January 11, 201115 yr Think Tough Gun Laws Keep Europeans Safe? Think Again... http://www.lewrockwell.com/lott/lott68.1.html Multiple victim public shootings appear to be at least as common in Europe as they are here. The following is a partial list of attacks occurring in Europe since 2001. All of them occurred in gun free zones, places where guns in the hands of civilians were not allowed: Zug, Switzerland, September 27, 2001: a man murdered 15 members of a cantonal parliament. Tours, France, October 29, 2001: four people were killed and 10 wounded when a French railway worker started killing people at a busy intersection in the city. Nanterre, France, March 27, 2002: a man kills eight city councilors after a city council meeting. Erfurt, Germany on April 26, 2002: a former student kills 18 at a secondary school. Freising, Germany on February 19, 2002: Three people killed and one wounded. Turin, Italy on October 15, 2002: Seven people were killed on a hillside overlooking the city. Madrid, Spain, October 1, 2006: a man kills two employees and wounds another at a company that he was fired from. Emsdetten, Germany, November 20, 2006: a former student murders 11 people at a high school. Southern Finland, November 7, 2007: Seven students and the principal were killed at a high school. Naples, Italy, September 18, 2008: Seven dead and two seriously wounded in a public meeting hall (not included in totals below because it may possibly have involved the mafia). Kauhajoki, Finland, Sept. 23, 2008: 10 people were shot to death at a college. Winnenden, Germany, March 11, 2009: a 17-year-old former student killed 15 people, including nine students and three teachers. Lyon, France, March 19, 2009: ten people injured after a man opened fire on a nursery school. Athens, Greece, April 10, 2009: three people killed and two people injured by a student at a vocational college. Rotterdam, Netherlands, April 11, 2009: three people killed and 1 injured at a crowded cafe. Vienna, Austria, May 24, 2009: one dead and 16 wounded in an attack on a Sikh Temple. Espoo, Finland, Dec. 31, 2009: 4 killed while shopping at a mall on New Year's Eve. Cumbria, England, June 2, 2010: 12 people killed by a British taxi driver.
January 11, 201115 yr I'll ask you the same question. What is "too much" for the average law-abiding citizen? Remember that this guy didn't get anything on the black market. He was completely above board. So I would argue that in this case the injuries and deaths could have been less had there been reasonable limits placed upon the citizenry. The average citizen I would say a 1 round clip is too much. But to the gun collector, lover, competition shooter, recreation shooter I would say 30 isn't too much. To the law-abiding sain gun owner it shouldn't matter how many a clip holds. It could hold 1000 and what would it matter. If this guy did this same thing with a 12 gauge that held 5 rounds I would bet the outcome wouldn't be that much different and would probably have been worse. I will ask you a question. If the average citizen couldn't buy a 30 round clip for a glock would that stop something like this from happening?
January 11, 201115 yr Detailed below are some of the worst incidents of School shootings between 1996 and 2002 as documented by the BBC. I find it intruguing that five of the top ten occurred in Great Britain and Germany with gun laws that make even the toughest proposed here in the U.S. look weak. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1953425.stm History of school shootings Scotland, March 1996: Gun enthusiast Thomas Hamilton shoots 16 children and their teacher dead at their primary school in Dunblane, Scotland before killing himself. Yemen, March 1997: A man with an assault rifle attacked hundreds of pupils at two schools in Sanaa, Yemen, killing six children and two others. He was sentenced to death the next day. United States, October 1997: A 16-year-old boy fatally stabbed his mother before shooting dead two students, including his former girlfriend, at Pearl High School in Pearl, Mississippi. United States, December 1997: A 14-year old boy killed three students attending a prayer meeting at Heath High School in West Paducah, Kentucky. United States, March 1998: Two boys aged 13 and 11 killed four pupils and a teacher after setting off fire alarms at Westside Middle School in Jonesboro, Arkansas. United States, April 1999: Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris killed 12 of their classmates and a teacher at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, before killing themselves. Germany, November 1999: A 15-year-old student in Meissen, eastern Germany, stabbed his teacher to death after taking bets from classmates he would dare commit the crime. He was later jailed for seven years. Germany, March 2000: A 16-year-old pupil at a private boarding school in the Bavarian town of Branneburg, shot a 57-year-old teacher, who later died from injuries. The teenager - who also shot himself - was facing expulsion from school after failing a cannabis test. Germany, February 2002: A former pupil killed his headmaster and set off pipe bombs in the technical school he had recently been expelled from in Freising near Munich. The man also shot dead his boss and a foreman at the company he worked for before turning the gun on himself. Another teacher was shot in the face, but survived. Germany, April 2002: Seventeen people killed after a gunman - a former pupil - opens fire in a school in Erfurt, eastern Germany. He then turned the gun on himself.
January 11, 201115 yr I think we all agree on whose fault it is and most are not blaming the gun. However, it's seems reasonable to many of us to ask if there is a point where there is "too much" gun. Does the average citizen need a 30 clip? Is it excessive? It's been mentioned that had he had, say, a 10 clip not as many people would have been shot. You see no validity to that? What is "too much?" So....If he had 2 9mm's with 15 round clips with 1 in each hand, what would have been the difference? Do tell.
January 11, 201115 yr Toughest laws in the world could not stop Cumbria tragedy http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article7142568.ece Gun Control's Twisted Outcome Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S. http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome Last December, London's Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent. Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England's inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.
January 11, 201115 yr So....If he had 2 9mm's with 15 round clips with 1 in each hand, what would have been the difference? Do tell. Absolutely nothing, which is one of many reasons why the whole 30 round clip assertion holds zero merit or credibility.
January 11, 201115 yr I think we all agree on whose fault it is and most are not blaming the gun. However, it's seems reasonable to many of us to ask if there is a point where there is "too much" gun. Does the average citizen need a 30 clip? Is it excessive? It's been mentioned that had he had, say, a 10 clip not as many people would have been shot. You see no validity to that? What is "too much?" I won't bother rehashing what the others have already correctly answered concerning your question.
January 11, 201115 yr November 5, 2009 at 1:34 p.m. Nidal Malik Hasan, a U.S. Army major, serving as a psychiatrist, leapt upon a desk at Fort Hood military base in Texas and shouted: "Allahu Akbar!" He began firing rounds from his semi-automatic pistol at unarmed servicemen and women. Several attempted to subdue him using chairs and tables at hand, and were killed or wounded in the process. It was not until Hasan was confronted by fellow soldiers armed with similar firearms that he was shot and stopped. In the few minutes of his shooting spree, he fired 214 rounds using 20 and 30 round magazines in his weapon, with another 177 unfired rounds still in his pockets. 13 people including one pregnant female were killed and 30 others were wounded. Following the shooting, we were told by President Obama, and many talking heads in the media to not jump to conclusions. Don’t rush to judgment. Wait until all the facts are in. The actions of this one killer were not indicative of all Muslims. I’m okay with that. Sounds like good advice. Where is it now? Why the rush to attribute the Arizona loon’s actions to Limbaugh, Palin and the Tea Party… when there’s not one shred of evidence that this guy had any connection with any of them? Not a loud shout of “Dittoes Rush!” or “This one’s for you Momma Bear!” As this nut’s profile emerges, it becomes more clear that he’s about as far from the conservative right as the liberals trying to pound his square peg into a round hole. The more I consider the eagerness of political hacks to attribute blame within hours of such a horrendous event, and the pass they have gotten in the media to promulgate such despicable lies… with no evidence whatsoever to back their vitriol, the more disgusted I become. And some of you wonder why newspapers and traditional media are going the way of the dodo bird…
January 11, 201115 yr What troubles me the most with the above scenario, is that even if the AZ clown had attended a Tea Party rally, or had campaigned for Palin or was a Rush devotee... why would the same advice we are told to extend to Muslim Radicals not apply to this loser? Some on the left are so eager to shut up Palin, Limbaugh, the Tea Party, etc. they are willing to not just do the opposite of what they endorsed following the Fort Hood shooting, they are making unrealistic assertions with no facts whatsoever to back them up... in simple words, they are lying hypocrites.
January 12, 201115 yr The assassination and attempted assassination of political leaders are inherently political issues and I think it’s valid to have a discussion about it, though with more tact and timing than has been exhibited thus far. The shooter here was clearly deranged and suffering from some sort of mental illness, from my layman’s diagnosis. No words, advertisements, or books caused his actions and those calling for persecution or banning of speech are very misguided and reactionary. However, it’s hard not to consider how violent our rhetoric has been. Whether its cross hairs on districts, “second amendment solutions,” carrying guns to protests, or the invocation of Jefferson’s famous saying – “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants” – as a political rallying cry, in the wake of the murder and attempted murder of politicians we have to take a step back and wonder what this rhetoric really means and how crude it actually is juxtaposed to tragedy. And this rhetoric certainly isn’t limited to the past few years. Many would be on the opposite side concerning this vileness people are passing off as true debate had someone taken an attempt on a Republican, especially in the wake of what was directed at President Bush, including Death of a President. I simply don’t believe it is legitimate or defensible and what better time than now to turn away from it? Instead, it appears we are doubling down on the boorish arguments. From cries that Sarah Palin has blood on her hands to the claims that that the murderer “has the full support of a major political party in this country” every side is cashing in on the tragedy as a political opportunity. Radley Balko wrote that the killer admired such a diverse list of authors and statements that there would be evidence to confirm anyone’s bias. That certainly appears true as he has been cast as a Marx-loving, potheaded liberal to a Rand-worshipping, anti-immigrant conservative. How any of that matters when discussing someone who is quite literally insane would otherwise be inexplicable, except that we know that partisans will make any excuse to cast the killer as a member of the opposition’s ranks. At a time when introspection is demanded we are as defensive as ever.
January 12, 201115 yr I have to take issue with the "Crosshairs" on congressional districts... whether republican or democrat... it's a stretch of Grand Canyon proportions to seriously assert that this had/has anything to do with the actions of a nutjob. It's even more dramatic than suggesting that the Beatles were at fault for the actions of Charles Manson. If it's true however, I can think of at least one national retailer that's going to have to come up a new name and logo:
January 12, 201115 yr The assassination and attempted assassination of political leaders are inherently political issues and I think it’s valid to have a discussion about it, though with more tact and timing than has been exhibited thus far. The shooter here was clearly deranged and suffering from some sort of mental illness, from my layman’s diagnosis. No words, advertisements, or books caused his actions and those calling for persecution or banning of speech are very misguided and reactionary. However, it’s hard not to consider how violent our rhetoric has been. Whether its cross hairs on districts, “second amendment solutions,” carrying guns to protests, or the invocation of Jefferson’s famous saying – “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants” – as a political rallying cry, in the wake of the murder and attempted murder of politicians we have to take a step back and wonder what this rhetoric really means and how crude it actually is juxtaposed to tragedy. And this rhetoric certainly isn’t limited to the past few years. Many would be on the opposite side concerning this vileness people are passing off as true debate had someone taken an attempt on a Republican, especially in the wake of what was directed at President Bush, including Death of a President. I simply don’t believe it is legitimate or defensible and what better time than now to turn away from it? Instead, it appears we are doubling down on the boorish arguments. From cries that Sarah Palin has blood on her hands to the claims that that the murderer “has the full support of a major political party in this country” every side is cashing in on the tragedy as a political opportunity. Radley Balko wrote that the killer admired such a diverse list of authors and statements that there would be evidence to confirm anyone’s bias. That certainly appears true as he has been cast as a Marx-loving, potheaded liberal to a Rand-worshipping, anti-immigrant conservative. How any of that matters when discussing someone who is quite literally insane would otherwise be inexplicable, except that we know that partisans will make any excuse to cast the killer as a member of the opposition’s ranks. At a time when introspection is demanded we are as defensive as ever. I wish that last sentence weren't true, but this seems to be where all of the focus is.
January 12, 201115 yr Think Tough Gun Laws Keep Europeans Safe? Think Again... http://www.lewrockwell.com/lott/lott68.1.html . The data is old but I'm guessing it's still representative of today's numbers. Homicides involving firearms by country per 100k population. Australia .56 Canada .60 Germany .21 Japan .03 Span .19 UK .13 USA 6.24 What does that tell us? http://www.allcountries.org/gun_deaths_by_country.html
January 12, 201115 yr The average citizen I would say a 1 round clip is too much. But to the gun collector, lover, competition shooter, recreation shooter I would say 30 isn't too much. To the law-abiding sain gun owner it shouldn't matter how many a clip holds. It could hold 1000 and what would it matter. If this guy did this same thing with a 12 gauge that held 5 rounds I would bet the outcome wouldn't be that much different and would probably have been worse. I will ask you a question. If the average citizen couldn't buy a 30 round clip for a glock would that stop something like this from happening? Of course no one can ever say it would completely stop the chance of an incident. If that's our benchmark we should have no laws at all.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.