PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   A USA gun thread. That won't be controversial, will it? (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/549775-usa-gun-thread-wont-controversial-will.html)

BOING 3rd Nov 2014 20:11

PTT

BOING
Quote:
The implication clearly being that gun quantity is the problem.
Maybe you should actually read something other than what you want to read. He expounds his (admittedly flawed) argument here:

Switzerland has the highest rate of gun ownership in Europe, we also have the highest rate of gun deaths in Europe.

The US has the highest rate of gun ownership in the 'west'. It also has the highest rate of gun death in the 'west'.

Q.E.D.
Come on PTT, get a grip. He wrote


Too many guns, too many gun deaths
Now are you going to requote ExxB with what you are sure he really meant?

I quoted it, go to his post for the original.

.

BOING 3rd Nov 2014 20:58

Seldom.
First of all you never did offer these proposals previously as such but let's forget that and look at your proposals one by one.

Mandatory training on each weapon purchased at time of purchase.
The training one I personally like if we can build it into the system.

I think the "each weapon" and the "at time of purchase" conditions may be difficult to implement.

"Each weapon" is superfluous unless it is a different type of weapon that the purchaser does not already own but how you would establish this I do not know because there are no uniform records of purchase (which is probably why you said "each" but see below.)

Associated with your suggestion how much training would be required? Guns are purchased from many sources and 99% of these do not have facilities or trained personnel to provide "hands-on. live" training such as no easily available shooting range. If you want full range training its not going to happen "at time of purchase". If all you want is a verbal operation briefing this may be pointless - might as well say make sure you read the manual. At our major local gunshops the salesperson will take out the gun paperwork and show the safety section to you, one of their forms they ask you to sign states that this has been done. Additionally, for handgun purchases, the store is required to ensure that there is a trigger lock included with the gun and a Federal brochure entitled "Youth Handgun Safety".

Gun stores are simply not set up to provide point-of-sale training. It could be arranged that you may not possess the gun you have selected until you have met a qualified instructor at a range for gun checkout. This would mean providing the gun, or an identical gun, at the range for the training. This gets sticky because both the cost of training and the delay could be argued to go against the 2nd Amendment, this situation is being argued at this time in Washington DC. And - what happens if someone fails the training - most definitely there would be a 2nd Amendment challenge because the fear would be that the authorities could make the training course so difficult to pass that it would be a form of gun control. OK, I would feel better not to let a dufous out with a gun but unfortunately dufous's are not in the restricted list.

Sticky, sticky, but I do like an appropriate training plan.

.

Seldomfitforpurpose 3rd Nov 2014 21:38

Boing,


I have been participating in these threads for quite a while now so trust me I have made those suggestions previously :ok:


With regards to training at point of purchase I just naturally assumed that the salesman would have the skillsets required to handle each of the weapons he was selling.


We used to call the checks NSP's or dry drills but effectively how to correctly unload/load/make safe your weapon also how to strip for cleaning and how to clean.


As regards live firing the first time at the range should be supervised. I spent quite a bit of time with the Browning 9mm but its been over 2 years since I handled one and I know that whilst I could probably still get it right doing it supervised to start with would make sense.


I have never handled a Glock or any other similar type and I am convinced I could muddle through but getting trained on it first has got to be the way to do it.

PTT 3rd Nov 2014 22:03

BOING - You're desperately flailing at a strawman. Tell you what, instead of us arguing about it why don't we let ExXB tell us...

ExXB - did you mean rate of gun ownership or absolute number of guns?

galaxy flyer 3rd Nov 2014 22:27

SFFP,


No notice checks for correct gun storage correct useage. first, the police have better things to do than rummaging thru one-third of US households. Second, they'll need probable cause and a search warrant. Lastly, the ONLY intent is to harass the law abiding into giving up their rights--both gun rights and to be secure in their homes.

Works perfectly well over here and why would a honest gun owner require the Police to have probable cause and a warrant? If you have nothing to hide what's the problem, if you have something to hide should you own a gun?

Unless the weapon is being carried it by it's legal owner it should be mandatory for it to be unloaded and stored securely to avoid accidental injury.
Unenforceable until after the accident



Really, how's about a mandatory 10 year prison sentence and life time forfeiture of Gun Ownership rights?
First, did I miss the news that the Nazis won? Of course, the police have to have probable cause and a warrant to enter my house. They have to prove to a judge that I'm committing an illegal act for a search. Using the "nothing to hide" reasoning, maybe cops should just walk in anytime they like. If you have nothing to hide, what could possibly be wrong. Exercising my 2nd Amendment rights doesn't require I give up my 4th Amendment protections to due process.

Second, why not just hang 'em, none of this wimpy 10-year stuff. Loads of felonies here have "mandatory" sentences but somehow dire sentencing is watered down in court. Mandatory sentencing has a lot to do with the drug war and incarceration rates for blacks in the US. Its wrong.

In decades past, we had "nut houses" where insane, mentally retarded or dangerous people were committed. We gave that bit of common sense up in a fit of giving the mentally handicapped their rights. Now this people are homeless, preyed upon, commit mass murders. Maybe, we should bring the "booby hatch" as my mother, an RN, called them back in the day. Maybe, if doctors and police stand up and said this person is a danger to society we could confine them, get them real help and save some victims. The Hamilton, Lanza and most other mass murderers are often known to their families, the police, school administrators. We can take some of them out of society.

In the inner cities, the gang leaders, their murderers are also well known to police. Maybe, upon conviction, we hung them in their neighborhoods, in public, we could instill a little tough love. I'm sure would be gangbangers would be scared straight for awhile.

Brits and Euros have given up on responsible society which is based on self-government; meaning expecting people to behave civilly. You'd rather make rules and laws based on the lowest level of citizenship--the worst idiots, the insane, the outright evil defines your society., it's laws, it's moral code. I'd rather aim for people being their best and separating the evil, the stupid and insane out of society.

GF

galaxy flyer 3rd Nov 2014 22:34


but getting trained on it first has got to be the way to do it.
One would have to be an idiot of the first rank not ask for or accept some training on any unfamiliar tool or device.

GF

Lord Spandex Masher 3rd Nov 2014 22:56


Originally Posted by MagnusP (Post 8726202)
Please point out the post # where I claimed I carried my knives openly in public, as YOU now claim I did.

Err, I already did but here it is again just for you and Chips. I've highlighted the pertinent bits.


Originally Posted by MagnusP (Post 8725940)

Try carrying your knife in public...
I frequently do, if I'm asked to cook at either daughters' house. I never carried my guns in public other than in a locked gun box in the car. Guess which got banned.

Next!

Then I supplied you with the definition of "in public" which means.....openly.

Not difficult chaps.

Lord Spandex Masher 3rd Nov 2014 23:00


Originally Posted by con-pilot (Post 8726458)
LSM



Would that be as compared to 'Bad England'?

The title of the thread I was referring to is:

"Should UK Hand Gun Laws be reversed?"


Now, as for the "(Subject)" bit I posted, that was just some bait that I tossed out there just to see who would bite.

You never disappoint me LSM. :p

Did I bite? No, I made a nebulous comment about the level of English in your post.

Seldomfitforpurpose 3rd Nov 2014 23:08


Originally Posted by galaxy flyer (Post 8726767)
One would have to be an idiot of the first rank not ask for or accept some training on any unfamiliar tool or device.

GF

From some the incidents quoted guess you have quite a few idiots of the first rank owning guns :ok:

galaxy flyer 3rd Nov 2014 23:30

Never said we didn't, SFFP. I just don't think society ought to be organized by their idiocy.

GF

John Hill 3rd Nov 2014 23:48

Is this some sort of spoof?

Woman Says ‘It Was God’s Will’ That 5 Year-Old Boy Accidentally Shot 2-Year-Old Granddaughter (Video) | Americans Against the Tea Party


A responsible, gun owning Kentucky mom stepped outside, leaving her 5-year-old son alone with his new birthday present a brand new, shiny loaded .22-cal. rifle and his 2-year-old sister.
Unfortunately, mom was outside just long enough for her son to fatally shoot his sister, Caroline Sparks, with his new present.
Kentucky State Police Trooper Billy Gregory says that the shooting has been ruled an accident. Its just one of those nightmares, he said, a quick thing that happens when you turn your back.

Hempy 4th Nov 2014 00:11

No, that is Darwin at work.

Pappa Smurf 4th Nov 2014 00:14

When I was 5 we used to play with plastic guns.

galaxy flyer 4th Nov 2014 00:16

SFFP,
And, this would be one idiot.

GF

Dushan 4th Nov 2014 00:18

No spoof, just old news.

John Hill 4th Nov 2014 00:20


Originally Posted by Hempy
No, that is Darwin at work.

Not Darwin, he shot his sister not his mother.

Dushan 4th Nov 2014 00:20


Originally Posted by Pappa Smurf (Post 8726873)
When I was 5 we used to play with plastic guns.

When I was 5, plastic wasn't invented yet. My guns were white metal with paper strip "caps".

con-pilot 4th Nov 2014 01:17


Did I bite? No, I made a nebulous comment about the level of English in your post.
Ah, right then, in an attempt to criticize my English as being a bit hazy, you post:

"BAD ENGLAND" :=

I shall notify Oxford and Cambridge of their mistake immediately.


Damn, you’re one funny dude LSM. :D

BOING 4th Nov 2014 02:13

PTT
Sorry I had work to do.
I only understand what the words themselves say and the words were simple and quite plain and understandable.

Now, if you think I should be able to guess what ExxBs meant when his words actually said something different then we should be on a mental telepathy forum.


Too many guns, too many gun deaths
Post 917.

The "too many gun deaths" is obvious but the "too many guns" is not, it implies that the too many deaths were due to too many guns which is not correct. Presumably the too many deaths were due to exactly the same number of guns while all of the other guns in the society were innocent, you can't relate number of gun deaths to the number of guns in a society, only the number of misused guns which is going to be pretty much the same as the number of shooters.

.

BOING 4th Nov 2014 02:48


Boing,


I have been participating in these threads for quite a while now so trust me I have made those suggestions previously


With regards to training at point of purchase I just naturally assumed that the salesman would have the skillsets required to handle each of the weapons he was selling.


We used to call the checks NSP's or dry drills but effectively how to correctly unload/load/make safe your weapon also how to strip for cleaning and how to clean.


As regards live firing the first time at the range should be supervised. I spent quite a bit of time with the Browning 9mm but its been over 2 years since I handled one and I know that whilst I could probably still get it right doing it supervised to start with would make sense.


I have never handled a Glock or any other similar type and I am convinced I could muddle through but getting trained on it first has got to be the way to do it.
Can't find a collected post of your suggestions, please provide a post number.

As you know, just because a guy can sell something does not mean he can use it and service it. Actually, and I think the other US participants will agree with me, a gun salesmen (unless he owns the shop) is the last person I would trust to provide advice on firearms. To put it mildly they all seem to think they are some sort of passed over Special Forces operative.:)

If somebody can be bothered to ask for help at a decent gun range there is likely to be an old member or member of the staff who will be delighted to discuss safety, maintenance and will probably supervise the first firing sessions. In many cases the new shooter will bring a more experienced friend with him. The advantage of a deep gun culture is that there a great many experienced people that know exactly what they are talking about. The dangerous people are the ones that watch two episodes of an FBI documentary and then think that is all they need to know. These are the accidental killers not the murderers.

Don't feel bad about being rusty. With my own continuing training and keeping the company people qualified to carry firearms trained I probably get through about 1,000 rounds a month since I am so busy with other stuff. I still get handed odd guns where I have to scratch my head to work out how to take them apart.

I liked the Browning but it was a bad fit in my chubby hands. I'm biased of course but I reckon the Glocks should be melted down to use as plastic dustbins (my old buddy calls them Tupperware guns). Berettas and Sigs are pretty good and the Sig P230 is a great compact carry gun.

Most of our work now is semi-automatic carbines, we do not touch many handguns apart from continuing qualification.


.

PTT 4th Nov 2014 07:05

BOING - I'm not guessing, I quoted him directly from post 947.
Switzerland has the highest rate of gun ownership in Europe, we also have the highest rate of gun deaths in Europe.

The US has the highest rate of gun ownership in the 'west'. It also has the highest rate of gun death in the 'west'.
You've quoted him and I've quoted him, so if we are uncertain of his actual meaning then we should get clarification rather than arguing over an assumed intent. I await ExXB's clarification on the matter.

MagnusP 4th Nov 2014 07:54

LSM, while wriggling can be amusing to watch, I suspect that you're embarrassing yourself. Since when did "openly" equate to "in public"? I carry my knives openly in private. I still carry my knives in public, albeit in a knife roll. You may wish to look at the definition in the Acts of what "in public" means. You may also wish to revisit the post where I claimed that I carried my knives "openly" in public, as you keep implying; not your definition of equivalence; please quote where I said it.

Lord Spandex Masher 4th Nov 2014 09:04

Magnus, you're being disingenuous again. I told you to try carrying your knife in public, you said you frequently do. I won't bother quoting them for a third time for you.

I will post the definition of "in public" for you again, it's even got some synonyms to make it easier for you, there's even an antonym.


in public
phrase of public
1.
in view of other people; when others are present.
"men don't cry in public"
synonyms: publicly, in full view of people/the public, openly, in the open, for all to see, undisguisedly, blatantly, flagrantly, brazenly, with no attempt at concealment, overtly, boldly, audaciously, unashamedly, shamelessly, unabashed, wantonly, immodestly; coram populo
antonyms: secretly
So, as you can see openly does in fact equate to in public. Which is not what you actually do despite claiming so.

There's nothing embarrassing about using English correctly but I'm happy to watch you make a mug of yourself.

Lord Spandex Masher 4th Nov 2014 09:05


Originally Posted by con-pilot (Post 8726914)
Ah, right then, in an attempt to criticize my English as being a bit hazy, you post:

"BAD ENGLAND" :=

I shall notify Oxford and Cambridge of their mistake immediately.

Damn, youre one funny dude LSM. :D

I actually said "Good England". It was a sarcastic attempt to let you know I couldn't understand what you said. Don't be too serious dude.

MagnusP 4th Nov 2014 09:53

Oh, dear, Spandex. Please go away and learn the difference between (uncited) dictionary definitions and legal definitions. Walking up the road to my daughter's is in public. Even within her building, in the common stairwell, it is by law in public. Ergo, I carry my knives in public, which is what I asserted earlier. You may wriggle all you wish.

Lord Spandex Masher 4th Nov 2014 10:18

Magnus, no, you are not obviously carrying knives, you are carrying a bit of cloth or leather possibly with a handle.

Tell you what, why not carry your knives by the handle and walk to your daughters next time? Do let us know how you get on.

MagnusP 4th Nov 2014 10:57

More creaking of goalposts, I see.

In the eyes of the law, I carry my knives in public with reasonable excuse, as confirmed yesterday by a senior judge. I wouldn't carry them unsheathed as, apart from anything else, it puts the edges at risk. No more would I walk around with my 5" sheath knife on my belt as, sheathed or not, I would not have a reasonable excuse for doing so.

Openly and obviously are the words you've crept in to the discussion. I stick with in public, and that has been confirmed as correct by someone more knowledgeable than you in matters of the law.

Lord Spandex Masher 4th Nov 2014 11:06

What goal posts are you referring to?

Apparently using descriptors is now akin to losing an argument, poor effort chap. Stick with in public, openly, undisguisedly even though that's not what you're doing.

Ignore ruining the blade, that's just an excuse to discount or ignore the point. What are the other reasons you would not carry a knife openly instead of in a knife roll?

MagnusP 4th Nov 2014 11:26

I simply wouldn't carry an expensive knife in public (remember; in the eyes of the law) unless the blade was protected. Why would I do otherwise?

Face it, you're WRONG. I carry, with reasonable excuse, my knives in public. Confirmed. In law. All I claimed. Trying to twist the debate to "uncovered", "obviously" and "openly" has buggerall to do with my proven-correct statement; that's moving the goalposts, and I wonder what you used to cut them down.

Your example of McKenzie was also a poor one. His axe was in the door pocket of his car. Hardly "obvious" or "open", is it?

Lord Spandex Masher 4th Nov 2014 11:34

Still attempting to ignore the question.


Why would I do otherwise?
Why wouldn't you, you have a reasonable excuse don't you? You did state "apart from anything else" so what are the other reasons apart from damaging the blade?

I'm not trying to twist anything Magnus, it is the definition of "in public" which is different to "a public place", examples of which you gave earlier. I understand it may be confusing but it isn't that hard to comprehend. Why don't you take a minute.

My example of Mckenzie was to indicate that what you might think is a reasonable excuse, as he did, might not be realistic.

MagnusP 4th Nov 2014 12:49

The question has **** all to do with your earlier suggestion "Try carrying your knife in public . . .", to which I responded "I frequently do". As you've been told repeatedly, my response was absolutely correct in fact and in law, and I have reasonable excuse to do so.

Your wriggling, obfuscation and introduction of terms which played no part in your initial suggestion don't change that fact that I answered correctly. You don't like it? Tough.

Enjoy your wriggling; I have drying paint to watch.

Lord Spandex Masher 4th Nov 2014 13:02

Introduction of terms?! You mean words synonymous with "in public"? Yes I can see how using English correctly is confusing.

In what way does asking you why you won't carry a knife, not just an expensive one either, unsheathed in public have nothing to do wiiiiiiith....carrying your knives in public? Even though you claim to be correct you won't answer a question which would seem to back up your assertions. Wow.

Or are you just saying they're not related so you can avoid answering....

Dushan 4th Nov 2014 13:06

Guys, all I can say it is absolutely incredible that your country has come to the point where carrying a kitchen knife (in the open, in public, on your person, covered, uncovered, whatever, etc. etc.) requires "a reasonable excuse" and that you can be arrested, charged, and convicted if you don't have a "reasonable excuse". Who the hell decides what is "reasonable"?

In other words you are guilty until you prove yourselves innocent.

What happened?

galaxy flyer 4th Nov 2014 14:11

Dushan,

In the UK and Europe, there's a base assumption that citizens are dangerous, to themselves and others. It is government's job to watch them every moment for dangerous behavior. Cameras everywhere, automated speeds monitoring, bans of anything remotely scary. They live in a Nanny Land of oatmeal and plastic sporkes.

GF

MagnusP 4th Nov 2014 14:17

LSM, I have told you twice and quite unequivocally why I don't carry unprotected chef's knives in public. It's for the protection of the knife, not of the public. Don't like the answer? Your problem. Grow up and get over it.

BenThere 4th Nov 2014 15:17

And if our do-gooders had their way, all in the interest of preventing needless deaths, we would soon have bans or draconian controls on alcohol, tobacco, gasoline, and later, bacon, sugar and butter. All in the interest of public safety, health, and good living.

It never stops.

BOING 4th Nov 2014 15:26

It is pretty amazing really.

The land of Kings and conquerors, stories of King Arthur, Henry Vth, the Few, real blood spilled against everyone from the Romans through the French to the Afghanis and now what do we see - arguments over carrying kitchen knives.

What a poor castrated country my England has become. Tear down all the statues of heroes, remove all the stained glass memorial windows from your churches and cathedrals, cover the tombs and plaques in Westminster Abbey, you do not deserve them and the people who lived the times would hang their heads in shame. Economic fortunes change and counties must adapt to it but when the country loses its soul it is the end and the people of England have given up their soul to buy a fig-leaf of security.


.

PTT 4th Nov 2014 15:27


It never stops.
There's that slippery slope again...

Here's another one: if these people who want the government to have nothing to do with them had their way then they'd soon be over-run by marauding biker gangs and living in a Mad Max dystopic world.

It's bullsh!t: it's not what you're saying and is a highly unlikely outcome. How about sticking to the argument being made rather than using a slippery slope to make strawmen?

BenThere 4th Nov 2014 15:31

Highly unlikely outcome? Then why are the prices you pay for alcohol, tobacco and gasoline roughly 75% composed of taxes?

Lord Spandex Masher 4th Nov 2014 16:36


Originally Posted by MagnusP (Post 8727656)
LSM, I have told you twice and quite unequivocally why I don't carry unprotected chef's knives in public. It's for the protection of the knife, not of the public. Don't like the answer? Your problem. Grow up and get over it.

No, you didn't. Unequivocally means in an unambiguous manner, or not open to interpretation - there's that correct use of English again.

You stated that

Originally Posted by MagnusP
apart from anything else, it puts the edges at risk

You've given me one reason, which I accept so it's not a case of not liking the answer - what are the anything else's?


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:35.


Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.