In todays news...

[gremlin]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The fact that somebody wants to own an assault rifle is reason enough not to let them have one.

[Mussels]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The fact that somebody wants to own an assault rifle is reason enough not to let them have one.

For that to make sense you need to define 'assault rifle' and what makes them different from any other semi-automatic rifle.

[Mr. Dazzle]

I don't see why you need a semi automatic rifle at all. In fact the number of people who genuinely need a rifle full stop is pretty small.

[Skub]

I don't see why you need a semi automatic rifle at all. In fact the number of people who genuinely need a rifle full stop is pretty small.

A bit like needing a 100 mph + vehicle.when the limit is 70 mph.

[Mr. Dazzle]

I don't see why you need a semi automatic rifle at all. In fact the number of people who genuinely need a rifle full stop is pretty small.

A bit like needing a 100 mph + vehicle.when the limit is 70 mph.

I've always found that argument bollox TBH.

Anyone killed by a bike is killed by accident pretty much. The danger is a by product of the activity.

Guns have one purpose, shooting shit. They're specifically built to be dangerous.

[Mussels]

I don't see why you need a semi automatic rifle at all. In fact the number of people who genuinely need a rifle full stop is pretty small.

A bit like needing a 100 mph + vehicle.when the limit is 70 mph.

I've always found that argument bollox TBH.

Anyone killed by a bike is killed by accident pretty much. The danger is a by product of the activity.

Guns have one purpose, shooting shit. They're specifically built to be dangerous.

A gun is a tool and is only as dangerous as the person holding it. That's the gun lobby argument, what they can't do is prevent dangerous people holding them.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Guns don't kill people, rappers do!

I totally agree that no gun ever got up and killed someone by itself. But its proven impossible to ban the right people (even when you try and use guns to do it!), so you are left with but one choice.

[slowsider]

I don't see why you need a semi automatic rifle at all. In fact the number of people who genuinely need a rifle full stop is pretty small.

A bit like needing a 100 mph + vehicle.when the limit is 70 mph.

I've always found that argument bollox TBH.

Anyone killed by a bike is killed by accident pretty much. The danger is a by product of the activity.

Guns have one purpose, shooting shit. They're specifically built to be dangerous.

Sounds like you think bikes are specifically built to ride slow?
Handle guns correctly and they are no more dangerous than kitchen knives, imho. And the UK needs to get a handle on those. (sic)

The principle difference is the numbers killed in an incident. Bikes rarely reach 2.

[Yambo]

A gun is a tool and is only as dangerous as the person holding it. That's the gun lobby argument, what they can't do is prevent dangerous people holding them.

What I can't understand why so many young Americans (or young people in America) want to go out and kill kids in school.

Now, OK, it's a target rich environment if you want to answer the question that way but it seems to me that there's a sickness in the USA and clearly quite a lot of mental sickness. I do wonder if taking the guns away would prevent these school killings or whether the sick psychopaths would go out of their way to find other ways of killing lots of kids in one go.

It's an American problem though and as they are a nation born and raised on violence they really need to grow up and start getting to grips with the serious mental illnesses that pervade their society.

[gremlin]

American weirdos and school killings have been happening for years, using many different methods...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

[Skub]

No one can legislate to protect against the actions of nutters.

[slowsider]

No one can legislate to protect against the actions of nutters.

Not entirely, but one can endeavour to limit their access to firearms and explosives.

[Cousin Jack]

No one can legislate to protect against the actions of nutters.

Not entirely, but one can endeavour to limit their access to firearms and explosives.

Not even sure the US can do that any more. There are an estimated 400 million guns in circulation, and only a small % are registered in any way. A draconian law (like the UK ban on pistols) will likely leave 300 million illegal guns in circulation.

[irie]

No one can legislate to protect against the actions of nutters.

Not entirely, but one can endeavour to limit their access to firearms and explosives.

Not even sure the US can do that any more. There are an estimated 400 million guns in circulation, and only a small % are registered in any way. A draconian law (like the UK ban on pistols) will likely leave 300 million illegal guns in circulation.

Well that would be up to 100m less guns in circulation than there currently are. A start has to be made somewhere ...

[slowsider]

No one can legislate to protect against the actions of nutters.

Not entirely, but one can endeavour to limit their access to firearms and explosives.

Not even sure the US can do that any more. There are an estimated 400 million guns in circulation, and only a small % are registered in any way. A draconian law (like the UK ban on pistols) will likely leave 300 million illegal guns in circulation.

Sure you can. Amnesties draw in a lot, the hardcore survivalist will decline, but this shooter was not in that bracket.
The NRA response is that school staff need to be better armed

[Cousin Jack]

Sure you can. Amnesties draw in a lot, the hardcore survivalist will decline, but this shooter was not in that bracket.
The NRA response is that school staff need to be better armed

I think you underestimate the US public and their buy-in to the 'right to bear arms' bit. Yes, of course the hardcore will keep their guns, but I think that an awful lot of everyday Joe Public will keep one or two squirreled away too, just for 'protection'. Yes, amnesties will erode that pool, but only very slowly. It will all help (and the USA needs all the help it can get), but don't expect any significant change for 50-100 years

[McNab]

You've got to start somewhere though or you'll never fix the problem.

[gremlin]

The NRA have done a good job of conflating fervent patriotism with that of being able to own evermore lethal firearms. The need to raise a militia army with armed civilians is a little outdated, I'd venture.

To be fair, if they want to hark back to that period in history let them be limited to owning muzzle-loaded flintlocks and be done with it.

[Cousin Jack]

The NRA have done a good job of conflating fervent patriotism with that of being able to own evermore lethal firearms. The need to raise a militia army with armed civilians is a little outdated, I'd venture.

To be fair, if they want to hark back to that period in history let them be limited to owning muzzle-loaded flintlocks and be done with it.

As you say, the NRA have done a good job and most Americans will not easily give up their guns. So I guess the advice for anyone visiting the USA is to stay away from schools, they are not safe.

[gremlin]

And the NRA wouldn't exist without the gun advocating Americans, either directly or via the makers of their purdy, lil guns.

I'm surprised an organisation of an estimated 3m can have such an influence over such a big country, but I suppose target the right individuals and Bob's your uncle (and probably father as well in some parts of the south).