PDA

View Full Version : Shooting at LAX thread closed


Pages : [1] 2

Desert185
2nd Nov 2013, 16:21
OK...here's some firearm facts in America.

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware | Pew Social & Demographic Trends (http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/)

Blacks, even though a small percentage of the population, are in the victim majority with black on black crime. Take away big cities (with comparatively onerous gun laws and restrictions like Detroit, Chicago, etc.), and the crime rate in America is even less. Virtually everyone where I live owns a gun...and there is no gun violence, but then I no longer live in the "gun-free-zone" big city where there is an abundance of dirtbags who defy laws by possessing guns.

The problem with drunk driving is not the Buick, and the problem with obesity is not the spoon.

I don't normally post in this forum, but this needs to be said.

probes
2nd Nov 2013, 16:31
I don't normally post in this forum
what's wrong with it? :confused:

BenThere
2nd Nov 2013, 16:33
This forum is an upgrade for you. Didn't you know that? Welcome to the elite.

El Grifo
2nd Nov 2013, 16:44
We are a very jovial crowd :p

El G.

superq7
2nd Nov 2013, 17:13
I wonder if Airship is going to read this thread. :E

Airborne Aircrew
2nd Nov 2013, 17:18
Desert185:


Blacks, even though a small percentage of the population, are in the victim majority with black on black crime.

I hate to be the one to break this to you but blacks are the victims one hundred percent of the time in black on black crime... :}

Just so you know... ;)

con-pilot
2nd Nov 2013, 17:27
I hate to be the one to break this to you but blacks are the victims one hundred percent of the time in black on black crime...

Now you know why he seldom posts here, we can be a bit pedantic from time to time. :p

All in good fun 185. :ok:

con-pilot
2nd Nov 2013, 17:30
It's amazing how quickly the crime rate falls when you don't count all the places where it's happening, or the people it's happening to.

Actually just in certain areas in big cities, remove gang on gang shootings and suicide by gun, the figures are shockingly lower.

Just sayin'.

er340790
2nd Nov 2013, 17:43
Con-pilot hits the nail on the head.

The nearest city to me here is (apparently) the second worst in Canada for serious crime.

I maintain however that it is, quite possibly, the safest place I have ever lived or seen. And I have worked in over 40 countries worldwide.

Why the paradox? Well, I avoid a couple of notorious streets, especially between the hours of midnight and 4 am which are populated with drunks, junkies and other low-lives taking it out on each other... the rate of serious crime outside this area and population base is practically zero.

This is borne out at the local hospital. Over 50% of emergency admissions are for the same group of 80 people. TRUE!

At some point, it will no longer be un-PC to state such truths.... :ugh:

VH-UFO
2nd Nov 2013, 19:39
Being from OZ, im trying to understand this gun thing in the U.S.

I just cant understand why someone requires one. We've never had a major gun issue here in OZ, the only massacre i can think of is the one at Port Arthur.

If citizens in other countries dont have the need to defend themselves with guns, their countries dont have an issue with guns, why does the U.S need them?

Is it a case that Americans are more violent than other Western countries and just simply need them?

From an outsiders perspective, it seems Americans have a fascination for guns stemming back to the "Wild West" days that simply overrides any rational thought.

I know its in your Constitution the right to bear arms, but to be brutually honest it seems like this is the excuse used everytime a massacre occurs in your country.

So therefore, it seems that Americans are quite happy to sacrifice 5 year olds being shot in schools rather than amend a constitution that was written in an era and with a train of thought completely different to that of now.

Back then, women bowed ton mens needs, blacks were slaves. We've grown up since then, but obviously not on the gun side of things.

Help me to understand why, because i dont.

Gertrude the Wombat
2nd Nov 2013, 20:08
So therefore, it seems that Americans are quite happy to sacrifice 5 year olds being shot in schools rather than amend a constitution that was written in an era and with a train of thought completely different to that of now.
They call it "freedom", and they are happy for as many other people as necessary to die for their "freedom".

Airborne Aircrew
2nd Nov 2013, 20:12
VH-UFO:

The easy answer is because they can... as can I living in their country.

The more accurate answer is really rather simple. Be it attack by a dangerous animal or another human the USA recognizes an individual's right to protect themselves rather than wait the 58 minutes it takes the police to arrive in Detroit. One wonders what kind of cruel and uncaring nations deprive their citizens of such a basic right...

TWT
2nd Nov 2013, 20:14
There's been a few more gun massacres in Australia than just Port Arthur.

Google these 2 for starters : Wade Frankum,Julian Knight

Loose rivets
2nd Nov 2013, 20:26
I watched a PhD talking on the telly-box. He made the comment that 'Americans are genetically optimistic.' Mmmm, thinks I. I'll remember that, and I did.

Could it be that Americans like their guns because they feel they could never, ever, no-matter-how-hard-someone-tried-to-kill-them, get shot?

The man was on the telly, so it must be true.:rolleyes:

finfly1
2nd Nov 2013, 20:34
Gertrude, jealousy is a particularly ugly emotion.

Airborne Aircrew
2nd Nov 2013, 20:40
Gertrude:

Have you ever even met an American????

ExXB
2nd Nov 2013, 20:54
Well I'm glad things have improved but,

"According to Slate’s gun-death tracker, an estimated 10,022 people have died as a result of gun violence in America since the Newtown massacre on December 14, 2012."

From "http://nocera.blogs.nytimes.com/category/gun-report/ "

That doesn't include suicides (another 20,000) using guns, unless the suicide included other fatalities.

Checkboard
2nd Nov 2013, 21:05
I love these threads.

Anti gun stats, followed by someone posting about his Colt 206 with the over sized mags, dual over-under laser sights and whatnot rubbish that not a single person cares about :ok:

Airborne Aircrew
2nd Nov 2013, 21:07
Checkboard:

You live in Earl's Court don't you... :E

Gertrude the Wombat
2nd Nov 2013, 21:19
Have you ever even met an American????
Yes, but probably a biased sample. The ones I meet in the UK are, clearly, ones who don't like living in the USA, otherwise why did they move. They're nothing like the extreme right wing gun nutters one meets here.

Most of the time I've spent in the USA has been in Hawaii and Alaska (where in the latter case I do appreciate that rifles are useful to people who wander around in the same forests as bears, but we still weren't too impressed with the ones who "joked" that they'd nearly shot us in mistake for bears).

lomapaseo
2nd Nov 2013, 21:19
Oh no

not another gun thread :ugh:

Airborne Aircrew
2nd Nov 2013, 21:28
Gertrude:

I'm impressed by your extensive experience of America and Americans. You really have no place discussing anything American because you come across like your average five year old. The conversation goes like this:-

Dad: Sweetie, eat your cabbage.

Kid: I don't like it.

Dad: Have you ever had cabbage before?

Kid: No...

Dad: Then how do you know you don't like it.

Kid: I just don't.

That, Gertrude, is you. Utterly inexperienced and somewhat naive and you dislike things you know nothing about... Well done... How xenophobic of you... :ugh:

Mostly Harmless
2nd Nov 2013, 21:41
VH-UFO - I've asked a few of these questions to people over the years... the extreme simplified answer is almost always the same. I'm going to take some flames for this but, it is basically true.

why does the U.S need them?
Fear. They are afraid... of attack by animals, strangers.. people in general... and the unknown. Usually stated in the form "I have to be able to defend myself."

Is it a case that Americans are more violent than other Western countries and just simply need them?
No, not any more violent than anyone else. Just easier access to guns when tempers flair. It is also a bit of a numbers game... there are only 23,000,000 in Austrailia, there are 317,000,000 in the US. You can have the same crime numbers per 100,000 people but it looks worse because there are more people.

Take this incident (sorry, I cannot find the man's original letter on line devoid of editorial comment). #NoseHillGentlemen: Kalamazoo police officer bashed by Canadians on Twitter | MLive.com (http://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/index.ssf/2012/08/canadians_tweeters_tweak_kalam.html) This gentleman felt afraid. Given it was Stampede week, and the 100th anniversary at that, the 2 men in question were very likely drunk at the time of the meeting... What Mr. Wawra failed to recognize is that the situation was easily resolved without violence or a weapon. He asked them to go away, and that's what they did. Mr. Wawra was afraid and wanted his gun to make him feel safe. I wish he felt he had other options to protect himself.

Whatever the cause is, be it media hype or legitimate personal experience... the people who want guns usually cite fear as the reason why.

Seldomfitforpurpose
2nd Nov 2013, 22:02
the people who want guns usually cite fear as the reason why.

Actually it's love of and fear of as to why folk want them :ok:

Airborne Aircrew
2nd Nov 2013, 22:05
Mostly:

You, like many others, mistake fear for being prepared...

You have house insurance, car insurance, life insurance and all the other insurances available I'm sure but did you ever spend a millisecond thinking about what they all do for you... No, you really didn't. They restore. (hopefully), what you have lost after the fact. A gun is another form of insurance but it's different to all the rest. It's the only one that might prevent you from losing something that truly is irreplaceable.

I don't expect you to understand that, you've already been taught that you are worthless and expendable.

Seldomfitforpurpose
2nd Nov 2013, 22:08
.

I don't expect you to understand that, you've already been taught that you are worthless and expendable.

A polite enquiry but at what age did you come to realise the above :ok:

Airborne Aircrew
2nd Nov 2013, 22:17
SFFP:

When Sgt. Dennis Wreford walked into the gym at RAF Catterick to address the eight men on my Pre-Para Course, looked at his watch and said:-

You leave the aircraft now, [tick, tick, tick], your main has failed you pull your reserve [tick, tick] it's failed too [tick tick] you're dead. Does anyone want to leave now?

It was right then...

Now I'm not so "crippled" by "orders"... I give my own now... :ok:

Seldomfitforpurpose
2nd Nov 2013, 22:23
Now I'm not so "crippled" by "orders"... I give my own now... :ok:

Maybe so but keeping it in context at what age did you work out you are not worthless and expendable and so took up gun ownership :ok:

Airborne Aircrew
2nd Nov 2013, 22:27
SFFP:

Same old bullsh1t eh?

Same answer. When I took on additional responsibility.

http://www.apm-home.net/gallery/index.php?cmd=image&sfpg=SG9tZS8qSSBoYXZlIHNvbWUgYmlnIHNob2VzIHRvIGZpbGwgNi0xNy0 yMDEwLmpwZyozMzBhYjM0YjZkY2JmODdmYTcyZDk1ZjlmOTlmZmE4Zg

Before this it was pretty much me, another adult and a pair of German Shepherds...

Seldomfitforpurpose
2nd Nov 2013, 22:30
SFFP:

Same old bullsh1t eh?

Same answer. When I took on additional responsibility.

Before this it was pretty much me, another adult and a pair of German Shepherds...

So until you had a child you didn't need a gun?

Nervous SLF
2nd Nov 2013, 23:06
"Guns are a lot like parachutes ~ If you need one and don't have one, you'll probably never need one again"

The best presentation on gun control yet. Even if you don't like guns, watch this ! Should be required viewing
by both sides of the issue of gun control/legislation
GUNS (Virtual State of the Union 2013) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/embed/_T-F_zfoDqI?rel=0)

.

glad rag
2nd Nov 2013, 23:15
They call it "freedom", and they are happy for as many other people as necessary to die for their "freedom".

Oh yes.

Following from wiki btw...

190th Fighter Squadron, Blues and Royals friendly fire incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incid ent)

"
British media allege six errors on the part of the aircrew:[16] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incid ent#cite_note-thesun.co.uk-16)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/190thKohntopp.jpg/275px-190thKohntopp.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:190thKohntopp.jpg) http://bits.wikimedia.org/static-1.23wmf1/skins/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:190thKohntopp.jpg)
Gus Kohntopp (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gus_Kohntopp), identified as POPOV36.[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incid ent#cite_note-18)




The pilots asked the Forward Air Controller ("Manila Hotel") if friendly forces were around the Iraqi vehicles — not to the west.
Neither pilot gave the precise grid references for the Household Cavalry patrol to double check its identity.
The pilots convinced themselves that the orange identification panels were in fact orange rocket launchers.
POPOV36 decided to attack, saying he is “rolling in” without permission from the Forward Air Controller (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_Air_Controller).
POPOV35 asked for artillery to fire a marker round into the target area to clear up confusion, but POPOV36 attacked without waiting for it.
POPOV36 strafed the column for a second time, but still doubted its identity.

The audio track includes debate around the identity of the targets and the order, from the FAC, to disengage identifying a likely "blue-on-blue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue-on-blue)" incident. The audio track also includes notification of one death and several injuries with the order to return to base.[19] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incid ent#cite_note-19) Subsequent audio indicates frustration and crying with the comment: "We're in jail, dude".[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incid ent#cite_note-20) Upon viewing the video, Matty Hull's widow, Susan, stated that the pilots were, "more concerned for themselves than their victims".[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incid ent#cite_note-21)"

glad rag
2nd Nov 2013, 23:21
SFFP:

Same old bullsh1t eh?

Same answer. When I took on additional responsibility.

http://www.apm-home.net/gallery/index.php?cmd=image&sfpg=SG9tZS8qSSBoYXZlIHNvbWUgYmlnIHNob2VzIHRvIGZpbGwgNi0xNy0 yMDEwLmpwZyozMzBhYjM0YjZkY2JmODdmYTcyZDk1ZjlmOTlmZmE4Zg

Before this it was pretty much me, another adult and a pair of German Shepherds...

Good Man.

If you feel the need then it your constitutional right to do just that.

And I support you in your belief to do so.

Gertrude the Wombat
2nd Nov 2013, 23:24
A gun is another form of insurance but it's different to all the rest. It's the only one that might prevent you from losing something that truly is irreplaceable.
And, of course, unless you've managed to find some magic sort of gun that only kills bad guys, or you live in some magic fairyland where guns never, accidentally or deliberately, kill people you care about, it's the only one that can cause you to lose something that truly is irreplaceable.

Mostly Harmless
2nd Nov 2013, 23:26
Airborne Aircrew Mostly:

You, like many others, mistake fear for being prepared...

You have house insurance, car insurance, life insurance and all the other insurances available I'm sure but did you ever spend a millisecond thinking about what they all do for you... No, you really didn't. They restore. (hopefully), what you have lost after the fact. A gun is another form of insurance but it's different to all the rest. It's the only one that might prevent you from losing something that truly is irreplaceable.

I don't expect you to understand that, you've already been taught that you are worthless and expendable.

Interesting argument. You say prepared, I see fear. You say insurance, I see fear of the unknown. Fear is not always a bad thing. In fact, it evolved for a good reason. It is a legitimate survival strategy... up to a point.

I do understand your argument, I just don't agree with it. I am curious about your worthless statement/assumption. It's a very odd thing to say. If you were to assume I can not defend myself, you would find yourself mistaken, I merely choose not to resort to guns as my first, last and only option.


I thought about it for a while, and given the cast of characters called Expendables... I'm going to take that as a compliment. Thanks. :)

The Expendables

Sylvester Stallone as Barney Ross
Jason Statham as Lee Christmas
Jet Li as Yin Yang
Dolph Lundgren as Gunner Jensen
Randy Couture as Toll Road
Terry Crews as Hale Caesar
Mickey Rourke as Tool

And introducing... Mostly Harmless.

Seldomfitforpurpose
2nd Nov 2013, 23:41
Interesting argument. You say prepared, I see fear. You say insurance, I see fear of the unknown. Fear is not always a bad thing. In fact, it evolved for a good reason. It is a legitimate survival strategy... up to a point.

I do understand your argument, I just don't agree with it. I am curious about your worthless statement/assumption. It's a very odd thing to say. If you were to assume I can not defend myself, you would find yourself mistaken, I merely choose not to resort to guns as my first, last and only option.

If you want to tickle the pot ask why AA he waited until 50 and in one of the most dangerous areas of the US before actually buying a gun, or why when here in the UK, in the RAF Regt, and perfectly entitled to apply for and own a gun he chose not to.

Reformed in any format is always a giggle :ok:

He chastises you for your choices but fails to justify his own

Cacophonix
2nd Nov 2013, 23:54
Let them kill themselves as they will. My experience of killing Americans is one shot from a Makarov and a barbecue later with a beer as you remove any trace of him or her...

Caco

galaxy flyer
3rd Nov 2013, 00:31
Brussel spouts, anyone for Brussel sprouts?

GF

Airborne Aircrew
3rd Nov 2013, 00:48
Seldom:

I have been constant in justifying my choices. Youth, better physical ability, less overall responsibility, a less randomly violent society have always been the thrust of my previous choices. You're silly little sniping at the fact that I waited is akin to your childish attempts to suggest that I "lacked the courage" to stay in the military. Both are far more a reflection of yourself than they are of me...

I was taught to learn, adapt and overcome... I do... You sit there in your utopia thinking that your safe... You're not, you're as misinformed as all the others in their graves who thought they were...

obgraham
3rd Nov 2013, 00:51
I'll restate what I said in the other thread, before it was so cruelly docked by the mods:

One of you stated he didn't think "anyone should be allowed" to own a gun.

Therein lies the heart of the cultural divide. US gun rights advocates do not feel it is the place of the government to tell its own law abiding citizens everything they can and cannot do, such as own a gun. We do, however, have specific laws indicating that if you do certain things with that gun, such as kill someone else, that you will be held accountable, and there is a penalty. All that needs to happen for a continued peaceful society is that those laws be respected and enforced -- unfortunately that doesn't always happen.

Your side has a centuries-old tradition of being told by your superiors what you can and cannot do. And you accept that, deferring decision to someone to decide for you.

Trying to make one side of this divide change to the others' view is fruitless and will not happen.

BenThere
3rd Nov 2013, 00:53
Think of it in terms of a man's dominion. Mine is at the threshold of my house and the sanctity of myself and loved ones.

The guns we hold serve to protect us and our loved ones in our dominions and as we move freely around our country.

As I'm moving to Australia before too long, I realize I'm going to have to give up that line of defense. I'm researching poison darts and crossbows, though. I'm not going to just sit there and let some thug have his way with me and my family.

Seldomfitforpurpose
3rd Nov 2013, 01:05
I was taught to learn, adapt and overcome... I do... You sit there in your utopia thinking that your safe... You're not, you're as misinformed as all the others in their graves who thought they were...

AA,

The bit that makes me giggle most is that up until you were 50 you never needed a firearm in any shape or form because of Alsatians, CCTV, physical prowess etc etc.

But apparently anyone else making that judgement is under prepared and a victim in waiting, most bizarre thought process :confused:

tecman
3rd Nov 2013, 01:19
BenThere..stay home, we don't want you.

BenThere
3rd Nov 2013, 01:23
You may not, but Australia does.

El Grifo
3rd Nov 2013, 01:40
I'm researching poison darts and crossbows, though. I'm not going to just sit there and let some thug have his way with me and my family.

Aw chill out there BT !!

BenThere
3rd Nov 2013, 01:48
I'm on constant chill, but I never forget the backup.

Dushan
3rd Nov 2013, 01:09
I love these threads.

Anti gun stats, followed by someone posting about his Colt 206 with the over sized mags, dual over-under laser sights and whatnot rubbish that not a single person cares about :ok:

I care about the Colt 206.

Dushan
3rd Nov 2013, 01:12
Yes, but probably a biased sample. The ones I meet in the UK are, clearly, ones who don't like living in the USA, otherwise why did they move. They're nothing like the extreme right wing gun nutters one meets here.

Most of the time I've spent in the USA has been in Hawaii and Alaska (where in the latter case I do appreciate that rifles are useful to people who wander around in the same forests as bears, but we still weren't too impressed with the ones who "joked" that they'd nearly shot us in mistake for bears).

Somehow I don't think they were joking. I think that they were genuinely concerned for your safety trying to give you sound advice on how to behave in an environment you were obviously ignorant about.

Desert185
3rd Nov 2013, 01:18
Desert185:

Quote:
Blacks, even though a small percentage of the population, are in the victim majority with black on black crime.
I hate to be the one to break this to you but blacks are the victims one hundred percent of the time in black on black crime...

Just so you know...


Jeez, thanks. Probably should have spelled it out more. Thought folks would understand that blacks are the majority victim in America due to black on black crime, even though they are only about 13% of the population. I hope this is clear now.

BenThere
3rd Nov 2013, 02:05
Another sad truth is that from a population of around 4 million, young black males in the USA, aged 15-24, commit about half the violent crime in the USA.

But incarcerating them at a rate proportionate to their criminality is challenged as racist.

500N
3rd Nov 2013, 02:11
That is why they should all be put in a run down area,
close it off to the outside and come back in a month
and incarcerate who is left.

BenThere
3rd Nov 2013, 02:21
I like the idea of a national prison island. Send prisoners there, let them set up their own government/control, and pick them up when their time is done.

West Coast
3rd Nov 2013, 02:27
Think Detroit has enough hotel rooms for that? Guess they could double up, wouldn't be for long.

lomapaseo
3rd Nov 2013, 03:21
I like the idea of a national prison island. Send prisoners there, let them set up their own government/control, and pick them up when their time is done.

That was tried in oystalia but when their time was up the prisoners would't get back in the ship to go back home to something worse then what they now had .:hmm:

Ascend Charlie
3rd Nov 2013, 04:00
Ben, you are welcome to come to our land.

You will not need your guns to feel safe. I don't even lock the house when I go out, and I know that walking a couple of km to the shops and back will not add anything to the crime statistics or result in anybody being hospitalised.

We are a safe society, albeit with some pockets of yobbos. Just stay clear of those areas and enjoy the Wide Brown Land like the rest of us. We don't need no stinkin guns. Look forward to having you join us.:ok:

500N
3rd Nov 2013, 06:23
BenThere

You are welcome in my hunting camp anytime :ok:


And don't worry about TecMan, he is from Perth, Western Australia and they
have weird gun laws, they are scared of a stick painted black :O
Best to stay away from WA !

Krystal n chips
3rd Nov 2013, 07:03
" BenThere

You are welcome in my hunting camp anytime "

Well, that would be a, ahem, "great meeting of minds" then....worth recording for You-tube in fact....if you can rope in AA and rgb as well......the quartet would be perfect !......discerning viewers will understand those long silences of course, as the conversation moves back and forth, from, erm, guns, to guns, and......even more guns.

Thereafter it may prove problematic as to the conversational range that can be engaged in.

500N
3rd Nov 2013, 07:08
Well Krystal, te conversation would be a lot more interesting
than listening to your monotonous lefty clap trap.

And actually, I think AA, RGB, BenThere and myself would
be able to have quite good conversations on a wide range
of intellectual topics including the pros and cons of various
countries considering the 4 of us have probably covered
more than the average.

In any case, RGB is required to wash the dishes since he is such a useless cook :O

Krystal n chips
3rd Nov 2013, 07:21
" And actually, I think AA, RGB, BenThere and myself would
be able to have quite good conversations on a wide range
of intellectual topics including the pros and cons of various
countries considering the 4 of us have probably covered
more than the average

Based on the contents of the various posts I have read, the evidence to support that wishful thinking is hardly compelling.

500N
3rd Nov 2013, 07:42
Krystal

Well, we don't show all our cards at once ;)

And since many topics I am interested in are not covered here,
it's a bit hard to have a conversation about them.

Seldomfitforpurpose
3rd Nov 2013, 09:13
KnC,

From what I have read over the past few years in here i am pretty certain you are not really fit to lace the boots of the 4 you chose to deride :=

Gertrude the Wombat
3rd Nov 2013, 09:49
Best to stay away from WA !
Main reason being that WA is a bit isolated - Perth is four hours by 747 to the nearest civilisation. (Whether you regard that as Sydney or Singapore is up to you, the distance is about the same.)

TWT
3rd Nov 2013, 10:15
BenThere has probably figured that out :rolleyes:

Dushan
3rd Nov 2013, 13:07
Back to the LAX shooting...

I am not usually the one to don a tin-hat but this one smells a bit.

Are DHS/TSA going to set up checkpoints around the airports and start searching cars as they approach?

False flag, anyone?


Police Presence Boosted After L.A. Airport Shooting - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-03/airport-police-presence-boosted-after-tsa-officer-killed.html)

SOPS
3rd Nov 2013, 13:22
How far do you take it? Just stop everyone even getting near the airport? What about a guy with a stinger sitting 5 miles from the airport ? Where do you stop?

Dushan
3rd Nov 2013, 14:15
I agree, but you are using logic on people who's primary job requirement is not to use logic. Otherwise why would they wand scan my bare arms, in a short sleeve shirt, when I go through the metal detector and beep because of my watch.

500N
3rd Nov 2013, 14:20
SOPS

And how do you know who is legit and who isn't ?
They wouldn't know Arthur from Martha.

At present it is done quietly, no fan fare, doing it outside of the airport
is just fraught with problems.

SOPS
3rd Nov 2013, 15:35
It's fraught with chaos!!!

dead_pan
3rd Nov 2013, 15:48
You may not, but Australia does.

Well, they have been known not to be too discerning. I mean, it wasn't that long ago when you needed a criminal record to get in.

I like the idea of a national prison island.

LOL - looks like you'll fit right in in Oz!

dead_pan
3rd Nov 2013, 15:55
Based on the contents of the various posts I have read, the evidence to support that wishful thinking is hardly compelling.

You're a very norty boy, Mr Krystal.

Actually, when Ben heads off to Oz they'll be able to start the aggrieved ex-pats club, when they'll be able to have long conversations about how crap their home countries are in comparison to their adopted homelands. Also, on the basis of recent discussions over on the US GOPherwheel, I'm intrigued how Ben's going to cope with the newly dreamt-up rule that no-one living outside the US is in a fit mental state to comment on goings-on in the country. That's gonna be a tough one to live with.

Solid Rust Twotter
3rd Nov 2013, 17:32
Dushan

I agree, but you are using logic on people who's primary job requirement is not to use logic. Otherwise why would they wand scan my bare arms, in a short sleeve shirt, when I go through the metal detector and beep because of my watch.

You have no idea. The moo faced automatons at my local airport have had me pass across my Ka-Bar for X-raying before handing it back to me once I've passed through their little metal detector. Why would anyone X-ray a BFO knife then hand it back to you before you wander out on the apron?


Words fail me...:confused:

Gertrude the Wombat
3rd Nov 2013, 17:35
Actually, when Ben heads off to Oz they'll be able to start the aggrieved ex-pats club, when they'll be able to have long conversations about how crap their home countries are in comparison to their adopted homelands.
Wot I don't get is, most of these whining ex-pats have left their home countries whining about how the place is impossible to live in any more on account of being overrun with immigrants ...


... and then expect to be welcomed as immigrants themselves somewhere else. Umm ... ???

wings folded
3rd Nov 2013, 17:57
One of the better aspects of the years 2000 is that people can move around, settle, earn a living, integrate, become part of the community, if, of course, that is the course they choose.

They are unfortunately some for whom that is not the intent.

dead_pan
3rd Nov 2013, 19:14
They are unfortunately some for whom that is not the intent.

There are as many, if not more, of our born and bred brethren who seem content not to earn a living, integrate or become part of the community. Whats to be done about them?

Lord Spandex Masher
3rd Nov 2013, 19:18
Shoot the buggers?

Cacophonix
3rd Nov 2013, 19:24
Wot I don't get is, most of these whining ex-pats have left their home countries whining about how the place is impossible to live in any more on account of being overrun with immigrants ...
... and then expect to
be welcomed as immigrants themselves somewhere else. Umm ... ???


Yep it is somewhat ironic isn't it...;)

Caco

500N
3rd Nov 2013, 19:30
Gertrude, Caco

You are incorrect in what you say and think.

All those "ex pats" as you put it also happen to include a huge range
of non WASP's.

And in general, we are not against immigration, we are against ILLEGAL
Asylum Seekers (The Gov't has now sanctioned the use of the word Illegal :ok:)

When I first came here, I was amazed at the vast group of cultures that
lived in a very multicultural way. And they still do and I think most people
would think this is a great positive.

dead_pan
3rd Nov 2013, 19:33
Shoot the buggers?

I'm sure that course of action would get much support hereabouts. :ok:

Cacophonix
3rd Nov 2013, 19:36
And in general, we are not against immigration


As an immigrant I am sure you are not! :p

Caco

galaxy flyer
4th Nov 2013, 00:11
Considering the original topic, Arkansas has joined Vermont in allowing "constitutional carry". Two states in, 48 to go.

GF

Airborne Aircrew
4th Nov 2013, 00:32
GF:

Considering the original topic, Arkansas has joined Vermont in allowing "constitutional carry". Two states in, 48 to go.

Interesting when you think how Democratic leaning Vermont is...

One wonders if it will shock those from abroad that profess such intimate knowledge of the US psyche to find that one of their little havens of liberalism so supports the second amendment. Or will they simply shut up and realize that their preconceptions of Americans are so unfounded and wrong and go away...

Oh, no... Of course not. They are far too bloody arrogant for that... :rolleyes:

Ogre
4th Nov 2013, 01:17
If I may, I would like to share an observation about human beings and their desire to uphold their "rights".

As an example, I shall use the case of the 'Right to roam" that crops up in the UK every so often. The "Right to roam" could be described as the right to follow ancient paths and by-ways across the country which have been used for hundreds of years. At some point in the past however, the land has been sold, or used for another purpose, which means that the "roaming" bit can be difficult to do (like a house has been built across the path) or place you in a situation which could be dangerous (such as a path which crosses a runway).

The most vocal proponents of this right will provide documented information that show their "right" has been practiced for many years, and that it should continue in the same fashion because "we've always done it this way" and many other excuses. The fact that the path in question may go right through a farmers field full of crops is irrelevant, they know in their hearts that it is their right and they would never intentionally cause any harm or damage unless it was strictly necessary.

Once their "right" has been justified, there will be those like-minded individuals who, like them, will conduct their right without causing damage or harm. However there will be countless others who see the "right" as an excuse to do what they want without due regard to those who are being affected by their "right". The farmers field suddenly has a swathe of trampled crops down the middle, or the fence around the house has been smashed down because the "path" is a few feet inside, rather than walk around the crop or down the other side of the fence which would cause no harm.

It is human nature to many to demand the full extent of what is theirs, regardless of the cost to others or the fact that not everyone is as conscientious as them.

No doubt this observation will be seen as an attack on everyone who ever climbed on their high horse about something or other, and I don't think I will be welcome in any of the fifty odd states for a while.

Perhaps it will make you think about how silly your arguments look to others, or how others may take your good intentions and twist them to their owns ends..

Coat, Hat etc.

AnQrKa
4th Nov 2013, 03:45
blah blah blah

its real simple.

Lots of hand guns results in lots of gun deaths.

You can argue all you like, Americans dont want to listen.

500N
4th Nov 2013, 03:51
Really ?

We have millions of hand guns in Aus and outside of crims not too many deaths.

And Europe wants to be rules by lefty bureaucrats from a central location
that brings in (read impose) stupid rules and regulations.

And why would the US want to listen to a bunch of people in Europe
that every so often want to go about killing themselves ?

West Coast
4th Nov 2013, 03:55
Son, you've only scratched the surface of the subject with your post. That's where your understanding ends. It's nots that we don't want to discuss it, we just want to discuss it with those who have more of an education than what the media allows.

No, I don't want to teach you before ask. Tried that in the past.

Desert185
4th Nov 2013, 04:48
Since you mentioned rights. We here in America have a constitution. The Second Amendment to that constitution specifically grants this right:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

"Shall not be infringed." Period. End.

Solid Rust Twotter
4th Nov 2013, 05:07
As I understand it, the rights are automatic, natural and self evident.

The "shall not be infringed" bit is a hands off warning to the federal govt or anyone wishing to curtail those rights.

BenThere
4th Nov 2013, 05:25
The right to bear arms is held sacred by so many of us, who are the ones with the firearms, that any attempt at real confiscation would result in an unleashing of violence even the Left doesn't want to contemplate.

Dushan
4th Nov 2013, 11:51
Basil, yada, yada. There is a comma in there, somewhere, that makes all the difference. Been flogged to death. The Supremes agree.
Period. End.

rgbrock1
4th Nov 2013, 11:57
airborne wrote:

I hate to be the one to break this to you but blacks are the victims one hundred percent of the time in black on black crime...

Airborne? You are indeed an Einstein. :}

Airborne Aircrew
4th Nov 2013, 12:12
RGB:

Airborne? You are indeed an Einstein.

Funny, others have called me a picky bastige... :}

Lonewolf_50
4th Nov 2013, 13:45
The person who shot up LAX seems to have been a conspiracy theorist worried that the New World Order was coming down to impose tyranny, or something like that. In his mind, the TSA was a symptom of a deeper problem. Why do I conclude that? Some of the stuff they attributed to him saying is standard stuff at web sites like the ones where Alex Jones is the great celebrity. No balanced points of view there, to be charitable.

A comment to one of the usual suspects and standard gratuitous Yank bashing in these threads:

"My rights are more important than your life."

That is in a lot of ways correct, Wombat. You tamper with my rights at your peril is a message deeply rooted in our history and society. See the flag "Don't Tread on Me" and its back story. The matter of rights informs how the civil rights movement got so much support from so many different sectors of our society: fight/struggle for rights is part of what we're about over here.

If you look back at our history, our forefathers killed people over that issue -- rights -- to get rid of an English/German king. Three generations later, our people killed one another over that issue to the tune of about half a million.

It's part of our heritage.

pigboat
4th Nov 2013, 15:04
its real simple. Lots of hand guns results in lots of gun deaths.
Canada has a population of around 35 million. No one knows how many guns there are in the country, estimates range from 7 to as high as 20 million. The latest homicide figures I can find are for 2011. There were 598 homicides of all types that year. Of that number, 158 were by firearm.

In 2011, a knife or other cutting instrument was the weapon most often used to commit a homicide, accounting for more than one-third (35%) of all homicides in Canada. Virtually all of the increase in homicides in 2011 was due to an increase in the number of homicides committed with a knife or other cutting instrument, up by 39 from 2010.

Kind of disproves your theory.

ExXB
4th Nov 2013, 15:29
Pigboat,

What are the rules for ownership of a handgun in Canada?

Can I go down to the local Wal-mart and buy a Glock and a couple boxes of ammunition?

Do I need a license, do I need to register it, can I carry it concealed or in my car?

Dushan
4th Nov 2013, 17:48
Yes, if you have a license. No carry permits. Can transport in car, locked, to and from gun club/range. You can buy as much ammo as you wish. Just show you have a license.


Need one time transport permit to take from store to home. Must be registered.

Mr Chips
4th Nov 2013, 18:46
I was going to comment, but f:mad:k it, I'll jump on the next time we have a thread about the gun laws in America.

It will come round fairly soon

:ugh::ugh::ugh:

Dushan
4th Nov 2013, 19:11
Mr. Chips, isn't this one of them?

ANd just in case we lost our focus…

Central Connecticut State University on lockdown, two people reportedly in custody (http://news.yahoo.com/ccsu-lockdown-181443285.html)

galaxy flyer
4th Nov 2013, 22:11
More lunatic overreaction by cops thinking someone might, just might, be carrying something that might be a gun or a samurai sword or whatever. Silly.

Vermont tried to pass a gun control act in the Thirties, state supreme court of Vermont tossed it based on the Second Amendment didn't allow for it. Several towns, including Burlington (aka Berkely East), tried since but gun control died aborning every time. A remarkable show of clearheaded thinking in an otherwise mindless political entity.

GF

pigboat
5th Nov 2013, 00:23
ExXB Dushan supplied the answer for handguns. For long guns a FAP - firearms acquisition permit - is sufficient. A FAP is obtained by following a 10 hour course on firearm safety and a clean rap sheet from the police. Walk into any Wal Mart or Canadian Tire store with one of those and they'll sell you a gun and all the ammo you can afford.

boofhead
5th Nov 2013, 06:33
As a youngster in Aus I always had a gun or two, as did my father and my uncles etc. We enjoyed using them for target shooting or going after rabbits etc. As an adult in Aus I had a couple of guns as well, did not think twice about it. We did not need a reason to have them, we considered it our right. I left Aus in 1974 and sold off my guns before I left. Still did not think twice about it.
I was gobsmacked when I read about the gun "buy back" in Aus after I left and wondered how my fellow countrymen had lost their cojones in letting it happen. The only way I could explain it was that people without spines do not need balls.
I live in Alaska now and of course have guns. I don't think anything about that, it is normal, as it was in Aus in the old days when we had spines.
As to the ignorant attacks on America and their "culture" of guns, you might be interested in the fact that young black men make up 60 percent of the prison population here. At the same time, young black men make up 2 percent of the total population. Does that tell you anything?
Gun violence, and in fact violence of all kinds, is not committed by guns. It is committed by people who have no regard for the rights of others.

doubleu-anker
5th Nov 2013, 06:43
Sorry if it has been said before and flame me if you wish. Apart from the media headlines and thread titles on here I know very little on this.

Was the victim of the LAX shooting a TSA guy?

500N
5th Nov 2013, 06:49
The one that was shot dead, yes, he was a TSA guy.

doubleu-anker
5th Nov 2013, 06:57
Oh, one of those nice TSA guys? Hmmm....

500N
5th Nov 2013, 07:00
doubleu-anker

I'm a callous prick most of the time but even that is a bit low.

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 12:21
Oh my... 500N is going soft on me... :E

cockney steve
5th Nov 2013, 13:30
Some time ago, in Stockport, England, A particular inspector employed by the Department of Transport, was shot, along with a trainee.


All DoT testing stations have to comply with legislation concerning layout, equipment, viewing-areas,demarcation-lines etc.

This particular inspector was purportedly somewhat zealous in his implementation of the regulations, particularly when it came to the tester in Stockport.

It came to a head, when the official apparently stretched his powers to the limit and pushed the owner over the edge....owner siezed his shotgun and killed his tormentor......unfortunately, the trainee inspector was also there and a witness.....he was killed as well.
The owner may well have got away with it, had not the inspector's car been parked close-by.

the parallell with the stories one reads about TSA officials, is striking.

There is no doubt that firearms can help curb the exesses of petty power-crazed officials. What I don't understand, is the ones who push their luck in abusing their position in a country where they know that firearms are legal and one day, they just might push the wrong buttons in the wrong order with the wrong person.

obgraham
5th Nov 2013, 14:54
I have no ill will toward the TSA man who was the victim here, and his family.

However, I am very surprised that it has taken this long to have an incident like this. The Govt has created an agency whose sole duty is to harrass and irritate law abiding travelers in their everyday activities. The entire airport system is all show, and no substance. They have NEVER come forward with details of even a single incident prevented by TSA methodology. Every time I fly, most recently yesterday, I'm reminded of how we have allowed our precious freedoms to be eroded, with no increase in safety in return.

It's no wonder that after millions of such encounters, violence was the result.

doubleu-anker
5th Nov 2013, 15:24
The 2 previous posts have summed up exactly my thoughts, only I was too scared to point it out.

Years ago in a rural area, of the country was brought up, a tax inspector (nice chap apparently) ruffled a few feathers among some farmers, during one of his crusades. He disappeared and hasn't been seen or heard of since.

Desert185
5th Nov 2013, 15:35
I am approaching 56 years owning firearms, and discounting Vietnam, I have never used one in vain. I hope I never have to, but the freedom exists for me to exercise my choice to own firearms and that is the really important point. I am a proud citizen, not a subject who lives in a gun-free zone where only the scum of society and the governing body has guns.

I also possess fire extinguishers. Rather not use them, but I have had to on occasion, and with satisfying results. There is a parallel there.

Condolences to the family and friends of the TSA agent.

The Professor
5th Nov 2013, 16:44
Many posters on here are of the opinion that the gun death rate here in the US is acceptable. Certainly the pro gun department at least appears to offer up no indication that change is required.

Maybe it isn’t, its simply personal opinion.

The gun death rate in the US is between 15-30 times higher than any other developed country. Why would we permit this to persist when the implied goal of a civil society is to improve things and constantly strive for better?

The US is constantly striving towards a reduction in fatalities from smoking, auto accidents, and medical ailments and yet so many ppruners on this thread appear to believe that nothing can be done or should be done about gun deaths.

So to the pro gun group on this thread, I ask two questions.

Do we have a problem with gun homicide in the US?

If so, what do you propose to do to reduce it?

Seldomfitforpurpose
5th Nov 2013, 16:47
I hope I never have to, but the freedom exists for me to exercise my choice to own firearms and that is the really important point.

Absolutely, but as the family of the poor unfortunate TSA worker have so tragically discovered that freedom often comes at a cost.

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 17:18
SFFP:

Absolutely, but as the family of the poor unfortunate TSA worker have so tragically discovered that freedom often comes at a cost.

Don't worry your pretty little head about it. The union are now pushing for the TSA to be armed. Trust me, they will kill far more innocent civilians with their brainless incompetence... The score will be evened soon enough.

doubleu-anker
5th Nov 2013, 17:24
Scarey or what?

"I'm your worst nightmare come true. I'm TSA and I have a gun"

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 17:31
Professor

Yes, there is a problem. Taking away weapons from folks like me isn't the answer to the issue. It's easier in theory to take away my weapons than to address the real issue. Any further discussion will cause Huggies to label me a racist.

It's a great way to end a conversation.

Zapatas Blood
5th Nov 2013, 17:43
And the real issue is........?

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 17:59
The people who break the law...

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 18:00
Why don't you try to figure it out, or have you arrived at a conclusion already?

Zapatas Blood
5th Nov 2013, 18:21
Rational adult like debate obviously not your strong point. Even on a subject as serious as gun control.

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 18:24
Zapata:

So you are saying that people who break the law are not the core of the issue. Pray, explain your logic.

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 18:31
Gun control is hitting what you're aiming at.

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 18:35
West:

Gun control is hitting what you're aiming at.

Aaaactually... To be precise, that is "projectile control"... Your version would be more relevant if you'd run out of ammunition but I would hold that you should never throw your gun but rather use it as a club to repeatedly and violently bludgeon the backguard to death in a pool of his own blood and brains... :}

bcgallacher
5th Nov 2013, 18:47
I have rarely read a more idiotic letter on a serious subject than that of Cockney Steve He seems to be advocating killing petty minded officials who annoy us.It would be a good idea for him to have a chat with some kind of mental health practitioner,this is the type of person who should not be allowed near any kind of firearm. If I shot every individual who pissed me off I would be knee deep in dead bodies.There have been some daft letters posted on this theme but I think this must be the daftest - lets control our officialdom by threatening them with a gun!

Seldomfitforpurpose
5th Nov 2013, 19:11
The union are now pushing for the TSA to be armed.

Crikey, TSA and Teachers, not long before everyone in work is going to need a gun :eek:

Seldomfitforpurpose
5th Nov 2013, 19:15
And the real issue is........?

The 2nd Amendment, which by allowing folk to own guns also allows todays sane and sensible to be tomorrows 'gone postal' person.

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 19:57
SFFP:

Arming the TSA will almost certainly kill the airline industry because no-one in their right minds will go near a bloody airport with that bunch of yahoos weilding guns... Have you ever seen these people? The dregs of society doesn't do them justice... Most wear bibs to soak up the drool.

The 2nd Amendment, which by allowing folk to own guns also allows todays sane and sensible to be tomorrows 'gone postal' person.

Oh yawn... You need a new lure... That one is all scratched up and has lost it's lustre...

Seldomfitforpurpose
5th Nov 2013, 20:05
Oh yawn... You need a new lure... That one is all scratched up and has lost it's lustre...

Lure, not really AA but do feel free to correct me :ok:

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 20:09
Many here already have... and, frankly, the repetition is getting tedious. Time for you to find another playground for this subject, after all, it's not your affair really is it?

bcgallacher
5th Nov 2013, 20:23
Gun control laws are not the answer to the USA's gun crime problem - it is too far gone for that. Countries such as the UK had gun control laws which prevented the guns coming in to society in the first place - the USA has some 300 million legally held firearms and an unknown number of illegal.The number of gun deaths is slowly falling as in most developed countries but I believe that the high death rate from gunshots is something that American society will just have to live with as I cannot see that any kind of gun control laws will make the slightest difference. For any kind of developed country to be training and allowing schoolteachers to carry firearms in the classroom is surely an admission that they have a severely disfunctional society. I am now awaiting the first school massacre to be perpetrated by an armed teacher losing his cool and emptying his Glock into his students.If carrying a firearm keeps you safe how come an average of 70 policemen - presumably most if not all armed - are shot dead every year in the USA where as in the UK where policemen are generally unarmed we rarely have police shot - it does happen from time to time but few deaths in comparison to the USA.

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 20:33
If carrying a firearm keeps you safe how come an average of 70 policemen - presumably most if not all armed - are shot dead every year in the USA where as in the UK where policemen are generally unarmed we rarely have police shot - it does happen from time to time but few deaths in comparison to the USA.

Being somewhat flippant one could point out that the Met won't even approach someone wielding a knife so a perp with a gun probably has them running like the easter bunny... Harder targets for the perp...

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 20:37
There is some unwarranted TSA abuse here. I interact with them 3-4 times a week, often multiple times a day. That I can remember, I've not had an unpleasant encounter. If this is what sends people over the edge to not fly, then you're too easily set off.

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 20:40
West:

People are funny things and there's no accounting for some... Hence there is the Second Amendment... :ok:

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 20:44
Yes, stop or I'll yell stop again. When you won't even approach the bad guy, yup your numbers will be low.

bcgallacher

You have one thing right, more laws wont help. Depending on who you listen to, there's upwards of 20,000 existing laws. Having thou shall not kill codified isn't the issue.

500N
5th Nov 2013, 20:47
"where as in the UK where policemen are generally unarmed we rarely have police shot - it does happen from time to time but few deaths in comparison to the USA."

Not having a good run in the last few years then.

Shotgun blast to the face when sitting in a car.
Two young females shot and then a grenade used on them.


And that is without really approaching anyone with a known firearm.

con-pilot
5th Nov 2013, 20:54
Two young females shot and then a grenade used on them.


Were they cops and where did this happen, the UK or Australia?

Not that it matters all that much, but damn....

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 20:55
Con:

UK... Last year(?).

con-pilot
5th Nov 2013, 21:04
UK... Last year(?).

Did they find the 'perps'?

obgraham
5th Nov 2013, 21:04
Rational adult like debate... on a subject as serious as gun control.Well "rational debate" to a liberal usually means "your view is stupid, change to my view".

When a truly rational debate on this topic breaks out here, please, someone PM me so I don't miss it. I'm not holding my breath.

500N
5th Nov 2013, 21:10
Two police officers killed in Greater Manchester shooting | UK news | theguardian.com (http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/sep/18/woman-police-officer-killed-manchester)

I see at the bottom of the page another off duty copper was shot in the chest
as well.

For a country with supposedly few firearms and tight gun laws,
seems to be an awful lot of shootings going on ;)

Lonewolf_50
5th Nov 2013, 21:39
Do we have a problem with gun homicide in the US?
Since the largest portion of gun deaths in the US are Suicide related, why do you ask the wrong question?
If so, what do you propose to do to reduce it?
Suicide? Not much I can do. I can't read your mind.

bcgallacher
5th Nov 2013, 21:40
Lonewolf - Take out the suicides and you still have higher gun deaths than most developed countries.

500N
5th Nov 2013, 21:44
And most of them are perps that no one really gives a shyte about, druggies, low life, scum so WGAF whether all of them are killed off ?

Why do you worry about it so much.

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 21:47
Careful 500, you're on thin ice. You're gonna be labeled a racist soon. I should know as I've been labeled already.

bcgallacher
5th Nov 2013, 21:47
500N - We in the UK have had less than 70 policemen shot dead since about 1900 - you have 70 a year. read the last sentence of my post - does 3 in 2 years compare to 70 a year? Stop clutching at straws to try to make a point - its childish. If you cannot find a rational argument it is better to say nothing.

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 21:50
bcg:

How many punch-ups have you seen on the streets and in the pubs of the UK?

Simple question requiring a simple answer. Your honesty will demonstrate whether you want a real discussion or are just here to stir porridge....

bcgallacher
5th Nov 2013, 21:51
As far as the druggies and lowlifes are concerned I can go along with that -its the children and innocent bystanders etc that concern me - and the kids shot with daddys house gun while playing because the dumb bastard did not secure it.

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 21:51
Then argue on a level field then. The Brit cops hold back in many situations that US cops head into. I can't blame them, if I wasn't armed I wouldn't approach a couple of guys who just decapitated a soldier as an example.

Live smugly in your statistics if you want, but they don't compare apples to apples, not that I think that's a concern for you.

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 21:54
West:

Wait until he answers my question honestly...

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 21:57
AA
He's made his mind up long ago based on the media reports.


bcgallacher

Where are you coming up with 70/yr shot dead in the US?


Law Enforcement Line of Duty Deaths in 2013 (http://www.odmp.org/search/year)

Dushan
5th Nov 2013, 22:00
The 2nd Amendment, which by allowing folk to own guns also allows todays sane and sensible to be tomorrows 'gone postal' person.

For the millionth time, when are yiu going to understand that the 2nd does not allow anything.

It prohibits the government to infringe on the right to own firearms.

bcgallacher
5th Nov 2013, 22:01
I have seen fights in the UK - I have also seen fights in Texas,Florida and other places in the USA- what relevance is that to gunshot deaths in the USA ?

500N
5th Nov 2013, 22:06
bcg

I notice you leave out those killed in Northern Ireland.

Or does being shot in Northern Ireland not count to your biased statistics ?

And let's not forget that the number of UK Police killed by being blown up by a bomb is significantly higher than the US.

Lonewolf_50
5th Nov 2013, 22:09
Lonewolf - Take out the suicides and you still have higher gun deaths than most developed countries.
So? Why would you presume that I care about that difference?
I don't.
I don't want Sweden to be a carbon copy of the US, and I don't want the US to be a carbon copy of France. And so on.

We don't have identical cultures.
We don't have identical demographic mixes.
Nor do we have identical crime stats.
We don't have identical cultural approaches to a great many societal features.

We have different levels of drug trades, different drug laws, different immigration afflictions and benefits, and different underground pipe lines for illegal human trafficking. All of that stuff feeds into the crime rate.

We have the death penalty in some of our states but not in others. We have criminal gangs who are known but we can't shoot them on sight. We have an immense tolerance for criminal activity, as seen by how many criminals get off. So, we have per capita a hell of a lot more crooks running around loose on a day to day basis.

We also have a nice pile of idiots who are well meaning but have firearms accidents because they are ... well ... stupid.

This alleged stat of yours (and the other whingers who fear and hate firearms) doesn't matter.

Why do you pretend that it does?

galaxy flyer
5th Nov 2013, 22:18
Dushan,

There is not a typeface in Christendom that's large enough to get your point across to these self-proclaimed experts on US law. Rights to these subjects, excuse me, "citizens" are merely temporary gifts of a political class that is corrupt beyond belief.

GF

Airborne Aircrew
5th Nov 2013, 22:21
bch:

I have seen fights in the UK - I have also seen fights in Texas,Florida and other places in the USA- what relevance is that to gunshot deaths in the USA ?

I've lived in the UK for 30 years and in the USA for 25...20 years of the 25 have been spent in and around Detroit, a city acknowledged to be on of America's most violent.

I've seen hundreds of fights in the UK.... Friday nights at the chips shop, the streets of a city on Saturday lunchtime when a soccer match is being played, the sh1t that travel on the trains to and from those games...Britain is, for a large part, an alcohol based fight club.

In my 25 years in the USA I have seen about ten fights... That includes my 20 years in Detroit. I've never even heard a gun fired in anger. I'll admit to having been in a good percentage of those fights... But, in my defence, I started on someone to protect someone who was unable to defend themselves against the antagonist.

I don't care how many times you flew into Miami or had a holiday in Myrtle Beach, I can assure you, Britain is a far more violent society than the USA is. The only difference is, and it is as it should be, if you mess with a Yank you might get shot.

Lord Spandex Masher
5th Nov 2013, 22:23
I think AA has been hanging out in the wrong places.

Dushan
5th Nov 2013, 22:27
GF,
LOL, I know, but I cannot resist to once agin show the "experts" on 2nd how little they really know.

galaxy flyer
5th Nov 2013, 22:31
alcohol based fight club.

Worse, the Brit hooligans take it on the road!

GF

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 22:32
Dushan
consider that you've probably exposed most of the huggies here to the 2nd amendment.

bcgallacher
5th Nov 2013, 22:34
West Coast
FBI web page shows 72 deaths in 2011 - 'Most by gunshot of which 53 were wearing body armour' For 2012 which is stated by another web site to be a particularly bad year 127 deaths in the line of duty were recorded, how many were by gunshot is not stated. The figure of 70 averaged I have from a some research I did some months back using official figures over I think a ten year period. Try to get some figures yourself over about 2002 to about 2012
and I am sure you will get around the same figure - some years more,some years less. Even 1/10th of that figure is in excess of the UK per head of population.The fact that our police are not generally armed also means that few people are shot by the British police and it is unheard of for bystanders to be caught in crossfire. As a couple of european examples- in 2012 German policemen fired a total of 36 shots killing 8 people.The Scottish police fired 12 shots in 2 years - the only death I know of was a police officer who shot himself in a police armoury.

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 22:41
Can you provide a link to the FBI page?

Edit

Never mind, I found it. I also found another, more up to date FBI release that disputes the numbers you use.

FBI ? FBI Releases 2012 Preliminary Statistics for Law Enforcement Officers Killed in the Line of Duty (http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2012-preliminary-statistics-for-law-enforcement-officers-killed-in-the-line-of-duty)

BEACH KING
5th Nov 2013, 22:55
And let's not forget that the number of UK Police killed by being blown up by a bomb is significantly higher than the US.

Should we include the World Trade Centre?

West Coast
5th Nov 2013, 23:05
Did the WTC buildings get blown up in 2012?

BEACH KING
5th Nov 2013, 23:26
Did the WTC buildings get blown up in 2012?
No..I'm pretty sure that happened in 2001, and wasn't technically a bomb.
But I don't know if any Limey coppers were blown up by bombs or errant aircraft in either 2001 or 2012.

Dushan
5th Nov 2013, 23:37
READING, Pa. - November 4, 2013 (WPVI) -- Authorities in Berks County say two robbery suspects were shot and killed by a concerned citizen outside a Reading convenience store.

"He was very brave, very brave. He could have ran away, he chose not to," Berks County District Attorney John Adams said.

It was just after 2:00 p.m. when shots rang out outside Krick's Korner Market on the 1600 block of North 9th Street.

Adams says cameras were rolling as the men, donning masks and armed with guns, entered the store and terrorized employees, pointing their weapons and making demands.

A concerned citizen witnessed the robbery happening from outside the store and waited there for the suspects.
The armed men took cash, cigarettes and lottery tickets before exiting the store. Outside they were confronted by the concerned citizen who told them not to move and that he was calling police.

Adams said a struggle ensued and the suspects took out their weapons. The citizen, however, was also armed and fired at the suspects.

The suspects were both shot in the chest and died at the scene.

Police took the armed citizen in for questioning, but after reviewing video of the incident and speaking with a number of witnesses, authorities released the man.

Adams said the shooter was very cooperative. The man had a license to carry, and since he was threatened at gunpoint, no charges are expected to be filed.

Friends and family of the dead suspects have identified the two as Williams Medina and Robert DeCarr.

They tried to portray the two has good hard working men.

Others in the rough Reading neighborhood say the two got what they deserved.

Police meanwhile believe there was a getaway driver and are still trying to locate that third suspect.

(Copyright ©2013 WPVI-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.)

Source & Video: 2 dead, 1 charged after Reading store robbery | 6abc.com (http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news%2Flocal&id=9312800)

galaxy flyer
5th Nov 2013, 23:44
Bcgallagher,

Well, so far in 2013, 39 officers have killed in line of duty by vehicles--accidents, assault by vehicle, even an aircraft accidents; 27 by gunfire. By your analysis, we should eliminate vehicles. After all, cars aren't protected by the Constitution so it should be easy and would save lives.

GF

500N
6th Nov 2013, 00:11
"But I don't know if any Limey coppers were blown up by bombs or errant aircraft in either 2001 or 2012."

1983 were the last one's I think.

Quite a few stabbing deaths of Police though !!!

500N
6th Nov 2013, 00:15
Dushan

That's what I like to see :ok:

A couple of dead no hopers caught in the act and duly despatched to a better place.

The guy deserves a medal.

doubleu-anker
6th Nov 2013, 00:45
500N

Couldn't agree more.

In the UK they have managed to disarm the general public, virtually overnight. Except the bad guys of course. Most governments in the world can only dream of this.

However the guns are still there in large numbers. They must be as the percentage of cops carrying arms remains high.

So they have disarmed the good guys, so now they are unable to protect themselves against the bad guys.

"The only defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun".

bcgallacher
6th Nov 2013, 07:31
As we have a murder rate of 1.2 per thousand and the USA has a murder rate of 4.7 per thousand we seem to be doing a better job protecting ourselves than the USA - and we do it without guns!

500N
6th Nov 2013, 08:14
So what.

You worry about Scotland and let the US worry about the US.

In any case, nothing is going to change in relation to the gun laws
or gun ownership in the US as has been proven by Obama.

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 08:17
"The only defense against a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun".

Absolutely, sadly we don't read more stories each day about how the good guy with the gun defeats the bad guy with the gun.

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 08:24
For the millionth time, when are yiu going to understand that the 2nd does not allow anything.

It prohibits the government to infringe on the right to own firearms.

Dushan,

I get it perfectly, you might want to try to obfuscate with childish semantics but the bottom line is as follows.

Good and well intentioned folk are allowed to own firearms.

Some of those good and well intentioned folk will go on to do bad things with those guns.

That is the true price of your freedoms.

doubleu-anker
6th Nov 2013, 08:25
bcg

The "murder" rate is low because the bad guy who waves the gun, runs off Scot free. If they were stopped in their tracks with a slug between the eyes, the ratio would rise. In these cases I don't call it murder. I call it cleaning the streets.

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 08:58
bcg

The "murder" rate is low because the bad guy who waves the gun, runs off Scot free. If they were stopped in their tracks with a slug between the eyes, the ratio would rise. In these cases I don't call it murder. I call it cleaning the streets.

In a country with million upon million of legally held firearms there is not much evidence of 'cleaning the streets' going on.

500N
6th Nov 2013, 09:02
Pity, it could do with a bit of street cleaning.

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 10:32
Pity, it could do with a bit of street cleaning.

Absolutely, and with the firepower available it is a bit of a surprise that its not happening :ok:

500N
6th Nov 2013, 10:48
Isn't the Mac 10 machine guns nickname the "Street Sweeper" ?

One of the small SMG's is named that.

Dushan
6th Nov 2013, 11:07
As we have a murder rate of 1.2 per thousand and the USA has a murder rate of 4.7 per thousand we seem to be doing a better job protecting ourselves than the USA - and we do it without guns!

So in a country of 330 million people 1,551,000 are murdered?

Wow! That is serious. Perhaps murder should be outlawed. Oh, wait...

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 11:16
Wow! That is serious. Perhaps murder should be outlawed. Oh, wait...

Or possibly look at making it a little more difficult :ok:

Fliegenmong
6th Nov 2013, 11:17
Perhaps everybody should be armed from age 10 and over, the basics taught in Kindy, and reinforced in Junior school, and the at age ten everyone gets a camera implanted in their forehead to see what their gun does, who drew first etc etc. then all crimes would be easily solved, the gun lovers will have nothing to fear, because they do no wrong, the baddies will know their 'indescretions' are caught on film....:ok: All good eh?!?!?! :D

Dushan
6th Nov 2013, 11:17
Dushan,

I get it perfectly, you might want to try to obfuscate with childish semantics but the bottom line is as follows.
Not childish, and certainly not semantics. If anyone is obfuscating in this exchange it isn't me.


Good and well intentioned folk are allowed to own firearms.
Wrong. The government "shall not infringe the right of good and well intentioned folks to own firearms.


Some of those good and well intentioned folk will go on to do bad things with those guns.
Correct, as they do everywhere else in the world.



That is the true price of your freedoms.
Correct. As is the price of everyone else's lack of.



What exactly is your point?

Airborne Aircrew
6th Nov 2013, 12:04
SFFP:

sadly we don't read more stories each day about how the good guy with the gun defeats the bad guy with the gunI've shown you this before... Plenty of good news there... just looking at October 2013 it looks like an incident every three days...

Link (http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen.aspx)

bcgallacher
6th Nov 2013, 13:12
My error - the figures are per 100,000 - missed out a couple of Zeros. I thought that perhaps you would have worked that one out by yourselves instead of trying to make cheap points,seems I overestimated your abilities.

500N
6th Nov 2013, 13:19
bcg

I guessed your figures were a bit off but was enjoying watching you
shoot yourself in the foot ;)

arcniz
6th Nov 2013, 13:25
bcgallacher says:
My error - the figures are per 100,000 - missed out a couple of Zeros. I thought that perhaps you would have worked that one out by yourselves instead of trying to make cheap points,seems I overestimated your abilities.

The Scots have alway been thought a difficult folk... even Julius the Cesar
likely had a curse or two for the Schottisch ilk.

Some might call that pluck.

Sounding off with the wrong facts and a dumbasso-style set of half-faked opinions goes more to the account of a pluck-up.

Please stop embarrassing a long tradition of stubborn obstinacy.

Too much loch, too little Ness.

bcgallacher
6th Nov 2013, 13:29
Just a small point of interest - when the new gun laws were introduced after the Dunblane massacre it made little difference to the gun death rate - the reason being that only 60,000 or so (got the correct number of zeros this time) guns were handed in. We had few of the prohibited firearms in circulation -pistols,semi automatic rifles and shotguns with more than 2 shot capability.In my lifetime there has never been any public debate about firearms in the UK - it is a non issue. As far as those who comment on the UK ' giving up its rights without a fight','Pussies' etc., Can I suggest that whoever makes these statements try them on a group of Scots sometimes - the word pussy will take on a whole new meaning.

bcgallacher
6th Nov 2013, 13:34
Arcniz-
Your statements are a little obscure,is English your first language? As far as your reference to Julius Ceasar is concerned I cannot remember if it was he who sent the 9th legion into what is now Scotland - there is no record of what happened to them so I am in agreement that it probably pissed the current Ceasar off somewhat.
.

arcniz
6th Nov 2013, 13:37
If one is to succeed as a troll, some degree of cogent consistency helps.

And a quaky bridge to hide under.

500N
6th Nov 2013, 13:39
bcg
Arniz's post was not at all obscure.

I understood it fully.

I think it's called "taking the piss" at your expense ;)


Sometimes it is better than people think you are a fool
than open your mouth to confirm it.
Have a nice day !

Dushan
6th Nov 2013, 13:41
As far as those who comment on the UK ' giving up its rights without a fight','Pussies' etc., Can I suggest that whoever makes these statements try them on a group of Scots sometimes - the word pussy will take on a whole new meaning.

Unless of course it is a government which takes your guns, then you fold like wet paper bag.

bcgallacher
6th Nov 2013, 13:42
Eh? Quakey bridge?

500N
6th Nov 2013, 13:44
"Can I suggest that whoever makes these statements try them on a group of Scots sometimes - the word pussy will take on a whole new meaning."

Are you trying to say that the Scots are extra tough ?

Must be from surviving all that cold air blowing up the skirts :O

arcniz
6th Nov 2013, 14:00
... or from having to put up with all them other Scots, otherwise.

arcniz
6th Nov 2013, 14:02
Eh? Quakey bridge?

Order the phrase "Damned in the Dialectic" for your tombstone,

West Coast
6th Nov 2013, 14:46
500

You have to give him/her proper dues. The poster makes a basic grade school math error, yet questions your intelligence level.

Love it.

500N
6th Nov 2013, 15:02
West Coast.

Yep !

Put him on the list ;)

Dushan
6th Nov 2013, 15:15
500

You have to give him/her proper dues. The poster makes a basic grade school math error, yet questions your intelligence level.

Love it.

Cheap shots (shotguns with 2 shot capability) is all they have. Let them be.

boofhead
6th Nov 2013, 15:43
There is plenty of evidence that the good guys with guns are winning. Estimates of up to half a million cases a year where the good guys prevented a crime or saved lives using a gun, usually just showing the gun is enough. The false but often-stated claims that guns do not protect the citizen or that having a gun in the house is of more danger to the owner, or that thousands of kids are killed etc can be easily countered by the truth. But it is too easy to just spout off the bs to make your point I guess.

Did you read what I posted previously about the ratios between population and prison occupants? Can't you see that only a small number of people is responsible for the violence in the country (any country), while the vast majority are just as law-abiding as you? And that crime is mainly confined to that small part of the population?

If you are not of that skin color/criminal occupation/drug trade you have less to worry about than a resident of most European countries. The rates of crime amongst the white races in the US is generally lower than that in your country I would bet. And I would further bet that you have the same problems with the violent minorities, and that you have a lot of under-reporting of crime.

It is a falsehood to think that living in the USA is any more dangerous with regard to crime in general and gun crime in particular than in any other industrialized country.

Despite what your governments have told you, gun ownership by honest citizens is not the problem. Gun confiscation is not the solution.

Doing something to change the violent nature of those who revel in it would be a better start. Whether that involves more punishment or a more sensitive approach is more than I can say but I do know that political correctness does not work nor is ignoring the true causes of violence.

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 18:41
SFFP:

I've shown you this before... Plenty of good news there... just looking at October 2013 it looks like an incident every three days...

Link (http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen.aspx)

1 every 3 days, that's roughly 120 a year, and for a country of 360,000,000 that's pretty impressive :D:D:D

BenThere
6th Nov 2013, 18:44
So in a country of 330 million people 1,551,000 are murdered?


I wondered where everyone in Detroit went.

Lonewolf_50
6th Nov 2013, 18:55
Lone Ranger, please go back up a few and read my post.

The way it works, our system lets a lot of crooks back out on the street. The general preference, based on the standards of evidence, is that it is better to let a few crooks loose than to incarcerate the innocent. This results in an increased number of criminals on the street.

Sadly, the system isn't perfect, and a few of them as didn't do it end up in the clink until someone (like The Innocence Project or an appeals attorney) can unscrew that mess.

bcgallacher
6th Nov 2013, 20:39
Do a search on the internet and watch police dash cams and note the manner in which the officer approaches a car. In the US he approaches with the attitude that the occupant may be armed - keep hands in view etc. Now see how a UK officer in the same circumstance approaches a car. He approaches with the attitude that the occupant is unarmed - why do you think that is so? In a nutshell that is the difference in our societies - we can safely assume that it is highly unlikely that a person is armed - In the USA you cannot.

500N
6th Nov 2013, 20:42
"Now see how a UK officer in the same circumstance approaches a car. He approaches with the attitude that the occupant is unarmed"

That is a failure of training to start with plus giving the possibly attacker
a nice window of opportunity.

Expect the worst, train for the worst.

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 20:50
Expect the worst, train for the worst.

Which is going to apply to both the Teacher and the TSA in the very near future............

500N
6th Nov 2013, 20:55
Would be better off having trained people standing guard than arming all TSA agents.

Just like after 9/11, you had soldiers patrolling airports.

IMHO, for a start you are arming a whole load of what is likely to be very lightly trained people where it is unlikely to be second nature and putting them in a place which is supposed to be firearm free.

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 21:03
IMHO, for a start you are arming a whole load of what is likely to be very lightly trained people where it is unlikely to be second nature and putting them in a place which is supposed to be firearm free.

Exactly, a point I have made on here on quite a few occasions :ok:

Edited to add that on further reflection that thought process could quite easily be expanded to include most folk who own a gun :ok:

Mr Chips
6th Nov 2013, 21:15
more police officers get shot in a country where guns are widespread,than in a country where guns are practically illegal.

Shocking.

:hmm:

Airborne Aircrew
6th Nov 2013, 21:16
1 every 3 days, that's roughly 120 a year, and for a country of 360,000,000 that's pretty impressive :D:D:D

Ahhh... Vintage SFFP... He complains that something doesn't happen... Someone shows him it does, regularly, so he whines that it isn't enough.

Seldom, sweetie... These are just the widely reported events... I'm surprised I have to explain that to someone with your demonstrated knowledge of firearms and their use... :rolleyes:

500N
6th Nov 2013, 21:17
SFFP

The whole reason of checking firearms in at the check in counter is so the whole airport past the check in counters and the aircraft is firearm free (with the obvious exception).

If you arm all the TSA agents, then you are putting firearms exactly where you don't want them IMHO.

TWT
6th Nov 2013, 21:23
The TSA won't be arming their staff IMHO.I'm sure we can all think of a multitude of reasons why.

Airborne Aircrew
6th Nov 2013, 21:25
TWT:

I'm sure we can all think of a multitude of reasons why.

Every, single employee? :E

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 21:27
Ahhh... Vintage SFFP... He complains that something doesn't happen... Someone shows him it does, regularly, so he whines that it isn't enough.



Whines, Oh dear sorry AA I thought I was just giving some context to your post :p

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 21:29
If you arm all the TSA agents, then you are putting firearms exactly where you don't want them IMHO.

Could not agree with you more, exactly the point I made when the lunacy about arming teachers was first mooted :ok:

TWT
6th Nov 2013, 21:34
Arming workers at the majority of places where a nutjob has struck isn't sensible.I don't think I'd want to go to a movie theatre that has armed ushers.

Airborne Aircrew
6th Nov 2013, 21:37
TWT:

But legal concealed carrying civilians is a good alternative...

TWT
6th Nov 2013, 21:43
Yes,responsible and well trained concealed carriers who regularly practice on the range
would certainly have helped in some previous incidents.

500N
6th Nov 2013, 21:45
The same as the Police in this instance were able to put a stop to it
reasonably quickly.

No shortage of Police in LAX, inside or outside.

Arming TSA agents wouldn't have stopped the initial action of this person.

Seldomfitforpurpose
6th Nov 2013, 22:12
Yes,responsible and well trained concealed carriers who regularly practice on the range
would certainly have helped in some previous incidents.

Trouble is, based on the NRA article recently quoted that would seem to rule out most of Joe Public :ok:

Airborne Aircrew
6th Nov 2013, 22:16
TWT:

Our "firearms instructing friend", (AKA SFFP), was utterly stunned just a few months ago when a similar question was asked of him and he found out the truth... ;)

But he was a firearms instructor.... :rolleyes:

Airborne Aircrew
6th Nov 2013, 22:24
Nice work Mods... Brilliant....

Someone starts in about guns, someone else points out their ignorance in a non abusive way and, somehow, randomly, you decide to excise it from this thread. :rolleyes:

The inconsistency of moderation on this site is only exceeded by the number of minutes per month it spends "unavailable"...

500N
6th Nov 2013, 22:33
AA

I see what you mean.

bcgallacher
6th Nov 2013, 22:55
500N
By your own reasoning there must be something wrong with US police officers training as so many are killed by criminals every year - considerably more, proportionally,than the UK and most of them by gunshot.

con-pilot
6th Nov 2013, 23:16
By your own reasoning there must be something wrong with US police officers training as so many are killed by criminals every year - considerably more, proportionally,than the UK and most of them by gunshot.

That kind of contradicts your earlier post:

Do a search on the internet and watch police dash cams and note the manner in which the officer approaches a car. In the US he approaches with the attitude that the occupant may be armed - keep hands in view etc.

Also, you ever heard of 'suicide by cop', sometimes it is the cop that is killed. Or they do their best to kill a cop, to insure that another cop will kill them.

500N
6th Nov 2013, 23:19
bcg

Not necessarily. I was talking about approaching a car.

Your statement above relates to ALL instances where cops are killed
by firearms. Not all police are killed approaching cars.

The US Police approach armed offenders and therefore just by default some will get killed. Then you have as above, suicide by cop.

West Coast
7th Nov 2013, 00:07
Bcgallacher

You didn't address that US police officers go to situations that their contemporaries in the UK wouldn't. This was evidenced by the London beheading crime. Why do you try to balance the numbers given the difference.

Funny how you're off now to another subject now.

BEACH KING
7th Nov 2013, 04:34
Hey AA...what's that on the news I hear happened in Detroit today?

Never mind..I found it. This might put an anomaly in the statistics.
2 Killed, 7 Hurt in Detroit Barbershop Shooting - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/detroit-police-dead-hurt-store-shooting-20810077)

500N
7th Nov 2013, 04:41
Keywords

"Craig said Al's is a known illegal gambling spot."

"Miner said two cars pulled up outside the barbershop and people in the vehicles exchanged gunfire with each other."

Well, not surprising is it.

BEACH KING
7th Nov 2013, 05:15
No, not surprising at all. :ok:

500N
7th Nov 2013, 05:18
2 dead, 7 wounded.

Either a lot of guns were involved or someone could shoot.

Airborne Aircrew
7th Nov 2013, 11:45
Beach King:

Yep, heard about it on the radio on the way to work...

The point the headline doesn't make is that the "barber shop" is a well known gambling house, (think illegal and criminals). The shooting took place when two carloads of people, (think criminals), pulled up outside and started shooting into the "barber shop". So, it's just another case of bad people doing bad things to some other bad people.

On the bright side, a third one has died in hospital... Who says I have no empathy... :E

dead_pan
7th Nov 2013, 11:48
But legal concealed carrying civilians is a good alternative...

Hmm, problem is if a person who's not in a uniform pulls a weapon, he's likely to be treated in pretty much the same way as the assailant by any arriving police officers. Also, what if two or more armed vigilante 'land-guards' happen to be on scene at the same time? In the heat of the moment, anyone they see bearing a weapon is likely to be viewed as a threat and dealt with accordingly.

Airborne Aircrew
7th Nov 2013, 12:00
DP:

Intuitively you'd probably be correct. The reality is though that police officers don't simply go rushing in with guns blazing. The vast majority never want to pull that trigger so warnings are issued. Law abiding citizens with a gun in that situation will follow instructions. The bad people won't. It rapidly becomes clear to the police who to shoot at.

Further reality indicates that when an armed civilian draws his weapon and fires it the perpetrator is dead, badly wounded on the floor or has run away and the civilians weapon is holstered again a long time before the police arrive.

Never forget, when seconds count the police are just minutes away... As a wonderful illustration of that the new Detroit Police Chief made a proud boast just yesterday. He claims that in the three(?) months he's been in the job he has reduced police response time to "critical incidents" from 50 minutes, (no - that isn't a typo), to eleven. I'm not knocking the good work the man seems to be doing but it's important to understand that an awful lot of bad can be rained upon a lot of people in eleven minutes.

Desert185
7th Nov 2013, 14:58
AA:

Speaking of response time. Remember the beheading of the soldier in the UK a few months back. Response time was very slow as they had to wait for a firearm equipped Bobby(ies) to respond. The normal, whistle-bearing Bobbies were ill-equipped to handle the large knife wielding muslim scumbag. Note that there was no call to ban large knives. I think the main complaint was multiculturalism and diversity. Tsk, tsk. Meanwhile, a good man is dead. RIP

Take away the onerous, gun-free zone, gang populated big cities in the US and the stats on violence of all levels would be more in line with the majority of America in general, which would dramatically reduce our ranking to reflect a peaceful nation (which we are). The majority should not be judged by the actions of a few, but thanks to the news the impression is swayed.

And still, my firearms (and knives, big and small) continue to remain inert and motionless without demonstrating a violent will of their own.

"...shall not be infringed."

Desert185
7th Nov 2013, 15:43
GUNS (Virtual State of the Union 2013) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/embed/_T-F_zfoDqI?rel=0)

500N
7th Nov 2013, 15:53
AA

"that an awful lot of bad can be rained upon a lot of people in eleven minutes."

At 300 - 600 rounds a minute :O

Or multiple magazine changes on a 9mm ;)

dead_pan
7th Nov 2013, 18:43
Just curious- how many of carry when you're out and about?


Posted from Pprune.org App for Android

500N
7th Nov 2013, 19:07
I would if I could and if I lived in a state in the US
I would pick a state that allowed concealed carry.

bcgallacher
7th Nov 2013, 21:41
I think Con Pilot and West Coast are missing my point - both US and UK police officers perform traffic stops for the usual violations but a US police officer approaches the stopped vehicle with a completely different attitude - he rightly has to take the view that the occupants may be armed. A UK police officer approaches the same situation with the attitude that the occupants are not likely to be armed due to the fact that there are few guns in society in the UK.
I am not aware of any UK police officer being shot after stopping a car for a traffic violation but have seen a few dash cam videos of police fatalities in those circumstances in the US.
With reference to the killing of the off duty soldier - as the soldier was run down by a car, bystanders initially thought it was a traffic accident. By the time the real situation became apparent it was too late - an armed policeman would have had to be on the spot as the incident occurred to possibly make a difference. The two perpetrators were shot - one by a policewoman I believe.
The UK police forces have on several occasions expressed the view that they do not wish to be an armed force. There are I believe about 6000 policemen trained and approved for firearms - all are volunteers.As in the US there have been cases of the wrong person being shot - much of it appears to be simple incompetence.

500N
7th Nov 2013, 21:47
"A UK police officer approaches the same situation with the attitude that the occupants are not likely to be armed due to the fact that there are few guns in society in the UK."

Yep, you have an ultra safe society in the UK !

Shots fired by armed police as they arrest suspect on busy dual carriageway during rush hour

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2491085/Shots-fired-A27-armed-police-arrest-suspect.html?ico=home^headlines (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2491085/Shots-fired-A27-armed-police-arrest-suspect.html?ico=home%5Eheadlines)

perthsaint
7th Nov 2013, 21:51
A quick read of the article shows no shots were fired.

Your point is?

421dog
7th Nov 2013, 22:13
You realize, of course, that most states include CCW information on drivers license/registration information, and the cop knows full well that you might be armed. Furthermore, the exchange is generally as follows:
(and now, I live in Michigan which Doesn't include such information)

Officer: Sir do you have any weapons in the truck?
Me: Yes, I am a CCW, I have weapons on my person and in the center console.
Officer: Ok sir, did you realize your left tail light was inoperative?....

The threat to a LEO from someone who cares enough to actually jump through the hoops is miniscule.

In fact, the current statistics suggest that a firearm associated felony is about 100x more likely to be committed by a duly deputized LEO than by a private citizen with a CCW.

500N
7th Nov 2013, 22:17
"The threat to a LEO from someone who cares enough to
actually jump through the hoops is miniscule."

Exactly.

Desert185
7th Nov 2013, 22:25
dead_pan

Just curious- how many of carry when you're out and about?

Every day.

bcgallacher
8th Nov 2013, 00:17
500N - I note from your comment that you finally agree with me - I would say though that our society is not ultra-safe - just safer than yours.

Thank you and goodnight.

BenThere
8th Nov 2013, 00:22
The two perpetrators were shot - one by a policewoman I believe.

Much better to have the woman on scene pull the trigger. Puts BBC in a dilemma.

Desert185
8th Nov 2013, 02:45
If we make guns illegal, then no one would get shot anymore. That's how we stopped people from doing drugs.

galaxy flyer
8th Nov 2013, 02:48
Desert185,

And stopped Demon Rum, don't forget that.

GF

Seldomfitforpurpose
8th Nov 2013, 11:38
I would if I could and if I lived in a state in the US
I would pick a state that allowed concealed carry.

If I wanted to live in the US I would want to live next door to any of the genuine US posters in here, as they regularly point our they have never had a need to actually use the guns they own in anger so it strikes me that where they live must be safe as a safe thing :ok:

Dushan
8th Nov 2013, 11:43
If I wanted to live in the US I would want to live next door to any of the genuine US posters in here, as they regularly point our they have never had a need to actually use the guns they own in anger so it strikes me that where they live must be safe as a safe thing :ok:

You are so close to connecting the dots. The reason the area is safe is because it is known that the inhabitants are armed. The perps will go to "gun free zones" like a movie theater, university, elementary school, even a military base.

500N
8th Nov 2013, 15:44
If I lived next to AA or RGB, I'd never get any work done :O
Would be fun though !