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)

Keef 20th Nov 2014 23:40


Originally Posted by Dushan (Post 8751139)
Yet everyone only concentrates on the evil gun. :ugh:

When it's pointed at you, you do tend to.

Dushan 20th Nov 2014 23:45

You should be concentrating on the assailant's center of mass.

con-pilot 21st Nov 2014 00:00


You should be concentrating on the assailant's center of mass.
Works very well with a 12 gauge shotgun* loaded with .00 buck. :E



* One with the barrel shorten to its legal limit of course.

bcgallacher 21st Nov 2014 01:10

Flash - it is not the passing of laws that makes the difference,it is the enforcement. I have a second home in the Philippines,the lawmakers pass laws at an incredible rate,in spite of that corruption goes from top to bottom on an enormous scale.In 1996 a nightclub fire killed 162 people - this week a verdict was reached in the trial after 18 years.There is a massacre trial in progress at this time - at the rate witnesses are being deposed the trial will take 21 years. It seems to be the case that wherever the Spaniards colonised they left behind a culture of graft and corruption.

Seldomfitforpurpose 21st Nov 2014 08:46


Originally Posted by Dushan (Post 8751139)
Yes, exactly, my point. Yet everyone only concentrates on the evil gun. :ugh:

I genuinely believe that because every civilised western society has problems with crime, whether that be alcohol induced fighting, knife crime, domestic or social violence but only one civilised western society has a level of gun crime like yours somthe gun gets obviously gets centre stage.

It's inevitable that people from without AND within would look at that and wonder why and how to find a way to fix it.

There's no point scoring with the above its just how it is.

ricardian 21st Nov 2014 10:52

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.n...db645763ef0266

bcgallacher 21st Nov 2014 12:14

SFP - A rare post of realistic common sense - not a lot of it around on the subject.

Krystal n chips 16th Dec 2014 06:40

Just another day then.....

BBC News - Pennsylvania shootings: Six dead, gunman on the run

Now who could possibly even think about suggesting a gun was to blame....

obgraham 16th Dec 2014 07:32

What, did the gun go off by itself?

Seldomfitforpurpose 16th Dec 2014 07:43

This will be interesting

BBC News - Sandy Hook victims' families file lawsuit against gun maker

not great advertising for the firm in question.

rh200 16th Dec 2014 07:48


This will be interesting
Yes it will from a philosophical viewpoint.

Do you open up the principle that anyone can sue a manufacture because their product is used illegally, even though the manufacture is doing something perfectly legal.

Where does it stop?

Pinky the pilot 16th Dec 2014 09:22


Do you open up the principle that anyone can sue a manufacture because their product is used illegally, even though the manufacture is doing something perfectly legal.
What this suggests to me is that there is a Lawyer (or Lawyers) who have decided that their BMWs/Mustangs/Corvettes/Houses/Swimming Pools/whatever, need upgrading/replacing/repair/whatever.:rolleyes::ugh:

Cynical? Moi??:eek:


Where does it stop?
Your guess is as good as mine!

Seldomfitforpurpose 16th Dec 2014 10:30


Originally Posted by rh200 (Post 8784824)
Yes it will from a philosophical viewpoint.

Do you open up the principle that anyone can sue a manufacture because their product is used illegally, even though the manufacture is doing something perfectly legal.

Where does it stop?

The thing is if you are one of the parents of those killed at Sandy Hook and to date there seems to be no 'apparent' moves from the Gun Lobby to address the situation what would you do?

I suspect the case is doomed to failure but maybe some other good may come of it.

rh200 16th Dec 2014 11:02


The thing is if you are one of the parents of those killed at Sandy Hook and to date there seems to be no 'apparent' moves from the Gun Lobby to address the situation what would you do?
The gun lobby doesn't have to do anything about it, one side of politics thinks its a gun problem, the other side a social issue.

I am generally in the camp where its a convolution of both. As such I would say maybe they should look at the phenomena where people these days, including children teen agers think that topping one self is great, and worse going out in some crazed way topping f%^ knows who else takes your fancy as well.

That said, Sandy hooks perpetrator was a bit shall we say "special", so in that case I'm sort of thinking maybe his access to firearms was not such a good thing.

Seldomfitforpurpose 16th Dec 2014 11:49


Originally Posted by rh200 (Post 8785025)
That said, Sandy hooks perpetrator was a bit shall we say "special", so in that case I'm sort of thinking maybe his access to firearms was not such a good thing.

The exact point I have tried to make on several occasions but because of the 2nd you can't stop Mrs Lanza having her arsenal hence no way to stop Adam eventually getting hold of them and killing as he did.

From the outside looking in no right minded person would think a house full of guns with someone like Adam at home was a good idea or training him to use them but how do you stop it? How many other homes across the U.S. are the same? How do you counter that?

The 2nd, it's interpretation and the stalwart defence of that mean that stopping future 'Mrs Lanza's' from owning guns is impossible so unless the solution is to simply lock up in a mental institution future 'Adam's' what progress has been made?

Mr Chips 16th Dec 2014 12:00

Who or what could have prevented Mrs Lanza from having those guns, and thus her disturbed son accessing them?

Mrs Lanza.

Seldomfitforpurpose 16th Dec 2014 12:08


Originally Posted by Mr Chips (Post 8785099)
Who or what could have prevented Mrs Lanza from having those guns, and thus her disturbed son accessing them?

Mrs Lanza.

Apart from the application of common sense what regulations are in place to prevent Adam getting her guns? Or is the presumption of individual common sense all that is required?

Didn't seem to work in this case?

Mr Chips 16th Dec 2014 12:28

That's the exact point Seldom. It can't always be down to laws and regulations. Mrs Lanza should have applied common sense, Mrs Lanza chose to have weapons in the same house as her disturbed son.

Mrs Lanza could have and should have prevented this. Nobody else.

rh200 16th Dec 2014 12:32


The exact point I have tried to make on several occasions but because of the 2nd you can't stop Mrs Lanza having her arsenal hence no way to stop Adam eventually getting hold of them and killing as he did.

From the outside looking in no right minded person would think a house full of guns with someone like Adam at home was a good idea or training him to use them but how do you stop it? How many other homes across the U.S. are the same? How do you counter that?
A mothers love has almost no bounds. We have moved on since the old days of just giving up on "special" people and try and make there lives as normal as possible in an attempt to help. I'm not aware of his exact circumstances and history, hence cannot give an outright opinion on the matter.

It is very common for people who where bought up in circumstances such as I to have correct respect for people and weapons drilled into us. A very normal right of passage, and for the vast majority of people there is no gung ho, and if you showed such you would very soon be taught the error of your ways, for it.

There are many things Mrs Lanza could have down to lesson the probability of what occurred, occurring, but it really comes down to an evaluation of his mental condition. Though my natural instinct is for the knee jerk reaction that she shouldn't have any weapons, its very easy in hindsight.

Boudreaux Bob 16th Dec 2014 12:47


The exact point I have tried to make on several occasions but because of the 2nd you can't stop Mrs Lanza having her arsenal hence no way to stop Adam eventually getting hold of them and killing as he did.
You confuse your arguments here.

The 2nd Amendment Rights to own firearms by the Mother does not convey access to those Firearms by the Son. It only refers to Mom being able to buy, own, and possess those firearms.

The Son also has the same 2nd Amendment Rights to buy, own, and possess HIS Firearms.

Federal and State Law determines if you may buy, own, or possess any Firearm. There are certain classes of people who are barred by Law from buying, owning, or possessing Firearms.

The Son was one of those folks that should never had a Firearm....in any way, shape, fashion, or form.

More importantly, plain old commonsense tells you that you do not let a Mentally Disturbed person ever get access to any Firearm YOU own or possess.

Mom is the individual that directly responsible for Junior having access to her firearms. She paid the price for that and sadly so did a lot of innocent people.

Had the System worked and Mom not failed in her duty then all this probably would not have happened.

Example.....I have guns.

I have them locked away in a Gun Vault.

I alone have the Combination to the Vault.

The Combination is locked away in a Bank Safety Deposit Box.

Only the Executor of my Will who has my Power Attorney that only kicks in upon my Death....can get access to the Combination.

As long as I keep the Vault Door locked unless I am needing access to it then no one can gain access to my guns.

I suppose they could break into the house, having disarmed the Security system, removed the Computer Hard drive the Security cameras record to, find a way to unbolt the Vault from the concrete floor, move the 2,000 pound Safe outside the house and load it onto a Truck then take the Safe somewhere and cut open the Door (without damaging the Guns and Ammunition inside the Safe of course) and then run off and use the guns in a crime somewhere.

Point of all this....is there are millions of responsible gun owners and enacting laws that punish the innocent will not stop the those who are irresponsible from causing these kinds of events.

That is why we enjoy having our 2nd Amendment Rights as they safeguard us from those who act from emotion and not reason.

Hempy 16th Dec 2014 13:02


Originally Posted by Boudreaux Bob
I have guns.

I have them locked away in a Gun Vault.

I alone have the Combination to the Vault.

The Combination is locked away in a Bank Safety Deposit Box.

Gee Bob, I hope you have quick fingers. Would hate you to be scrambling for those guns at 3am with a bad black/muslim/leftie/welfare recipient/German tourist in the bedroom looking to slot you and your family!! What are you going to do, ask him to give you a minute or two to unlock the safe??

I think you need a new 'defence' strategy. Unless the guns aren't for 'defence' at all of course, then...good plan :ok:

rgbrock1 16th Dec 2014 13:15

So from the lawsuit filed against Bushmaster, which is of course all over the "news" here in this area, can we then surmise that had the weapon been a baseball bat then a lawsuit would have been filed against Louisville Slugger?

rgbrock1 16th Dec 2014 13:21

sffp wrote:


The exact point I have tried to make on several occasions but because of the 2nd you can't stop Mrs Lanza having her arsenal hence no way to stop Adam eventually getting hold of them and killing as he did.
Good points you make there. But the answer lies in responsibility. Social responsibility and responsibility for self. Mrs. Lanza was just as guilty of shooting those kids, and teachers, as her son himself. Just as guilty.
As are some of her neighbors, family and friends who were well aware of Adam Lanza's mental condition and the fact that she had a small arsenal of firearms at hand. But knowing all that, no one bothered to step forward and speak out. No one. Not his father, not anyone. Had anyone bothered to have a sense of responsibility, including Mrs. Lanza, then this might not have happened.

Boudreaux Bob 16th Dec 2014 13:28

Hempy,

Your post doesn't deserve a response.

Well it does but the Mods would ban me.

I am going to cite Godwin's Rule and note to everyone that you violated that the other day and the results of that are you lost the argument and are no longer credible per Godwin.

Hempy 16th Dec 2014 14:17


Originally Posted by Boudreaux Bob
Hempy,

Your post doesn't deserve a response.

Well it does but the Mods would ban me.


I figured that would be about the strength of your argument with a bit of logic thrown at you.


p.s.

Originally Posted by Boudreaux Bob
I am going to cite Godwin's Rule and note to everyone that you violated that the other day and the results of that are you lost the argument and are no longer credible per Godwin.

If you are going to throw Godwins Law about at least get your facts right. Given what you would like done with every Muslim on the planet, I said you'd fit in well with the Totenkopfverbände, who, if you may not be aware, were the SS Deaths Head battalions responsible for running the concentration camps amongst other things. The SS were not Nazis (or Hitler), they were members of the SS, although a lot of them were in fact Nazis as well as being SS. Much like the Wehrmacht ...the difference being that the Nazis were members of the NSDAP and the SS were simply a band of brainless thugs.


Originally Posted by Godwins Law
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1"

Although if the cap fits..

Seldomfitforpurpose 16th Dec 2014 16:51


Originally Posted by rgbrock1 (Post 8785199)
Had anyone bothered to have a sense of responsibility, including Mrs. Lanza, then this might not have happened.

Whilst you make a good point it seems to me that society in general understands that 'stupid' people need protecting from themselves. It's why we have legislation in all kinds of formats from driving laws to drug laws etc.

Not even the most devout defender of the 2nd can genuinely believe that the Lanza situation was good use of that amendment and simply relying on common sense when it comes to guns just does not seem that smart a thing to do. Even more so when you consider the number of deaths and injuries caused each year through accidents.

Not sure what the solution is but simply crossing your fingers and hoping no one screws up certainly isn't working so far.

con-pilot 16th Dec 2014 17:09

As for the law suit, already dead in the water because;

"The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act", passed in 2005 gives gun manufacturers and dealers broad immunity from being sued.

Don't know about baseball bats.

Boudreaux Bob 16th Dec 2014 17:18

I suppose the Wife of the Bosnian that got beat to death with hammers the other night near Ferguson could sue Stanley, Ace Hardware, and the Kid's Parents if one uses the same logic as SFFP put forth.

It would seem showing the linkage between the manufacture, sale, and failure to control a Child's access to a deadly weapon would be just as difficult for either the hammers or the Rifle.

Both devices were used illegally and in violation of Criminal Law and Administrative Rules pertaining to Health and Safety. So why should the manufacturer and Retail Store that sold them be considered in any way connected to the Criminal Offense or Civil Tort if they complied with all pertinent Laws and Regulations?

If you go down the Pub and drink a dozen Pints of Ale, climb into your car and drive over a Pedestrian on your way home.....does the Car maker and Sales Dealership have any connection to the Pedestrian getting killed?

The Driver, Owner of the Car, and the Publican serving up the Ale might but not the Car Dealer and Car Maker.

obgraham 16th Dec 2014 17:24

This is America, folks. As an attorney once explained to me:

Anyone can sue anyone here for anything they like.

Collecting is an entirely different matter.

Seldomfitforpurpose 16th Dec 2014 19:46


Originally Posted by Boudreaux Bob (Post 8785512)
if one uses the same logic as SFFP put forth.

Not sure if I put any logic forth, just the suggestion that if you were a parent of one of the victims you might think this course of action, almost Vtails doomed to failure, worthwhile to highlight the 'apparent' inaction post the tragedy..............

Lonewolf_50 16th Dec 2014 19:53


Originally Posted by Seldomfitforpurpose (Post 8785747)
Not sure if I put any logic forth

Neither you nor Hempy have yet done so on this topic. :p

As we near Christmas, I find that the one gift that never stops giving is the gift of whinging provided by the anti-gunners.

Fill your own stockings, thanks.

Seldomfitforpurpose 16th Dec 2014 19:59


Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50 (Post 8785754)
anti-gunners.

Moi........never have been antigun but if you think I have please feel free to provide examples old bean :p

Seldomfitforpurpose 16th Dec 2014 22:26

Another court case


BBC News - Family of Ohio Walmart shooting victim sues store

galaxy flyer 16th Dec 2014 23:26


Whilst you make a good point it seems to me that society in general understands that 'stupid' people need protecting from themselves. It's why we have legislation in all kinds of formats from driving laws to drug laws etc.
SFFP,

And it is the over criminalization of America in a futile attempt to "protect stupid people" from themselves that results in the US's high incarceration rate. You can't fix stupid, except by learning them a lesson. Drug laws, the "war on drugs", which is a "war on drug users" are the primary cause of US violence rates, incarceration rates and hideously high rate of turning human potential into dross.

GF

con-pilot 17th Dec 2014 01:38


Drug laws, the "war on drugs", which is a "war on drug users" are the primary cause of US violence rates, incarceration rates and hideously high rate of turning human potential into dross.
Yep, and those laws have to be changed. And I'll vote for any politician that wants to get rid of those laws.

Boudreaux Bob 17th Dec 2014 03:27

I wonder why there has been no outcry from the Gun Banners for the Taliban and Pakistani's to ban guns in Pakistan and Afghanistan in wake of the School Shootings that killed way over a hundred children?

After all, the Taliban used Assault Rifles in the massacre!

Why is it the Gun Banners only go after American Gun Owners when these things happen? I don't recall a single Peep out of any of them over the thing in Oz either re banning Shotguns. Even though Oz did the Gun Turn-In deal that was supposed to end gun violence.

bcgallacher 17th Dec 2014 08:24

BB - you are getting a little desperate when you start comparing the U.S. with Afghanistan,it is not quite that bad yet. As far as Australian gun control is concerned the purpose was never to end gun crime - as with UK gun control laws the purpose was to minimise gun crime. It is infantile to suggest that controls have failed because there are still crimes being committed with guns.
Gun controls in the UK as I have posted before means that a citizen of the UK is about 100 times less likely to be shot dead than a citizen of the USA. We have only had one school shooting in my lifetime as opposed to about one a month in the USA. Your country is in the unfortunate position of being too late for any kind of effective gun controls so you will continue to shoot yourselves and each other dead in industrial numbers.

Boudreaux Bob 17th Dec 2014 13:16

Yet you lot went Ape Shit over Sandy Hook but not a peep about the School Shooting in Pakistan.....why no outrage expressed. Ten times the casualties and at least one Female burned to death in front of her Students but no outrage expressed or call for the Taliban to be prosecuted for crimes, no demand the Taliban be disarmed, nothing. I just find that to be both very odd and very telling of those who so freely criticize Americans about our gun culture.

How do you explain the difference in reaction to the Sandy Hook and Pakistan School events?

rgbrock1 17th Dec 2014 13:20

Bob wrote:


How do you explain the difference in reaction to the Sandy Hook and Pakistan School events?
The silence is deafening Bob. It really is.

Hempy 17th Dec 2014 13:47

You do realise that Pakistan is a shlthole 3rd world country entrenched with sectarian violence and political instability don't you? Are you seriously comparing the USA with Pakistan when it comes to politico-social issues?

If so, ok :ok: I didn't realise you'd sunk to their level, but you'd know better than us foreigners.


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:23.


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