Jim Jeffries has got it about right. And very funny.
Bollox, doesn't want to play
I read the news today oh boy! Page 2,403
Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 22nd May 2022, 10:26 AMJim Jeffries has got it about right. And very funny.
There's a Part Two to this as well.
Absolutely brilliant.
And bang on.
Bradford man leaves wife and kids to start new life with their Ukrainian refugee just ten days after arriving. Is that you Stephen? His wife told her to leave, so she left with her husband. Ha ha! ?
Just cos I'm now living in a love nest in Totnes High street, don't make assumptions.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 22nd May 2022, 9:38 AMWe all get that, responsible gun owners aren't the problem, but what that question avoids is the legal purchases of guns, especially the ridiculously high powered assault rifles to people who turn out NOT to be responsible.
And the question that nearly everyone avoids is how to prevent the law-abiding owners from being persecuted and prosecuted in the futile attempt to prevent homicidal and often suicidal individuals from buying guns. Until we have a functional crystal ball, there's only one solution that has been presented time and time again: confiscate the law-abiding owners' guns ("buying them back" with their own tax dollars, of course) and arrest them if they fail to do so while letting the criminals - who by their very name and nature refuse to follow laws - armed and dangerous as ever.
Please, if you take nothing else away from this essentially useless debate, understand that so-called "assault rifles" are not ridiculously high-powered. That's just a term that's been thrown out as a scare tactic. Rifles are more powerful than pistols, but the standard .223 round fired by the typical AR-15 isn't especially powerful. My hunting rifle is much more powerful, and many states won't allow the use of AR-15s and the rounds they fire to be used for hunting, because they lack the power to reliably take down deer, etc.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 22nd May 2022, 9:38 AMTaking the line the insane gun industry does, the more gun murders there are, the more guns we need to sell to the public as self protection. To everyone outside of America, and I think many inside now, this is the definition of insanity.
One man's definition of insanity is another well-prepared man's reasonable self-defense, I guess. Please note that with all the political clamor about gun control and mass shootings, gun sales have been increasing at a tremendous rate. It's not about marketing, it's about "I'd better buy a gun or two before the government tries to ban them and leave me outgunned by the bad guys (and the government)." Women, minorities, and Democrats are snatching up firearms at record rates.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ 22nd May 2022, 9:38 AMBurglaries, muggings, insecure gun safes that allow your kids to take your gun, and simply losing or misplacing a gun. These have all been proved to contribute to the circulation of guns in undesirables' hands.
So we should somehow blame (and punish?) people for being the victim of crimes? That's not how the criminal justice system is supposed to work. Punish the bad guys, and support the good guys. Of course, it happens in very rare circumstances, but very few gun owners are likely to lose their $1000 firearm.
That video really is brilliant https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rR9IaXH1M0&t=8s it really destroys most of the pr-gun arguements.
" Of course, it happens in very rare circumstances, but very few gun owners are likely to lose their $1000 firearm. "
Yup as far as Dabutt is concerned 492 killings of innocents, per year, is not a serious problem!
As I said earlier, but it got ignored, possibly because it was at the bottom of a page.
Quote: billwill @ 19th May 2022, 1:34 PMI notice that the number of children & parents killed by accident, by children playing with a loaded gun has been missed out above.
492 people unintentionally die by gun in an average year.
https://www.google.com/search?q=USA+children+killed+by+loaded+gun
Quote: billwill @ 22nd May 2022, 3:44 PMThat video really is brilliant https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rR9IaXH1M0&t=8s it really destroys most of the pr-gun arguements.
I was hoping for something reasoned and substantial, but that appears to be the same comedy video that others have already posted. Sorry, but I don't look to Australian comedians for advice on a serious subject like gun control. The United States and Australia couldn't possibly be more dissimilar: we have a population almost 15 times as large, we have a gang population at least that many times as large, and we have tens of millions of firearms in the hands of criminals, not to mention that pesky Constitution thing.
The video must be very old, because while the comedian asserts that they haven't had a mass shooting since they essentially removed guns from the law-abiding population, that no longer holds true - they've had several. Case closed.
Quote: billwill @ 22nd May 2022, 3:44 PMYup as far as Dabutt is concerned 492 killings of innocents, per year, is not a serious problem!
I never said that, but now take a look at the number of children killed by drug overdoses - it exceeds that number. Why focus on guns? The answer is that a portion of the government would like to permanently disarm citizens. Why? They stand in the way of even more abuses of the constitution.
Part of the 10% that are fuming.
Do you realise how ridiculous it is to say that one process of killing innocents doesn't matter because another careless process has a higher death rate?
~~~~
"Why focus on guns?"
Because focusing on one part of the problem at a time is the answer. there is no magic cure that will fix the whole problem in one fell swoop, Focus on one part of the problem at a time and fix that. Then go on to the next part.
Same as "How do you eat an elephant?" ... One bite at a time.
~~~ Personally I have no problem with USA citizens owning guns, provided that they CAN ONLY be used for the purpose for which they were sold. Which it usually either
target prowess or (b) hunting or (c) self defence.
Being the son of a British Army Officer, we have often had guns and ammunition kept in our house, without problems.
I don't understand the objections to making guns which can only be fired by the owner (or registered friends/family). If such guns became the norm, this would eliminate or drastically diminish the number of cases of accidental death by guns. I've voiced that before and your reply was that you didn't want the risk of failure to fire at a critical defense moment. I recognise that fingerprint identification is too unreliable for this function but the gun-loving clamour seems to have effectively closed development of more reliable methods. Personally I would favour the insertion of a 'recognised-user' chip under the skin of the forearm of persons permitted to use a particular weapon. The procedure is safe, has been used on millions of pets and some humans and potential owners not willing to undergo such a minor operation shouldn't be allowed to buy the gun.
The 'risk of failure' to fire (primarily, i would guess, for the case when an intruder enters your home illegally) would be far less than the risk of being unable to get the gun out of the gun-safe in time to be used (which I believe is the USA's current requirement), A gun with inbuilt recognised-user trigger-control could be exempt from the requirement to keep it in a locked gun-safe. Modern electronics are reliable enough to be used for mobile phones, cash payments, travel tickets and Mars rovers (which roam around Mars for months on end without human intervention) so creating reliable electronic trigger control would not really be a problem if it was allowed to proceed.
Quote: DaButt @ 22nd May 2022, 11:47 PMI never said that, but now take a look at the number of children killed by drug overdoses - it exceeds that number. Why focus on guns?
I think if you could buy crack at Walmart the focus might shift somewhat.
Quote: billwill @ 23rd May 2022, 2:39 PMDo you realise how ridiculous it is to say that one process of killing innocents doesn't matter because another careless process has a higher death rate?
Again you try to put words in my mouth that I never said.
Quote: billwill @ 23rd May 2022, 2:39 PMBecause focusing on one part of the problem at a time is the answer. there is no magic cure that will fix the whole problem in one fell swoop, Focus on one part of the problem at a time and fix that. Then go on to the next part.
Same as "How do you eat an elephant?" ... One bite at a time.
Ok. Since we're talking about elephants, let's tackle the elephant in the room - the only step that makes any sense is to figure out how you're going to remove tens of millions of guns from the possession of criminals who don't give a damn about laws or fines or prison sentences. All the high-tech firing mechanisms in the world won't be of any use if the people who actually commit gun crimes remain as heavily armed as ever.
Quote: billwill @ 23rd May 2022, 2:39 PMI don't understand the objections to making guns which can only be fired by the owner (or registered friends/family). If such guns became the norm, this would eliminate or drastically diminish the number of cases of accidental death by guns. I've voiced that before and your reply was that you didn't want the risk of failure to fire at a critical defense moment. I recognise that fingerprint identification is too unreliable for this function but the gun-loving clamour seems to have effectively closed development of more reliable methods.
A gun has only one purpose: to go "bang" when you pull the trigger. They're very simple mechanical devices, and reliability is paramount - that's why they remain functional for a century or more. When you're in a literal life-or-death situation, the last thing you'd want is for some piece of newfangled electronic gadgetry to prevent your weapon from firing. As a reasonably competent cybersecurity specialist and a run-of-the-mill gun owner, I can think of a lot of things that could go wrong:
1. Dead batteries at the most inopportune moment.
2. Criminals who hack a stolen gun in order to use it "illegally".
3. RF or other electromagnetic interference, to include intentional jamming.
4. Having to switch hands to the non-chipped appendage due to injury or other reason.
5. Time-consuming, expensive bureaucracy involved with every transfer of a firearm between two people after a sale.
6. The creation of a government-controlled database of guns and gun owners.
7. Hesitancy to accept a government ID chip, and the expensive legal battles that would ensue. "I shouldn't have to have surgery to exercise my constitutional rights."
Quote: billwill @ 23rd May 2022, 2:39 PMThe 'risk of failure' to fire (primarily, i would guess, for the case when an intruder enters your home illegally) would be far less than the risk of being unable to get the gun out of the gun-safe in time to be used (which I believe is the USA's current requirement)
There is no national law governing gun storage. States and municipalities can enact their own laws, but they typically only pertain to households with children.
Quote: billwill @ 23rd May 2022, 2:39 PMModern electronics are reliable enough to be used for mobile phones, cash payments, travel tickets and Mars rovers (which roam around Mars for months on end without human intervention) so creating reliable electronic trigger control would not really be a problem if it was allowed to proceed.
The biggest obstacle in implementing electronic controls on firearms is that the number of gun owners who would want them would be very small, but don't overestimate the reliability of electronics and software. In response to the items you mentioned:
1. Mobile phones - I've dropped a phone and broken it. I've also experienced a lack of signal when I urgently needed it.
2. Cash payments - banks and credit card companies are hit with billions of dollars in fraudulent charges yearly.
3. Travel tickets - on my most recent flight two passengers were assigned to the same seat.
4. Mars rovers - I worked with NASA, military, and commercial spacecraft for nearly twenty years, and show-stopping problems were commonplace. Teams of brilliant engineers pored over every software and hardware anomaly, it wasn't a fire-and-forget process.
Quote: Lazzard @ 23rd May 2022, 2:44 PMI think if you could buy crack at Walmart the focus might shift somewhat.
Walmart is just a bit player in the gun sale business these days. They only sell firearms in about half of their stores, they don't sell handguns or "assault" rifles, and I don't think they sell ammo for AR-15s anymore. Most gun sales these days take place at sporting goods stores and online.
When I was a kid they sold rifles and pistols at the local hardware store. Different era.
Your fervency to defend gun rights leads me to think you are a member of the NRA.
With the same thousand excuses to keep everyone armed, they use.
Aren't they funded in the main by gun manufacturers and have the power to block anyone or anything that opposes gun disarmament.
Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 24th May 2022, 8:07 AMYour fervency to defend gun rights leads me to think you are a member of the NRA.
You're incorrect. I am not a member. My thoughts are my own, but they are essentially common sense and simple facts, so of course, there will be some commonality with the NRA's stance.
Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 24th May 2022, 8:07 AMAren't they funded in the main by gun manufacturers and have the power to block anyone or anything that opposes gun disarmament.
That is also incorrect. They are funded primarily by individuals. Their power lies in the hands of the electorate - Americans support gun ownership. We vote for politicians who support our views, and it's political suicide to support more gun control in many parts of the country, and total disarmament would go down like a lead balloon in the country as a whole.
I see that party De Piffel was at turns out not to be a party . How pig thick and totally gullible would have to be to continue to support this chancer and his sycophants? He has made a total f**king mockery of the idiots that defended him and left them in the same state Farage did. Up shit creek without a paddle.
Why do people feel need to follow people like this? Is it a lack of basic intelligence , hatred ,or both?
I feel sorry for those poor f**kers who have to be wheeled out to lie on his behalf.
I wonder if that's what they went into politics for?