British Ordnance Collectors Network
Join over 14,000 collectors of inert military ordnance. Get expert identification help for shells, fuzes, grenades, and more — plus access our classifieds marketplace and decades of archived knowledge. Free to register, takes seconds.
BBC News Report
- Thread starter flak18
- Start date
Certainly possible, but depends in part on how you define mass shooting. FBI goes by any shooting that results in 3 deaths or more. Others go by people shot, not killed. The media source reporting this could be using either of these methods or others of their own definition. Keep in mind that while these shootings are terrible and there certainly are problems that need to be addressed, the US is a very large country with a lot of people. 250 events when held up to the population and the number of privately owned firearms is an incredibly small percentage, indication that the vast majority of gun owners are not involved in events of this sort. We are a democracy and we have guns because the majority of people want guns, regardless of what the vocal minority shouts. It has been quite some time since I confirmed any numbers, but if memory serves you are about a thousand times more likely to be killed by a drunk driver in the US than by a firearm. Yet drunk driving continues to be practiced and tolerated.
Tragedies like these shootings give the anti-gun movement opportunity to create their soundbites and advance their agendas, but the fact remains that messed up people with their own twisted purposes have always existed, and removing guns from the hands of hundreds of thousands of legitimate owners will not change this. Bombings, stabbings, attacks on crowds with vehicles, different tools used by the same people for the same purposes.
Tragedies like these shootings give the anti-gun movement opportunity to create their soundbites and advance their agendas, but the fact remains that messed up people with their own twisted purposes have always existed, and removing guns from the hands of hundreds of thousands of legitimate owners will not change this. Bombings, stabbings, attacks on crowds with vehicles, different tools used by the same people for the same purposes.
To add to what Subs said and taking into account the three or more shot making a mass shooting, that would include gang related violence in the larger cities such as Detroit and, especially, Chicago, though smaller cities like Louisville are climbing up there. Those shootings are usually by criminals who will never abide by any firearms laws, are mostly drug related, and in high crime areas. That said, the number of shootings per capita has gone down over the past few years from the information I've seen and heard. But the motto seems to be, "Never let a good crisis go to waste".
Richard709
Well-Known Member
I think you have to put these figures into context, as already mentioned the size of the US population these numbers while totally abhorrent are quite small. As at 17 May 2019 the UK had 100 fatal stabbings, 132 people in London have been murdered so far this year and for the year ending March 2109 over 43,000 offences were recorded for knife crime in the UK. you are still more likely to be killed by a drunk driver or run over by a bus. These types of figures are used for political and minority agendas.
Every country in the world has a problem of sorts, if you live in Russia you are more likely to die from illicit Vodka than being shot or stabbed. Politicians and the Media exploit these very sad incidents for there own ends. Bad news sells papers and the politician that promises to fix everything will get elected.
Last edited:
"We are a democracy and we have guns because the majority of people want guns" :US-Subs
Actually, it's because of the 2nd Amendment. But you know that.
And, technically, we're a Republic.
Agree to disagree. We have the amendment because we want it. It is an amendment, by definition a change. Keep in mind it can be changed again (repealed), if the people want it. See the 18th and 21st Amendments in example. These are living documents, not cast in stone. People that cling to the 2nd Amendment forget that sometimes.
I consider myself very pro-gun, but I'll be the first to admit that there are people out there that I do not feel are qualified, competent or capable of owning one. I share the average American's pathological fear of losing my firearm rights, but I also believe in responsible gun ownership, as I believe most citizens do. As M8owner states, no one advocates banning cars, however they do license you to drive them.
I think that most gun owners could accept the concept of actions to control unqualified access to guns, if they believed in any way that the far left would leave it at that point. Unfortunately the fringe elements on both sides continue to push radical ideals, screwing the majority of us that are somewhere in the middle. I don't see any compromise on the horizon.
pzgr40
Well-Known Member
Even when you licence gun ownership it would not solve the problems for a century to come in the USA. There are so many legal and illegal weapons around in the USA it is hard to collect them all from the population if you's make the laws more restrictive. There are more guns than inhabitants n the USA. The president that restrics fire arms posession is the president that knows he's only going to serve one term and is than voted away.
Even here in the Netherlands where we have vey restrictive (fire) arm laws illegal weapons are still a big problem with four shootings (amongst criminals) in four days just in Amsterdam.
Even here in the Netherlands where we have vey restrictive (fire) arm laws illegal weapons are still a big problem with four shootings (amongst criminals) in four days just in Amsterdam.
I would have to agree, there is nothing wrong with a healthy dose of licensing / control to keep criminals and the insane away from firearms. However this control would have to be inplemented in such a way that it is made as foolproof as possible.
In the Netherlands control over the law abiding portion of gunowners is as tight as it gets,.. while, with the EU's outside and inner borders as leaky as they come, criminals can get their hands on any firearm they desire.
Extremely ineffective policing and law enforcement also mean that in the Netherlands, criminals can use their weapons with, near, impunity, while hunters and legal shooters are scrutinized.
As mentioned by Pzgr40, there are multiple cases of firearms related violence in the Netherlands on a daily basis, it even gets so bad as handgrenades being used. Oftentimes they are merely tied to doors or left on porches as a threat (to get rid of competing "businesses", or in order to extort "protection fees"), but in the neighbourhood where I used to live until last April (western part of Amsterdam) no less than four handgrenades were used "in anger" since november last year.
So unless enforcement is thight "all the way" ... a ban on firearms will not solve the problem of firearms related violence....or worse.
In the Netherlands control over the law abiding portion of gunowners is as tight as it gets,.. while, with the EU's outside and inner borders as leaky as they come, criminals can get their hands on any firearm they desire.
Extremely ineffective policing and law enforcement also mean that in the Netherlands, criminals can use their weapons with, near, impunity, while hunters and legal shooters are scrutinized.
As mentioned by Pzgr40, there are multiple cases of firearms related violence in the Netherlands on a daily basis, it even gets so bad as handgrenades being used. Oftentimes they are merely tied to doors or left on porches as a threat (to get rid of competing "businesses", or in order to extort "protection fees"), but in the neighbourhood where I used to live until last April (western part of Amsterdam) no less than four handgrenades were used "in anger" since november last year.
So unless enforcement is thight "all the way" ... a ban on firearms will not solve the problem of firearms related violence....or worse.
Last edited:
In the UK firearms were licenced to varying levels long ago and it was easy to ban handguns and collect all the legally owned ones as the police knew who had what. Only criminals disregarded the confiscation. In the States there are few records and many guns not recorded to an owner so there is no hope of collecting them all in. Our weirdos now use knives and vehicles for mass killings, guns are for gang related shootings.
There is no doubt that guns attract an enormous amount of stupid. And, there is a lot of stupid out there. I could certainly agree that many should not be allowed to have guns. However, that is not the way the system works - we all get them or no one gets them. I want to keep mine, and I am willing to pay the price of that decision. I agree with Subs that I would be willing to talk about restrictions, but we already know the entire game plan of the Left. No restriction will be enough until even air guns are banned. They will not stop, and I will not start the conversation. None shall pass.
pzgr40
Well-Known Member
"No restriction will be enough until even air guns are banned. They will not stop, and I will not start the conversation. None shall pass. "
Yep, that's the whole point. Once the first restriction had passed, there is no stopping anymore and an attempt to restrict wapons in the hands of those who cannot bear the resoponsibility of handling weapons will soon end in an all out restriction for all.
On the other hand.... when living in rural USA you really need a weapon for self protection as the police will never be in time when it comes to protect you in case of... They're already allways late -with a Lucky exeption- in the Netherlands, and that's a small country.
Yep, that's the whole point. Once the first restriction had passed, there is no stopping anymore and an attempt to restrict wapons in the hands of those who cannot bear the resoponsibility of handling weapons will soon end in an all out restriction for all.
On the other hand.... when living in rural USA you really need a weapon for self protection as the police will never be in time when it comes to protect you in case of... They're already allways late -with a Lucky exeption- in the Netherlands, and that's a small country.
Funny thing is, in Rural America the crime rate is still much lower than where the protection would be needed most, i.e., the cities. Rural areas usually DO have weapons, so most of the criminals are cautious, knowing that their likelyhood of being shot is heightened even in an "empty" dwelling. (Knocking on my wooden table now).
Last edited:
The UK has some of the strictest firearms laws in the world but we still have firearms used by criminals. Recently a car was stopped at Dover that had 60 handguns hidden in it.
Strict laws never stop crime but only limit it a bit.
Only goes to show my point!
Laws alone won't solve the problem. There has to be enforcement and control. Checking people and transports at borders. Checking people in the street (what 17 year old hangs out in a BMW or Mercedes AMG at 03:00 AM?). Checking/raiding known hangouts.... Nothing of that is done in the Netherlands.
What is done ... anual checks on licensed hunters, licensed shooters, licensed collectors. That really goes a long way to keep the public safe!! (Yep that's sarcasm).
Your example of the find in the car at the border, proofs that those checks are what's needed!
Sure no system will ever be watertight, but merely keeping the "sheeple" in check, while doing nothing about the real problems... That is criminal negligence on behalf of government and sheer injustice.
Laws alone won't solve the problem. There has to be enforcement and control. Checking people and transports at borders. Checking people in the street (what 17 year old hangs out in a BMW or Mercedes AMG at 03:00 AM?). Checking/raiding known hangouts.... Nothing of that is done in the Netherlands.
What is done ... anual checks on licensed hunters, licensed shooters, licensed collectors. That really goes a long way to keep the public safe!! (Yep that's sarcasm).
Your example of the find in the car at the border, proofs that those checks are what's needed!
Sure no system will ever be watertight, but merely keeping the "sheeple" in check, while doing nothing about the real problems... That is criminal negligence on behalf of government and sheer injustice.
My favorite running theme is that gun crime is a health issue.
How about all the people who die in hospitals due to mistreatment, missed diagnosis, and malpractice? Those "health issues" kill more every year than legal and illegal guns together! Let's solve that problem before we talk about gun deaths.
How about all the people who die in hospitals due to mistreatment, missed diagnosis, and malpractice? Those "health issues" kill more every year than legal and illegal guns together! Let's solve that problem before we talk about gun deaths.
I keep well away from hospitals. Bloody dangerous places with a higher death rate than any rifle range.