Other Countries Change Their Gun Laws After Mass Shootings. Why Not America?

a reply to: Willtell

Well put.

a reply to: seeker1963

I just quoted an article for gun control and challenged debate.

Honestly so far the pro-gun law side is winning


If you knew me you would know in theory I have always been on the side of the pro gun people somewhat based on the fact that guns don’t think for themselves.

But if statistics and experience show certain things then perhaps they should be considered to adapt here since we do have a problem with gun violence in America

a reply to: Willtell

Ahhhh okay. You don't like the article, therefore it doesn't count.

And you've completely missed some of the points in the article, obviously.

Let me make two points: how big is England? Land mass, population? Now how big is America? Land mass and population? So who are you to say that a person who lives on, say, 800 acres in Montana should be subject to the same gun laws as citizen of New York City? Are their situations remotely similar?

Secondly, this is really all pointless isn't it? You're not really interested in discourse. You put up some stats and then dare everybody to refute them. And that's it. End of debate. You're not going to allow your mind to be changed. You're not interested in any thing "the other side" has to say. You and the others of your ilk spout the same stuff over and over again, but when a pro-gunner does it, suddenly it's rhetoric and hyperbole.

Oh well. Like I said before: molon labe.

a reply to: beezzer

Well then how can you make people get educated?

The theory behind gun laws is similar to the theory behind laws that make people get car insurance.

Your positioning the drug laws in this debate may not be applicable.

The OP and the real life stats in that article are directly related to guns…drug s is a different experience.

Even there we don’t know what would happen if we loosened the drug laws.

There we might want to look at other countries that have done that and see how that worked.

Ironically, the same people who want to make gun laws more severe are on the side of legalizing drugs, and the people who don’t want to make gun laws more severe are on the side of NOT legalizing drugs.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: seeker1963

I just quoted an article for gun control and challenged debate.

Honestly so far the pro-gun law side is winning


If you knew me you would know in theory I have always been on the side of the pro gun people somewhat based on the fact that guns don’t think for themselves.

But if statistics and experience show certain things then perhaps they should be considered to adapt here since we do have a problem with gun violence in America

We have a problem with violence PERIOD! Perhaps we need to step away from the television and the divisional rhetoric of politicians?

When people lose everything they lose "IT"! Why do you think everything is about racism/sexism etc etc......It takes the eyes off the scumbags in Washington who have orchestrated our downfall so that we focus on BS.

Those who jump on here and argue political talking points? Are praised by those they hate! BOTH parties! If our government cared about our safety? Then what the hell have any of them been doing to promote our ability to survive in a world run by Corporations?

None of this talk of "laws" changes the fact that the government is constitutionally bound to respect the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

The right of the individual to self defense by the most effective means available is a right inherent to the person.

I don't care what laws are passed. I don't care what the media says.

You can't have my firearms. You want my property? You'd better take it by force, if you can.

I'm tired of this gun debate. I'm not debating anymore.

Come and take them.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Your post is not true, I have responded to your input, maybe not to your liking.


I keep telling you I’m not even particularly pro or against increasing laws on guns.


But the article in the OP is pretty convincing.

I did read completely your article and decided it wasn’t as persuasive as the one I posted.

Funny you accuse me of the mentality that you yourself are exhibiting!


For you seem very rigid.



Maybe the idea of Bill O’Reilly might appeal to you.

Any one that has an illegal gun (or uses one in a crime) gets automatically 10 years in federal prison

How does that sound to you?

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Shamrock6

Your post is not true, I have responded to your input, maybe not to your liking.


I keep telling you I’m not even particularly pro or against increasing laws on guns.


But the article in the OP is pretty convincing.

I did read completely your article and decided it wasn’t as persuasive as the one I posted.

Funny you accuse me of the mentality that you yourself are exhibiting!


For you seem very rigid.



Maybe the idea of Bill O’Reilly might appeal to you.

Any one that has an illegal gun (or uses one in a crime) gets automatically 10 years in federal prison

How does that sound to you?

I did read completely your article and decided it wasn’t as persuasive as the one I posted.

You are a salepersons wet dream!

Do Facts ever enter your mind when composing an opinion?

I can persuade people to think and do many things, but it doesn't make me right?

Politicians DEPEND on persuading people to believe their BS? Otherwise they end up being lobbyists?

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: Shamrock6

Your post is not true, I have responded to your input, maybe not to your liking.


I keep telling you I’m not even particularly pro or against increasing laws on guns.


But the article in the OP is pretty convincing.

I did read completely your article and decided it wasn’t as persuasive as the one I posted.

Funny you accuse me of the mentality that you yourself are exhibiting!


For you seem very rigid.



Maybe the idea of Bill O’Reilly might appeal to you.

Any one that has an illegal gun (or uses one in a crime) gets automatically 10 years in federal prison

How does that sound to you?

Even better--stop locking up pot smokers and put violent criminals away instead, period.

a reply to: seeker1963

The op article is reasonable.

It merely suggests that since other countries have improved their crime stats through the change in gun laws maybe the US should try it.


Are you reasonable?

a reply to: rossacus

TRY it.
I scare the SNOT out of my wife as I have to sleep alone ,I stir with movement AND I'M not the only one like me
OF course WITH YOUR incredible wisdom who can oversee ALL of us,you must be a DELTA force member to know so much of us..
MEH ,another FOOL who hasn't figured out only politeness and disciplne keeps such TRASH alive...
When one CORNERS you I suppose you'll TALK them back with your IMPRESSIVE verbage I CAN only be in AWE of the superior judgement YOU display.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: seeker1963

The op article is reasonable.

It merely suggests that since other countries have improved their crime stats through the change in gun laws maybe the US should try it.


Are you reasonable?

As long as being reasonable does not mean getting rid of the Constitution? Yea, I am reasonable. But let me ask you this?

You said, "Other Countries" right? Well, why should we want to be like other countries? Do they not have issues? Are you a globalist? I love our countries sovereignty, yet look at the EU, they pretty much gave their sovereignty up and our now at the mercy of a "collective" government.

Makes it a bit difficult to solve a problem doesn't it?

I respect your opinion whether I agree with it or not. You have always been kind without calling names and such, but what your asking for is creating more power for the same corrupt government that is depending on disarming it's citizens for THEIR protection!

They don't care about us! Our survival, our safety, it doesn't matter to them any more. All they care about is saving their own worthless hides for being cowards and thieves.

a reply to: Willtell

Ahhhh and now you're trotting out FoxNews (which, by the way, I can count on one hand the number of times I've watched).

So now we arrive at the real crux of the issue: when an anti-gunner happens to stumble upon a pretty moderate supporter of gun rights (ie, me) who doesn't think everybody needs a machine gun, who does favor background checks, who doesn't like gunshow loopholes, etc., but still disagrees with the need for some sweeping "cure-all" legislation, the anti-gunner acts as if the moderate just said they believe every man woman and child should have a howitzer in their back yard.

Casually dismiss anything they have to say, bring on the ridicule (a la FoxNews jabs), and browbeat them.

And that's why we'll never get anywhere: both extremes want to alienate the other side's moderates, because they can't deal with us. They don't know HOW to deal with us.

Oh well.

originally posted by: Willtell

Ironically, the same people who want to make gun laws more severe are on the side of legalizing drugs, and the people who don’t want to make gun laws more severe are on the side of NOT legalizing drugs.

I'm a firm supporter of the 2nd Amendment and also see the futility of laws that criminals won't follow, just like drug laws.

I also support legalization and the decriminalization of drug laws.

a reply to: seeker1963

It’s not getting rid of the constitution to control the gun laws. If that were the case then the laws we have now would have been struck down by the courts.

As for looking at the experience of other countries?


To me it is wise to look at the experience of other human cultures to gain insight on how we might proceed in a similar problem


Am I a globalist?


www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Willtell

NO but not an American by nature.

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Willtell

Ironically, the same people who want to make gun laws more severe are on the side of legalizing drugs, and the people who don’t want to make gun laws more severe are on the side of NOT legalizing drugs.

I'm a firm supporter of the 2nd Amendment and also see the futility of laws that criminals won't follow, just like drug laws.

I also support legalization and the decriminalization of drug laws.

I’m also for getting rid of the drug laws

But am for studying ways to stop all this carnage in the US.

Mental health research…

Less severe psychotropic drugs

Some adjustments to the gun laws without infringing on our rights to self-protection in the 2nd amendment.


A universal attempt at more civility in the culture such as more love and compassion for each other


Why not a billboard saying:

Love each other once in a while rather than buy this soap


An approach where all levels should be used to stop the carnage going on in this country

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: seeker1963

It’s not getting rid of the constitution to control the gun laws. If that were the case then the laws we have now would have been struck down by the courts.

As for looking at the experience of other countries?


To me it is wise to look at the experience of other human cultures to gain insight on how we might proceed in a similar problem


Am I a globalist?


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Your supporting the globalists by supporting stricter gun laws in the US. Look at who has the guns and who commits the crimes in countries who already have strict gun laws. Criminals! By criminals roaming the streets, the people beg the government to save them from who again?

I am more scared of Progressives than I am terrorist or criminals. Why? I can still protect myself "legally".

It wasn't until 2008 that people in the UK had a law passed that protected them from beating the living hell out of someone who broke into their home! Is that what we want? To show up in court and defend ourselves because we might have killed someone who broke into our locked home?

Meh, you don't want guns? Don't call 911 for a LEO to show up and protect you with one! After all, it isn't the crazy right wingers I am seeing making blanket statements that the police are all racist murderers.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: seeker1963

The op article is reasonable.

It merely suggests that since other countries have improved their crime stats through the change in gun laws maybe the US should try it.


Are you reasonable?

But it is not reasonable because they did not improve crime stats with gun control.

a reply to: cavtrooper7
No fight man to man like the old days. If he has a sharp object I will try my best to avoid/flee. If he has a bat or blunt object, I may try my luck depending on the situation/state of mind.. If I'm cornered and he has a gun pointed at me, me having a gun would be irrelevant. This is what you and many others ignore. If someone has the high ground you lose. By reaching for your gun you have a high chance of being shot. Being Macho doesn't help in the subject and pretending you have super human senses is absurd. Stick to the steroids.