talkmagic.co.uk

Theres absolutely no comparison between a freak accident which kills somebodies wife and two kids shooting up their school other than both incidents involve guns, the former is accidental (and stupid) while the latter is intentional.

I think guns in america should be available only to people who can trusted to use it responsibly and not go on a rampage but nothings going to change no matter how many massacres there are

The point isn't really how the gun was used.
Somebody shot at a wall to put a hole in it...

That to me is irresponsible use of a gun. As is shooting up a school.

People get hold of guns and do stupid things with them which result in people's deaths.
My original point was that things like this prove that it's the free and easy access to guns that's the problem - not video games or heavy metal. I stand to that point.

abraxus wrote:guns should be given to everyone on the planet, just make bullets illegal, or cost a million quid each...at least then, if you get shot at, it proves the other persons commitment...

Really, that's your solution ? That's like deciding to get a partial circumcision. You might as well go all the way or just f**kin' forget it.

EckoZero wrote:The point isn't really how the gun was used.
Somebody shot at a wall to put a hole in it...

That to me is irresponsible use of a gun. As is shooting up a school.

People get hold of guns and do stupid things with them which result in people's deaths.
My original point was that things like this prove that it's the free and easy access to guns that's the problem - not video games or heavy metal. I stand to that point.

the article never even mentioned whether he was into heavy metal or video games though

Gun debates aside, if only he'd killed himself this would be up there with the best of the Darwin Awards.

Misanthropy wrote:

EckoZero wrote:The point isn't really how the gun was used.
Somebody shot at a wall to put a hole in it...

That to me is irresponsible use of a gun. As is shooting up a school.

People get hold of guns and do stupid things with them which result in people's deaths.
My original point was that things like this prove that it's the free and easy access to guns that's the problem - not video games or heavy metal. I stand to that point.

the article never even mentioned whether he was into heavy metal or video games though

Exactly. People die when people are allowed guns regardless of what they do in their free time.
The problem is the guns therefore - not the music or video games; my original point

Okay I was going to stay out of this one. The problem has nothing to do with gun laws. The only value in a gun law is that if you catch somebody owning or carrying a gun without a permit to do so, you can arrest them for a brief moment in time. Chances are if they don't have a permit, they did not buy the gun legally. And by the time the police find the gun and the person chances are pretty darn good the gun has already been used in not a great way. The person who goes out and legaly gets a gun probably will not commit a crime with it, (except perhaps the crime of being stupid as this was clearly the case here). You can argue that if he was not allowed to own a gun then chances are his wife would still be alive. Obviously there is no way to know that. Stupid is just stupid no matter what the implement of destruction is/was. Could be his very next move was he was on the roof putting up the dish, He screwed in the mounting screws but didn't have place to put down the screwdriver so he threw it off the roof and impaled his wife, killing her while she was holding the ladder. I know chances are pretty improbable. But just as improbable is some idiot who decides to use a gun instead of a drill to put a hole in his wall.

IMHO the problem isn't with guns, or even extreme music/video games.

The problem is with people - we're far from nice at times .

Mandrake wrote:IMHO the problem isn't with guns, or even extreme music/video games.

The problem is with people - we're far from nice at times .

Very true. Guns dont kill people, people kill people

I grew up near some army ranges and usually as kids we played on or near them at the weekends. This guy at my school aged about 13/14 found a thunderflash. A live one. so he emptied out the powder on his dads workbench and tried to light it, however for some reason (perhaps it was damp) it did not light so down to his last match he put his head over the pile so that he could gently blow onto the powder as he lit it. He had no hair for about 6 months and it was a miracle that he can still see.
Whilst he still had no hair he found a bullet, he put it in his dads vice and hit the bottom with a punch and hammer. Again leaning over it as he did. He had a small 3 cm graze going verticaly between his eyes. He looked absolutely terrified for about a week.
Whilst in my twenties I had to go to a&e and from there into surgery at a london hospital. I ended up sitting next to a guy who worked at the city farm. Being a farm worker myself I struck up a conversation and asked what he had done. "oh I just volunteer at the weekends" he said " we were asked to chop up some logs but they kept falling over. So I was holding them whilst my mate split them with an axe"
Says it all eh?

I work with guns daily and have all my (Working) Life, i do think its the People Not the weapon though, if you take away the Guns, they will only find other ways and means.
The Sad fact is (IMHO) in the US some people do need to have a gun to defend themselves.
I honestly would have no idea how to Improve the Gun Laws!
What makes it different for us is the amount of Gun Related Crime Nowadays over here it is a lot worse than we think!

You will please forgive me if I carry on - I've been drinking. And, this issue is far too much for me to ignore. What I'm saying is that I'm about to go on a tirade and you should either get yourself a cup of tea, or a beer (if you're actually going to read this), because I'm probably going to go on for a while.

I will start with the most simplistic of approaches:

Lommie wrote:I've really never understood the american gun laws. Why does anyone really even need to own a gun.

Now, I don't say "simplistic" to intone a negative feel nor disparage the intent of Lommie's post...It's just that this honestly is the most base of questions when it comes to gun ownership.

Why? Because I like them. Because I know that they are a tool, same as any other tool, just a particularly dangerous tool. But, there are plenty of dangerous tools that we use daily or have in our houses that aren't given a second thought because they don't carry that very evil moniker of "gun."

There is electricity. You can find it everywhere around you, generally open for anyone to use, anytime. There are power outlets all around you and you have them in your home, where your children can stuff a fork into the full, open charge.

A car is a tool...How many people die in car accidents? Correct me if I'm wrong (and I could be), but accidental deaths, statistically, are the highest where cars are concerned.

There is the downside to guns, yes - they are dangerous and their misuse kills. Again, though, the same can be said of cars.

So, why own a gun? Because I like them. A simple answer to a simple question - I like guns. I like shooting them (it's fun), I like looking at them (a well made gun is a thing of beauty and to a guy like me, art) and I appreciate the comfort of knowing that if someone broke into my house, even whilst I type this, I could simply pick up my .45 and protect that which I've worked all my life to obtain (in physical belongings).

At this point, there are those who would say, "Well, you've been drinking, you admit that, so what if, in your drunkeness, you picked up a gun and started shooting people?" Okay, well I own a car too. What if, in my drunkeness, I decided that I needed to go to Taco Bell and had to drive? Same thing.

It is here that I'd like to address EckoZero's posts...

See, he and I are saying the same thing on several levels. The difference is that he blames the guns themselves and not the video games. I can understand that since, in America, everyone can get their hands on anything short of nuclear arms. So, it is the guns and not the video games that is forcing people to kill each other via the use of guns.

Where my opinion and his converges is in the fact that I say it isn't the video games. (But it isn't the guns, either.) I take umbrage to EckoZero's stance, because he's willing to indict one inanimate object over another to point out the evil. I say it is human kind in general, but EchoZero still wants to point the finger.

To wit:

EckoZero wrote:People die when people are allowed guns regardless of what they do in their free time.

People die even when they AREN'T allowed guns regardless of what they do in their free time.

People die. Guns, no guns; maleria, no maleria. People die. People kill each other (on both a personal basis and in large scale too, like in war). People were killing people long before guns were ever invented and people will be killing people even if guns vanished from the face of the earth.

But, when you come right down to the live wire, you simply may_not_have my gun. I've gone 43 years on this earth, I've never held a gun to another human in anger, I've never had a desire to start mass killing people, my only desire is to protect my person and my belongings. I have a basic human right to the protection of my person and the protection of my poperty.

Would you argue that self preservation and the protection of your property are not basic, human rights? They are - the most basic of all rights, really. And, I'll tell you - if you never want to be shot by me, then simply don't break into my home. Now, that's pretty easy for anyone to understand.

Unfortunately, just like examples of video gamers going off their nut and killing people, there are plenty of examples of people getting their hands on guns and killing people. Sadly, guns are a very easy way of killing, which is why they are so attacked by the liberal crowd.

Now, EckoZero, you may not have thought this out completelyl, but one of the reasons that video games are not more attacked is because guns have to go first. It is the "frog in boiling water" effect. You see, you are more than happy to have guns banned, but once they are banned and the killing continues (and it will) there will be something else that must be blamed and banned. You have the luxury of pointing at guns presently, but once you cannot point the blame that way, where will you go?

Nowhere.

Humans are to blame. Hate crimes, passion crimes, crimes against humanity - the entire spectrum...That does NOT come from guns.

Mike.

Michael Jay wrote:It is here that I'd like to address EckoZero's posts...

See, he and I are saying the same thing on several levels. The difference is that he blames the guns themselves and not the video games. I can understand that since, in America, everyone can get their hands on anything short of nuclear arms. So, it is the guns and not the video games that is forcing people to kill each other via the use of guns.

Where my opinion and his converges is in the fact that I say it isn't the video games. (But it isn't the guns, either.) I take umbrage to EckoZero's stance, because he's willing to indict one inanimate object over another to point out the evil. I say it is human kind in general, but EchoZero still wants to point the finger.

To wit:

EckoZero wrote:People die when people are allowed guns regardless of what they do in their free time.

People die even when they AREN'T allowed guns regardless of what they do in their free time.

People die. Guns, no guns; maleria, no maleria. People die. People kill each other (on both a personal basis and in large scale too, like in war). People were killing people long before guns were ever invented and people will be killing people even if guns vanished from the face of the earth.

Michael, I would like to point out that (even though it might have come across like this in my posts - and I'm not so sure of that) I do not blame guns.
To further this point

EckoZero wrote:

Mandrake wrote:IMHO the problem isn't with guns, or even extreme music/video games.

The problem is with people - we're far from nice at times .

Very true. Guns dont kill people, people kill people

My original point was that a man shoots a hole in his wall and kills his wife results in someone dying from the DIRECT use of guns.
Similarly, the Columbine incident was people dying from DIRECT use of guns.

However, the media is easy to jump on very large parts of my life - music, film and videogames - and say that these things are the direct cause of the offence.
Now, this in itself is offensive to people like me who responsibly enjoy all of the above (and yes, I like firing guns too! And I have 2 replica guns because I also think they are beautiful - and a fascinating memento mori) but it's also quite plainly ignoring several other facts.

I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) that you must be over 18 to own a gun in America.
In the specific instance of the Columbine shooting, neither boy were 18, yet both had access to semi-automatics.
Why? And how?
And furthermore, how can the media then turn around and say "Well perhaps if they didn't listen to Nine Inch Nails they wouldn't have done this"? Shouldn't the real issue be "If they weren't allowed access to semi-automatics they wouldn't have done that" - now this second statement is not entirely true and I will come back to this.

That - the above - was my original point.
A man kills his wife quite accidentally by firing a gun and it's a horrible tragedy.
Two boys go and shoot up a school, and whilst it's a tragedy - it's one that the media feels justified in scapegoating onto something else.

Now returning to why the statement wasn't quite true... the two boys actually built pipe bombs which they left in the school canteen. It's thought that their original plan was to set them off killing most people in there (would have been 95-100% of the school) and then shoot stragglers.

However, if they hadn't had the guns - when the pipebombs failed to go off, wouldn't they have been forced to say "Oh s***!" and run off?

Again I stress this point - I am not saying that guns are the sole cause of killing and suffering. I am not saying that no-one should be allowed a gun because of irresponsible idiots - what I am saying is that the media needs to adress the real issue, rather than (how it appears to me) playing off the American nation's piety (I understand heavy metal is considered evil by certain churches?) to justify a law.
Identify the problem, adress the problem, and then seek to solve the problem.

Kids will never stop shooting up high schools until the problem that they can access guns is resolved.

Unfortunately, just like examples of video gamers going off their nut and killing people, there are plenty of examples of people getting their hands on guns and killing people. Sadly, guns are a very easy way of killing, which is why they are so attacked by the liberal crowd.

Now, EckoZero, you may not have thought this out completelyl, but one of the reasons that video games are not more attacked is because guns have to go first. It is the "frog in boiling water" effect. You see, you are more than happy to have guns banned, but once they are banned and the killing continues (and it will) there will be something else that must be blamed and banned. You have the luxury of pointing at guns presently, but once you cannot point the blame that way, where will you go?

Nowhere.

Not at all Mike.
Whilst I would love to see a complete surrenderance of guns, I am realistic enough to know that this would never happen and would cause more problems than it would solve.

therefore, my wish would be for a more responsible attitude to guns.

I respect your attitude to guns - and I am glad you have never pointed it at anyone in anger (else I might find myself in your sights! ).
However, in the case of Virginia Tech, the shooter was a known violent psychiatric patient.

this was largely overlooked by the media again, and this time the idea of "foreign films" was thrown into the fray as the main cause.

Why was a known violent psychiatric patient allowed a gun? That's all I want to know.

Keep the gun law.
Keep your guns.
And keep your right to protect your property!

But please... don't attack me for asking for more common sense to be issued.




I understand entirely if you wish to reply to this post addressing points I've raised - but I will ask in the name of boardwise peace, and the preservation of an interest and well thought out piece that any such comments be directed to me via PM.

Failing that, if my points make sense - can we shake hands and have a gentlemanly agreement?

I'm sorry if I offended you - that was the never the point.
But I've said all I can say now.

I am not going to go into the gun laws in the USA I may upset to many people being a Brit and Ex army I guess I have my own views.

Anyway has anyone considered the size of the round used to make the hole for the cable?.22 calibre It Must be thin cable in the USA for satellite .

Just my thoughts
Take Care all

EckoZero wrote:I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) that you must be over 18 to own a gun in America.
In the specific instance of the Columbine shooting, neither boy were 18, yet both had access to semi-automatics.
Why? And how?
And furthermore, how can the media then turn around and say "Well perhaps if they didn't listen to Nine Inch Nails they wouldn't have done this"? Shouldn't the real issue be "If they weren't allowed access to semi-automatics they wouldn't have done that" - now this second statement is not entirely true and I will come back to this.

Much of the problem, Ecko - is that you're on the outside looking in. this is NOT a dig - but you clearly aren't fully aware of all of the facts on this specific case.

1 - Every single gun used by the two murderers at Columbine, was purchased illegally. No amount of gun laws would have prevented these two from getting their hands on the guns.

This is the major flaw in many of the gun laws. The "extreme" cases presented in this issue, rarely center on the legal purchase/acquisition of said firearms, therefore, even a stricter enforcement of existing gun laws would not always prevent incidents like this. The reality of the case is that these gun law restrictions serve to make it harder for people like Michael to buy a gun, not someone like Dylan Klebold or Eric Harris.

2 - Yes, there was attention given to right-wing ideologies where the event was focused on music/video games and other outside stimuli. HOWEVER - this was never presented as the true focus of the media attention. Simply put, a few crackpots were given a mic and a forum - and made these arguments.

In this kind of debate - you have to take the good and the bad. If you want a particular citizen to have the right to speak about outlawing firearms completely, you need to allow the lunatic bible thumper to do the same.

That being said, while there was a light cast upon that section - to say that all US media focused solely and largely upon that theory is false. Once again, being from the UK - it may SEEM that way, but it's simply not the case.

Case in point - the only time we generally hear news of the royal family in England, is when they've done something scandalous. It's sensationalism - not journalism. The same applies to stories about our very own wingnuts.