Per capita leads to dodgy statistics. The Vatican is the crime capital of Europe per capita.
I read the news today oh boy! Page 1,966
Quote: Paul Wimsett @ 26th November 2017, 6:53 PMPer capita leads to dodgy statistics. The Vatican is the crime capital of Europe per capita.
True, if you're talking about a small sample size, but there are 325 million Americans and about the same number of guns, so it's really a non-issue in this discussion.
Only statistics that suit will be mentioned.
I gave up after it was explained that the Vegas shooter could have shot more had he aimed with a scope.
The wall of excuses and vicarious pleasure from describing how more people could be shot dead is enough for me.
Quote: DaButt @ 26th November 2017, 5:19 PMI think the glorification of which you speak exists mainly in the imaginations of people who hate guns and/or can't understand any of the valid reasons people have for owning firearms.
No it doesn't. It exists in people like you, who bemoan the sight of an empty gun safe, who think a gun is a great gift idea, who post that guns are fun in the aftermath of a massacre. There's your problem. You value your "right" to own firearms more than you value human life.
Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 26th November 2017, 7:18 PMI gave up after it was explained that the Vegas shooter could have shot more had he aimed with a scope.
You'll note that my response was in direct reply to a post by another BCG member, was 100% factual, and was prefaced by an apology for clinically/scientifically analyzing a tragedy in its immediate aftermath.
Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 26th November 2017, 7:18 PMThe wall of excuses and vicarious pleasure from describing how more people could be shot dead is enough for me.
My 'excuses' are actually factual rebuttals, and describing my responses as 'vicarious pleasure from describing how more people could be shot dead' shows just how far removed from reality your views are.
Quote: Kenneth @ 26th November 2017, 11:22 PMYou value your "right" to own firearms more than you value human life.
No, you clearly have no understanding of the situation, but there are many American criminals who value our valuables more than they value our lives. I'm thankful that the Constitution gives us the right to arm ourselves against them, so remove your scare quotes from the word 'right.'
Quote: DaButt @ 27th November 2017, 12:52 AM... so remove your scare quotes from the word 'right.'
Scare quotes? Worzel Gummidge never carried a shooter, did he?
Say, if you value human life more than the "right" to own guns, then why not start on the path to disarming the public, starting with all the bad guys? (and stop selling guns and ammo)
Since American mass shootings are no longer news, any chance of moving this discussion to it's own thread?
Yeah, then locking it. 
The suggestions above by UK residents are highly unrealistic. The UK police have not succeeded in disarming UK criminals with guns, so why expect the much bigger USA be able to do that.
This is what I said back in Jan 2016;
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Where guns are concerned the citizens of USA have a "tiger by the tail" and they can't let go.
It would be a logistical nightmare to try to ban or reduce having guns in the USA.
In the case of most countries there were not that many guns around, so banning and collecting by an amnesty was possible, so not many were left around for criminals to obtain.
But there are so many guns in the USA that vast numbers would be mislaid or deliberately hidden not surrendered, so it would indeed end up (as many law-abiding USA citizens believe) with far too many guns in the hand of criminals and insufficient lawful guns (police) to counteract them.
The original "right to bear arms" was, I understand, so that the citizens could form a militia to overturn the Government if the Goverment turned bad, but the way it has evolved is now like "holding a tiger by its tail." There is no easy solution.
As with all big problems the only way to solve them is one tiny bit at a time (like eating an elephant)
One possible solution advocated for the accidental shootings (especially by children) and theft of legal weapons, was that all new guns should be keyed such that they recognise the owner by palm-print or by a wireless dongle worn as a wristwatch or badge so that the gun would not fire if stolen or wrested from the owner. Gradually the old guns would get replaced by the 'safer' ones. Little kids would not be able to accidentally shoot friends or family.
Unfortunately in a misguided attempt to encourage manufacturers to create smart guns by 'forcing' future sales; the state of New Jersey passed a law which said that once Smart Gun Technology was proven (how proven was left vague) all new guns sold in New Jersey would have to be smart guns.
This law has drastically backfired.
The NRA (National Rifle Association) oppose these new guns as the technology is too raw (in their opinion) and they fear that the NewJersey mandate would be enacted to the detriment of gun relibility. NRA still has the fear of a bad government and want to continue to have the capability of revolt, without fearing that the government forces (police) might have the power to disable all the citizens guns by a jamming device or hidden back-door coding in the new guns.
NRA claim that they don't oppose the actual introduction of such guns only stupid mandates like the NewJersey one and in any case that the existing Smart Gun (ony one manufacturer has got into production) is too unrelibale and also appears to contain a remote wireless disable function.
NRA tested the Armatix iP1 Smart Gun http://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2015/11/12/exclusive-we-test-the-armatix-ip1-the-not-so-smart-gun/ and found it fiddly to activate (12 seconds) and unreliable in firing:
Does the Armatix operate perfectly? Well, no; we found it to be troubling at best. NRA's tests, conducted with staffers trained by Armatix, found a number of very serious problems:
The Armatix pistol initially required a full 20 minutes to pair with the watch, even with the aid of an IT pro trained in its use. Without pairing, the Armatix functions like any other handgun, capable of being fired by anyone.
Once paired, a "cold start" still requires a minimum of seven push-button commands and a duration of 12 seconds before the gun can be fired.
While the gun holds a maximum of 11 rounds (10+1), the best our experts could manage was nine consecutive rounds without a failure to fire (and that only once). Three or four misfires per magazine were common, despite using various brands of ammunition.
Although the Armatix has a decent single-action trigger, it has the worst double-action trigger we've ever tested, requiring more force than any other pistol we've fired.
The pistol must be within 10 inches of the watch during "start up." This slows and complicates the use of the pistol if one hand is injured or otherwise unavailable.
The design of the Armatix's hammer prevents it from being safely thumbed forward.
All this malfunction comes at a high price: At $1,798 ($1,399 for the base pistol and another $399 for the enabling watch), the Armatix is a more than five times the cost of other common .22s, like Walther's excellent P22 ($319) or Browning's tried-and-true Buckmark ($349), and four and a half times that of Smith & Wesson's M&P22 polymer semi-auto ($379) or Ruger's SR22 ($379). It's also more than three times the cost of pistols like Glocks and Smith & Wesson M&Ps made in true self-defence calibers
Note that: Three or four misfires per magazine were common, despite using various brands of ammunition.
And yet the manufacturer conducted tests with a quarter million rounds! http://fortune.com/2015/04/22/smart-guns-theyre-ready-are-we/
No standards body, like Underwriters Lab, certifies the reliability of civilian guns. California and Massachusetts do require that a firearm, to be sold there, pass a shooting test. But they ask only that it fire 600 rounds with no more than six failures.
Mauch says the de facto industry norm for civilian handguns is around 5,000 rounds with no more than 50 failures. But at H&K and Armatix, he claims, he has hewed to a higher standard: no more than 10 failures in 10,000 firings. "We tested the iP1 with more than a quarter million rounds," he says. "You can use it in rain, dust, and mud."
The iP1 takes two AAA batteries, which will power about 5,000 firings, according to Armatix. An indicator light begins flashing when the batteries still have one-third of their life remaining -- i.e., more than 1,000 shots. The watch takes a common button battery, and a watch-face icon monitors its depletion. If the battery is allowed to run out, the gun will not operate.
The manufacturers tests results are the opposite of the NRA tests, but then I expect the "MRDA" (Mandy-Rice-Davies) principle applies to both.
To sell, smart guns do not have to be 100% relible (no gun ever is) but it has to be more relible than the de facto industry norm for civilian handguns which is said to be around 5,000 rounds with no more than 50 failures. 1 in a 100 misfires?
~~~~~~~~~~
However requiring a fiddly procedure to pair a gun with its activator (a watch in this case) is an absurd design, they should be paired at the factory and purchased together like the RFID keys of motorcars. Furthermore the mechanism to enable the gun to fire should activate almost instantly (say less than a half second) when the activator come in range and that range should allow either hand to fire the gun, 10 inches range is too short. Having a timeout of 8 hours on the activation is also silly. I means that if a burglar comes at dawn there is a high robability that the householder's gun will not fire until he has pressed the 7 keys in the right order. Nope, that timeout is one safety-precaution too far. The gun and actvator need to be permanently paired and activated only by their near proximity.
The gun has to be capable of being taken from a glove locker and fired at a car jacker before the baddie realises that the driver has a gun; a 12 second delay makes it useless.
~~~~~~~~~~
As said above the gun problems of the USA need to be clearly identified and then tackled one by one. The Smart gun 'solution' (assuming a sensible reliable smart gun), only tackles a few of those issues, notable the accidental shootings done by children and the shooting of cops with their own weapons after they have been wrested from them.
(In 2010, 62 children, age 14 or younger, died in gun-related accidents, including 25 under the age of 5, according to the National Safety Council.)
Additionally, the hope is that smart guns could reduce the toll of murdered police officers, killed when their service revolvers are wrested away from them. (From 2004 to 2013, according to FBI statistics, 33 police officers were murdered with their own weapons.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Other solutions would need to be found for other problems such as the School Shootings; possibly that if an area is going to be declared gun-free then the relevant people have to make damn sure that it really is gun-free by fencing it in and using Airport-style metal and Xray detectors at the entrance.
Quote: Lazzard @ 27th November 2017, 10:36 AMSince American mass shootings are no longer news, any chance of moving this discussion to it's own thread?
Got my vote.
I created a new thread in the appropriate General Discussion forum.
Excellent. Now the update on Davina Macall's bottom...
Quote: Kenneth @ 27th November 2017, 7:38 AMScare quotes? Worzel Gummidge never carried a shooter, did he?
Say, if you value human life more than the "right" to own guns, then why not start on the path to disarming the public, starting with all the bad guys? (and stop selling guns and ammo)
I'll respond to this in the new thread that I created.
Changing the subject slightly I see that marriage in many of the United States is legal with children.
Quote: Chappers @ 27th November 2017, 7:53 PMChanging the subject slightly I see that marriage in many of the United States is legal with children.
When my nephew & his partner got married, they had children.