Quote
kovach

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kovach

Quote
Rokyfan

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kovach

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
HighwireC
Do you believe, some "couple of good guys with concealed carry permits" would have had a real chance to stopp these terrorists using machine guns, really?

Show me one example, please ...

Peace.
HigfhwireC

Yes I obviously do or I wouldn't have said so.. I assure you if I was there, I would have tried to stop them. And if you were there and armed you probably would have too. I implore you not to continue the debate for obvious reasons..

But since you asked for examples:

[crimeresearch.org]

Seems to be a misperception of gun crimes in the US. I don't own a gun myself but I support the right of those who do. And yes we have the highest rate of gun ownership in the world, but when it comes to gun related crimes we don't even crack the top 100 countries in the world. That doesn't exactly suggest more guns = more violence.

Who told you that, the NFA?

Dandy, there are a lot of simple-minded people here in the US who believe that it would be better if everyone was walking around armed.

They come out after every such event, whether terrorist or Columbine, the Connecticut school, etc. and point out that if someone there had been armed, far fewer innocent people would have been killed, which is obviously true in all the cases. If there had been some good person in the Paris theater, armed, far fewer people would have been killed there.

However, does anyone really think that the overall quantum of shootings would be less if the general population in the US or Europe were walking around with handguns, that general mayhem would not prevail? Sadly, I think there are people here in my country who do.

Chicago has one of the most restrictive handgun laws in the country and also one of the highest rates of handgun crimes. Elsewhere you see similar situations in that gun-free zones have higher handgun crimes. Criminals don't obey laws and they know where they'll have less resistance.

That's the same as allowing rape and physical abuse. The criminals will do it anyway, so let's allow it in controlled forms?

Really?

Allowing someone to carry a handgun for their own protection is equal to legalizing rape and physical abuse? You lost me with that analogy...

Mind you I'm not a gun owner, I think they're dangerous to have in the home especially with children. But I understand why people do.

It was this sentence that caught my eye:

«Criminals don't obey laws and they know where they'll have less resistance»

Hence I wondered if you thought that easy access to weapons would solve the problem.

Giving in won't solve anything, imo. You gotta start somewhere. You live in a country with a quarter of a billion people, and there are bound to be thousands who never should get near a gun. Half of the people who carry for protection will get unlucky. It's a negative spiral...

But enough of politics for now

Forget this "NRA" question. That's entirely a US debate. It's not a big question in Europe. And in this case: To respond to fire from a group of jihad terrorists
armed with automatic weapons you better be well equipped and organized...

Quote
Stoneage
Forget this "NRA" question. That's entirely a US debate. It's not a big question in Europe. And in this case: To respond to fire from a group of jihad terrorists
armed with automatic weapons you better be well equipped and organized...

You better not...

Surprised that this post hasn't been taken down yet.

good points expressed so far, in this thread.

a lot of disagreement, yes, but mostly in a non-personal way..

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that.
Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."

- Martin Luther King Jnr.


Peace.
HighwireC

Quote
Silver Dagger
Surprised that this post hasn't been taken down yet.

Agreed. Especially with all the "blaming"/politicizing going on. Sad and pathetic

Quote
Stones50

Quote
Silver Dagger
Surprised that this post hasn't been taken down yet.

Agreed. Especially with all the "blaming"/politicizing going on. Sad and pathetic

Your right, we all feel pathetic and sad after so many innocent people has killed..........

__________________________

Quote
Stones50

Quote
Silver Dagger
Surprised that this post hasn't been taken down yet.

Agreed. Especially with all the "blaming"/politicizing going on. Sad and pathetic

Imho it's the thread where we can violate the "no politics" rule at IORR (as long as we remain civil).

Quote
Silver Dagger
Surprised that this post hasn't been taken down yet.

Why? I mean, it has turned into a gun control debate which is kind of off the main point, but why should it be taken down? If people want to discuss something you don't want to read, then don't read it. The events of the past few days are obviously huge, and people like to discuss things with people they "know" so what is the problem?

Is it off the main point if a potential terrorist can buy pretty heavy arms over the counter in the US, and those weapons are used in an attack later on?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kovach

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kovach

Quote
Rokyfan

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kovach

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
HighwireC
Do you believe, some "couple of good guys with concealed carry permits" would have had a real chance to stopp these terrorists using machine guns, really?

Show me one example, please ...

Peace.
HigfhwireC

Yes I obviously do or I wouldn't have said so.. I assure you if I was there, I would have tried to stop them. And if you were there and armed you probably would have too. I implore you not to continue the debate for obvious reasons..

But since you asked for examples:

[crimeresearch.org]

Seems to be a misperception of gun crimes in the US. I don't own a gun myself but I support the right of those who do. And yes we have the highest rate of gun ownership in the world, but when it comes to gun related crimes we don't even crack the top 100 countries in the world. That doesn't exactly suggest more guns = more violence.

Who told you that, the NFA?

Dandy, there are a lot of simple-minded people here in the US who believe that it would be better if everyone was walking around armed.

They come out after every such event, whether terrorist or Columbine, the Connecticut school, etc. and point out that if someone there had been armed, far fewer innocent people would have been killed, which is obviously true in all the cases. If there had been some good person in the Paris theater, armed, far fewer people would have been killed there.

However, does anyone really think that the overall quantum of shootings would be less if the general population in the US or Europe were walking around with handguns, that general mayhem would not prevail? Sadly, I think there are people here in my country who do.

Chicago has one of the most restrictive handgun laws in the country and also one of the highest rates of handgun crimes. Elsewhere you see similar situations in that gun-free zones have higher handgun crimes. Criminals don't obey laws and they know where they'll have less resistance.

That's the same as allowing rape and physical abuse. The criminals will do it anyway, so let's allow it in controlled forms?

Really?

Allowing someone to carry a handgun for their own protection is equal to legalizing rape and physical abuse? You lost me with that analogy...

Mind you I'm not a gun owner, I think they're dangerous to have in the home especially with children. But I understand why people do.

It was this sentence that caught my eye:

«Criminals don't obey laws and they know where they'll have less resistance»

Hence I wondered if you thought that easy access to weapons would solve the problem.

Giving in won't solve anything, imo. You gotta start somewhere. You live in a country with a quarter of a billion people, and there are bound to be thousands who never should get near a gun. Half of the people who carry for protection will get unlucky. It's a negative spiral...

But enough of politics for now

I see where you're coming from. The problem here in the US is the easy access of cheap guns on the black market used in the majority of crimes and gun free zones sort of give them a safe haven to perform such acts where they know the majority of law abiding citizens won't have them.

But there's too many accidents where people are hurt by their own weapons. Thus my reasoning for not having any in my household! To each his own...

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Is it off the main point if a potential terrorist can buy pretty heavy arms over the counter in the US, and those weapons are used in an attack later on?

If your point is that such an attack would be easier in the US because the arms and ammo can just be purchased in WalMart, or in some states even through drive-in windows, you are correct.

80 people die every day in the US from a homicide or suicide using a gun. If you are a gun owner, the biggest risk of someone you know being killed from a gun is not someone else attacking you or someone you love, but someone using your gun to commit suicide (about 50 suicides per day using guns in the USA).

Having said that, gun crime in the US (and all violent crime in the US) is on a rapid decline. The level of gun crime committed seems to be less correlated with gun control and more correlated with how healthy a society is.

The topic of guns and gun control is not really relevant to the topic of terrorist attacks, because the number of people killed by terrorist attacks in Europe and the USA is so small compared to the number of people killed by other causes, and the terrorist attacks usually involve access to explosives that are banned in all countries being discussed.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-11-16 19:47 by Turner68.

Turner68,
I'm afraid that , yes the topic of gun control is very close to terrorism.
From Russia to USA, we have to associate our efforts to reduce the circulation of fire weapons.
I know that lots of them come from conflicts in different parts of the world.
Weapons seem to easily go through the borders so we absolutely must give much more means to stop this weapons traffic.

Quote
Turner 68
The topic of guns and gun control is not really relevant to the topic of terrorist attacks, because the number of people killed by terrorist attacks in the Europe and the USA is so small compared to the number of people killed by other causes.

The former has nothing to do with the first. It's a logical fallacy.

***
I'm just a Bad Boy Boogie

Quote
Stoneage

Quote
Turner 68
The topic of guns and gun control is not really relevant to the topic of terrorist attacks, because the number of people killed by terrorist attacks in the Europe and the USA is so small compared to the number of people killed by other causes.

The former has nothing to do with the first. It's a logical fallacy.

That's because you deleted the last part of the sentence!

Madrid, Beirut, the Egyptian airliner, 9/11... guns tend not to be used in terrorist attacks. That completes the logical statement.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-11-16 20:02 by Turner68.

Quote
jpasc95
Turner68,
I'm afraid that , yes the topic of gun control is very close to terrorism.
From Russia to USA, we have to associate our efforts to reduce the circulation of fire weapons.
I know that lots of them come from conflicts in different parts of the world.
Weapons seem to easily go through the borders so we absolutely must give much more means to stop this weapons traffic.

sure, it's related, but what i am saying is that the chief cause of death from guns is not terrorism, and that the chief cause of death from terrorism is not guns, it's suicide bombs.

Turner68: I didn't delete any part of the sentence. You must have edited your post after I copied the sentence! Anyway, it's history now...

(Somewhat a digression from this: I see now that almost every big rock/pop act have canceled their concerts in Paris and even Europe at large.)

Quote
Stoneage
(Somewhat a digression from this: I see now that almost every big rock/pop act have canceled their concerts in Paris and even Europe at large.)

they need to get metal detectors/security at the door/explosive-sniffing dogs.

Quote
Stoneage
(Somewhat a digression from this: I see now that almost every big rock/pop act have canceled their concerts in Paris and even Europe at large.)

This is truly a shame. As I said in another thread, much respect to the Artists who decide not to give in to the fear and play in Paris anyway. I wonder how much of these decisions are based on the fact that the terror happened at a music venue? How long will Paris be off-limits? Can't let those terrorists win like this!

Is that Phil Collins in that picture above?

Quote
Koen
Is that Phil Collins in that picture above?

Brian Johnson from ACDC.

Quote
Koen
Is that Phil Collins in that picture above?

Yes, complete with wig.

.....

Olly.

The Rolling Stones will do South America I'm sure, but if this world is going the way it's going.................it could be the last time for quite a few of the bands from the 60's and 70's performing live.

They just don't need the hassle in a potentially dangerous situation.

I really do hope things will get better and we can all lead a peaceful life.

Please do not use this thread to discuss domestic politics or religion or other difficult matters that will start another war right here on IORR. The same goes for gun control. Some like to own a gun, or may be twenty, others hate guns. I use a knife to cut my bread, others use a knife to kill.

If there are too many of those kind of political posts here then I have to start deleting, closing, acting like the real old Mr Censorship myself. I trust people are able to post with respect here.

On the personal side, I feel deep sadness for the pain our French friends are suffering right now. Like a young AUF girl said shortly after the terror attack in Norway July 22, 2011 attacks: "If one man can show so much hate, think how much love we could show, standing together."

Bjornulf

BV...THANK YOU!