Conquer Club

Just stupid, why is this politician even a politician???

http://www.news.com.au/world/north-amer ... 6797948780

What possible reason could there be for unloading your gun in your office? Alternatively, why was it loaded to begin with?

Yep, that's terrible. Glad I'm not in America.

Are you Americans happy with all these guns and feel safer or are you stuck with this law you don't really want? I'd migrate if those numbers were shown about my country.

The fact that she was probably being stupid with the gun doesn't mean they should all be banned.

we europeans will never understand you americans,
but we try to respect you and your laws ( well, actually i dont want to speak for myself as europeans, so i change this to- I, myself, me)
i personally dont think every american has a gun
there must be a huge number of americans who dont posess a gun

i know only one thing about human brain- if u have a gun at home- once in your life u will use it
it doesnt have to be necesseraly a situation where u take the right to defend yourselve,
it can be a situation, sometimes worse than that

u could use it against someone else then a burglar,
it could be your .....

----mother in law

These threads crack me up....

On a positive note....I just got another pistol!

Maybe she was shootin' wabbits.

Agent 86 wrote:Just stupid, why is this politician even a politician???

http://www.news.com.au/world/north-amer ... 6797948780

'It happens'...wow these morons crack me up.And people voted for her!Strange place for sure..

replace gun accident with car accident and how do all ur responses sound?

hotfire wrote:replace gun accident with car accident and how do all ur responses sound?

'It happens' is not an appropriate response to any accident that might have led to a serious injury or death,Period.

hotfire wrote:replace gun accident with car accident and how do all ur responses sound?

Being drunk can be problematic with either vehicle of death,
but it's much harder to hit a burglar with a car.

[quote="Night Strike"]The fact that she was probably being stupid with the gun doesn't mean they should all be banned.[/quote

Probably???And what about her complacent response?

oVo wrote:

hotfire wrote:replace gun accident with car accident and how do all ur responses sound?

Being drunk can be problematic with either vehicle of death,
but it's much harder to hit a burglar with a car.

Unless the burglar was in the garage.

chang50 wrote:

hotfire wrote:replace gun accident with car accident and how do all ur responses sound?

'It happens' is not an appropriate response to any accident that might have led to a serious injury or death,Period.

Is "BAN THEM!" an appropriate response?

thegreekdog wrote:

oVo wrote:

hotfire wrote:replace gun accident with car accident and how do all ur responses sound?

Being drunk can be problematic with either vehicle of death,
but it's much harder to hit a burglar with a car.

Unless the burglar was in the garage.

chang50 wrote:

hotfire wrote:replace gun accident with car accident and how do all ur responses sound?

'It happens' is not an appropriate response to any accident that might have led to a serious injury or death,Period.

Is "BAN THEM!" an appropriate response?

Obviously it is not realistic when you have arrived at the saturation position the US has after such a long period of relatively easy access.I can only wonder where do you even start when elected politicians make complacent comments like this lady and she isn't roundly condemned?
Do you as an American have any potential solutions to the problem (assuming you agree it is a problem) of gun violence in your country?

chang50 wrote:Do you as an American have any potential solutions to the problem (assuming you agree it is a problem) of gun violence in your country?

There are an array of potential solutions, only one of which would completely solve the problem of gun violence: The federal government passes a law banning the manufacturing and sale of all guns, including those used by the police and military, the second amendment is repealed, and the federal government collects all firearms from everyone in the country and destroys them. A local or state jurisdiction banning guns won't work since most criminals who use firearms obtained the weapons illegally anyway.

If you're looking for a more practical solution, I don't think I have one. I would probably start with legalizing recreational drugs (all of them) to attempt to eliminate the actual problem (which is gun violence associated with the buying and selling of illegal drugs) as opposed to fake problems (people shooting themselves by accident or crazy people massacring school children). I would also focus (not government, but society generally) on changing the culture around gun violence, specifically gang culture. This probably is affected by education and parenting and the like, but those things are probably hard to change. I suspect that the UK also has similar problems associated with gangs, education, and parenting, but people affected by those things don't have access to firearms. In any event, none of those things are easy and are probably completely unrealistic given our country's obsession with the war on drugs and the rent-seeking that goes on with all levels of government.

BAN PEOPLE is the only logical solution.

notyou2 wrote:BAN PEOPLE is the only logical solution.

And the solution that would surely work the best in this case.

All in favour say 'Aye!' and we're good to go.

thegreekdog wrote:

chang50 wrote:Do you as an American have any potential solutions to the problem (assuming you agree it is a problem) of gun violence in your country?

There are an array of potential solutions, only one of which would completely solve the problem of gun violence: The federal government passes a law banning the manufacturing and sale of all guns, including those used by the police and military, the second amendment is repealed, and the federal government collects all firearms from everyone in the country and destroys them. A local or state jurisdiction banning guns won't work since most criminals who use firearms obtained the weapons illegally anyway.

If you're looking for a more practical solution, I don't think I have one. I would probably start with legalizing recreational drugs (all of them) to attempt to eliminate the actual problem (which is gun violence associated with the buying and selling of illegal drugs) as opposed to fake problems (people shooting themselves by accident or crazy people massacring school children). I would also focus (not government, but society generally) on changing the culture around gun violence, specifically gang culture. This probably is affected by education and parenting and the like, but those things are probably hard to change. I suspect that the UK also has similar problems associated with gangs, education, and parenting, but people affected by those things don't have access to firearms. In any event, none of those things are easy and are probably completely unrealistic given our country's obsession with the war on drugs and the rent-seeking that goes on with all levels of government.

I love you greekdog but.... Are you kidding?

How would that be any different from a federal law banning the production and sale of drugs?

How is that working to prevent Americans from obtaining drugs?

2dimes wrote:How is that working to prevent Americans from obtaining drugs?

It doesn't, but it regulates the obtaining of the drugs, which would make a lot of gun-related problems go away. This is, if I interpret it correctly.

JBlombier wrote:

2dimes wrote:How is that working to prevent Americans from obtaining drugs?

It doesn't, but it regulates the obtaining of the drugs, which would make a lot of gun-related problems go away. This is, if I interpret it correctly.

That's right. Instead of gang wars with guns, we'd have corporate wars with hostile takeovers and the like (which I think don't happen with guns). I'm interested to see how things work out in Colorado and Washington on the legalization of marijuana (not that people are killing each other to sell pot).

I haven't done an in depth study or anything, but I watch the local news. Almost all gun violence in Philadelphia occurs directly or indirectly as a result of illegal drugs, drug dealing, and the like. If you legitimize the business of selling drugs, I believe it takes away the illegal violence associated with the business of selling drugs currently.

thegreekdog wrote:

JBlombier wrote:

2dimes wrote:How is that working to prevent Americans from obtaining drugs?

It doesn't, but it regulates the obtaining of the drugs, which would make a lot of gun-related problems go away. This is, if I interpret it correctly.

That's right. Instead of gang wars with guns, we'd have corporate wars with hostile takeovers and the like (which I think don't happen with guns). I'm interested to see how things work out in Colorado and Washington on the legalization of marijuana (not that people are killing each other to sell pot).

I haven't done an in depth study or anything, but I watch the local news. Almost all gun violence in Philadelphia occurs directly or indirectly as a result of illegal drugs, drug dealing, and the like. If you legitimize the business of selling drugs, I believe it takes away the illegal violence associated with the business of selling drugs currently.

A lot of crime in a lot of countries is drug related,ending prohibition also allows for taxation,which would fund additional law enforcement,education etc.Prohibition only enriches criminals,people determined to use drugs will invariably find a way.

JBlombier wrote:

2dimes wrote:How is that working to prevent Americans from obtaining drugs?

It doesn't, but it regulates the obtaining of the drugs, which would make a lot of gun-related problems go away. This is, if I interpret it correctly.

What problems? That dimwit from the first post failing to shoot herself in the foot?

I am not against regulation. The problem with criminalizing firearms is preventing good guys from owning one while making it worth more to import illegal ones.

It's a pain to get a legal hand gun in Canada. Getting an illegal one is relatively easy. If you're going to use one to rob a liquor store or shoot someone in the back for humping your girlfriend. Which gun are you going to buy?

If I'm going to go to a firing range to murder circles. I'm going to go through the painful process of attempting to buy a legal one. Thank you for making that difficult and increasing the profit margin for bad guys.

Yes I know nearly all illegal guns began as a legal one. Further to my point you can't magically fix this with a law.

2dimes wrote:

JBlombier wrote:

2dimes wrote:How is that working to prevent Americans from obtaining drugs?

It doesn't, but it regulates the obtaining of the drugs, which would make a lot of gun-related problems go away. This is, if I interpret it correctly.

What problems? That dimwit from the first post failing to shoot herself in the foot?

I am not against regulation. The problem with criminalizing firearms is preventing good guys from owning one while making it worth more to import illegal ones.

It's a pain to get a legal hand gun in Canada. Getting an illegal one is relatively easy. If you're going to use one to rob a liquor store or shoot someone in the back for humping your girlfriend. Which gun are you going to buy?

If I'm going to go to a firing range to murder circles. I'm going to go through the painful process of attempting to buy a legal one. Thank you for making that difficult and increasing the profit margin for bad guys.

Like you, I also find it ironic that people who tend to be in favor of legalizing drugs are in favor of making gun ownership illegal. Making guns illegal will have the same ultimate result as the illegalizing of drugs has had (namely, criminals are enriched). That's yet another thing I just don't understand about gun control advocates.

We start with the premise that criminals who obtain guns, either obtain them illegally (likely) or obtain them with intent to use them illegally. In other words, criminals are breaking the law. If you pass a law banning guns, why would that law have any effect on those same criminals when current laws don't have any effect on them?

EDIT - My ultimate point with my "plan" (which is off the cuff and similar caveats) is that we should take away the reason why people use guns illegally (i.e. drugs) rather than taking away the guns. Which is a more effective approach? Obviously, I think the legalization of drugs is more effective (see, e.g. Prohibition). Which is an approach that is more likely to occur? I do not know the answer to this.

thegreekdog wrote:

2dimes wrote:

JBlombier wrote:

2dimes wrote:How is that working to prevent Americans from obtaining drugs?

It doesn't, but it regulates the obtaining of the drugs, which would make a lot of gun-related problems go away. This is, if I interpret it correctly.

What problems? That dimwit from the first post failing to shoot herself in the foot?

I am not against regulation. The problem with criminalizing firearms is preventing good guys from owning one while making it worth more to import illegal ones.

It's a pain to get a legal hand gun in Canada. Getting an illegal one is relatively easy. If you're going to use one to rob a liquor store or shoot someone in the back for humping your girlfriend. Which gun are you going to buy?

If I'm going to go to a firing range to murder circles. I'm going to go through the painful process of attempting to buy a legal one. Thank you for making that difficult and increasing the profit margin for bad guys.

Like you, I also find it ironic that people who tend to be in favor of legalizing drugs are in favor of making gun ownership illegal. Making guns illegal will have the same ultimate result as the illegalizing of drugs has had (namely, criminals are enriched). That's yet another thing I just don't understand about gun control advocates.

We start with the premise that criminals who obtain guns, either obtain them illegally (likely) or obtain them with intent to use them illegally. In other words, criminals are breaking the law. If you pass a law banning guns, why would that law have any effect on those same criminals when current laws don't have any effect on them?

EDIT - My ultimate point with my "plan" (which is off the cuff and similar caveats) is that we should take away the reason why people use guns illegally (i.e. drugs) rather than taking away the guns. Which is a more effective approach? Obviously, I think the legalization of drugs is more effective (see, e.g. Prohibition). Which is an approach that is more likely to occur? I do not know the answer to this.

Never argued for a total ban on ownership,just heavily restricted ownership which is somewhat effective in countries that haven't reached the saturation point of the US.Ultimately it is this that makes the problem so intractable.