gun control to just 49 percent. In 2012, it was a minority of 47 percent in favor of stricter gun laws and 46 percent in favor of the status quo.

 

Recent gun violence have had little impact in swaying the public, despite the outrage at the time of their occurrence.

 

Shortly after the “Batman shooting” in Aurora, Colo on July 20, 2012, a minority 48 percent wanted stricter gun control and 52 percent wanted to protect gun owners’ rights in a poll taken a week after the movie theater shooting that killed 12 people watching a midnight viewing of “The Dark Knight Rises”. While that interest in gun control did rise from a similar poll taken in April of that same year, it rose from around 45 percent in favor of stricter gun laws.

 

Polls can be tricky. We’re a fickle bunch. A lot depends on the questioning.

 

According to a series of CBS News polls asking if gun control laws should be made more strict, less strict or stay the same, 53 percent said it should be more strict when asked in the first week of February. That number remained within the margin of error from a similar poll taken in the first two weeks of January by CBS, with 54 percent saying they were in favor of stricter gun laws. Just after Sandy Hook, those in favor was 59 percent.

 

It’s been falling ever since.

 

If this keeps up, Americans will likely be where they were in April 2012, when only 39 percent said gun laws should be stronger; 41 percent said they should be kept as they are and 13 percent said they should be loosened further.

 

* taken from information I found on the net. The truth is we are the "wild west" and I guess we will be for a long time. Maybe it IS time for me to emigrate!

[Lt Kije]

Completely disagree with you Stallard.

 

If you are an American you are 20 times more likely to die by a gun than in any other developed Country

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/chart-the-u-s-has-far-more-gun-related-killings-than-any-other-developed-country/

[asperity]

Unless you are in a relationship with a legless South African maybe :cool:

[observer]

I tried fishing for the global stats for a list of homicides per capita table, but couldn't find a clear list. Whilst the US may have a high "gun related" crime rate; I think there may be some Countries higher up the league table for total homicides?

[Lt Kije]

Yes their are Obs, That is why the list is for developed Countries

[Stallard12]

Even though I am a Republican and pro business - please forgive me for that sin, I still have feelings Bill.  Here I was just trying to give a report on the actiual nuances around the country, rather than have you live and die by the liberal garbage on the media and I end up a target !!.  

My problem is with hype, gun ownership is an easy target for those of a liberal disposition and the President is cashing in on that.    Instead of vilifying legitimate and responsible gun owners, why doesn't he he push for something effective, like having doctors and the clergy report confessed pyschopaths?  Why, because that doesn't excite his left base, that's why.

Now, to be totally controversial, you may want to take a closer look at Mr Obama and his achievments versus his speeches and rhetoric.  He is a fervent poll follower and all of his rhetoric is dictated by them, followed by very little action.   Unemployment, deficit spending, entitlements, illegal aliens, border security, Syria, Iran, Libya, North Korea ?????   Which of those problems has he made a dent in?  That's why he is promoting gun control, a diversion.

Just in case you think that I'm out of line, I have rubbed shoulders with Obama and he didn't impress me.   After I retired, to take a break from golf, I started driving a charter tour bus part time.   When Obama came to Texas I got the job of driving him and his entourage and I was at the auditorium with him when he gave his stump speach in Beaumont - was not impressed by the man - a total media invented individual.   OK, take your best shots, I'm already ducking !!!!!

[Stallard12]

Thanks Lt, if you diagree, I know that I'm on the right track.

[observer]

   Stall, your description of Obama could apply to all politicians - so nothing new there.  In a democracy, they have to play to the crowd and the crowd keep electing them, despite knowing they will renage on their promises - catch 22.