[Closed] I love Americans, but there is something seriously wrong over there...

[url= http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/rural-population-percent-of-total-population-wb-data.html ]http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/rural-population-percent-of-total-population-wb-data.html[/url]

just under 18% of the US population live in 'rural' areas. I'd imagine the subset of those who might be subject to attack by predatory wild animals is a very small percentage of the total population.

Why anyone living in an urban or suburban area would *need* a gun is a mystery to me. So probably 300,000,000+ people could only need a gun to protect themselves from other humans.

If I lived in Shitsville Idaho, then I can understand wanting to own a rifle. But how many people does that represent? What percentage of the population could seriously justify 'needing' firearms?

That's not what gun ownership in America is about at all. Its marketed to the willing population, half on baseless fear, and half on some weird, testosterone fueled ballistics porn

So connect to their website and leave your comments - enough people hassle these morons they might stop making this sh*t. No good whining in a closet.

[url= http://www.slidefire.com/contact ][/url]

I find it ironic that this happens on the same day that GTA is released.

The issue is that some people see the world in terms of goodies and baddies. Not just in the USA either, people on STW do it too.

There are indeed goodies and baddies, but there are people in between, and people who move between the two. Most pro gun arguments run along the lines of "If the good people have guns, they can shoot the bad people and save the good people".

Which is patently obviously flawed to anyone over the age of 12 of course, but there is a complication. The guns are ALREADY out there. Stopping sales of new guns won't get rid of what's already there. The horse has already bolted.

That's a problem to which no-one really has an answer, imo.

Maybe they should only be allowed to own weapons that were available when the constitution was written.

molgrips - Member
The guns are ALREADY out there. Stopping sales of new guns won't get rid of what's already there. The horse has already bolted.

As Chris Rock (I think) said, make the bullets $1000 each.

EDIT - Zippy's plan works too.

Unless for home defence, a [b]responsible[/b] gun owner would never bring a gun and ammo together unless at a range.

Ah. There's that annoying R word again.

As Chris Rock (I think) said, make the bullets $1000 each

Except it'll take forever to deplete existing stocks.

zippykona - Member

Maybe they should only be allowed to own weapons that were available when the constitution was written.

I thought we'd cleared this one up?

[img] [/img]

On a more general note, I always have a little bit of trouble with the "It's in the constitution, and the constitution is sacred, you can't mess with it or, you know, [i]amend[/i] it."

Aren't the amendments all additions? Adding rights is easier than taking them away I suspect.

I still think this is a wonderful exhibit A when discussing American right-wing views:

s Chris Rock (I think) said, make the bullets $1000 each.

And make it the law that every firearm must be painted Barbie Pink and sprinkled with glitter and feathers. Whould chip away at the macho image!

Why anyone living in an urban or suburban area would *need* a gun is a mystery to me. So probably 300,000,000+ people could only need a gun to protect themselves from other humans.

Huge social and race issues, leading inevitably to crime related issues. And since those issues aren't going to be sorted any time soon, I can understand why they feel the need for handguns. I also understand the rifles for hunting business.

What I don't understand is the need for semi auto and automatic weapons to be available to the general population.

I've always found it funny that some of them state they need to have firearms in case they need to defend themselves against the government. The last time they did that was 1861-1865, and look how well that turned out.

The last time they did that was 1861-1865, and look how well that turned out.

Not enough guns. Next time will be different.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

To be fair I'm much more likely to be killed by cheese than by a gun.

Any person who has psychological issues like these cases will find a weapon and kill people. No amount of legislation will stop that.

It happens all over the world, including Europe.......

Raol Moat
Anders Breivic
Derrick Bird
Dale Cregan

So why is gun crime so high in the US then LHS if it's nothing to do with proliferation of guns? It's just part of the culture?

To be fair I'm much more likely to be killed by cheese than by a gun.

The smell of a nice ripe Epoisse could kill as well as any assault rifle.

Raol Moat
Anders Breivic
Derrick Bird
Dale Cregan

You've left out all the people who [i]haven't[/i] gone on shooting sprees because of anti-gun legislation.

And btw killing 4 people is quite a pathetic killing spree, if people with "psychological issues" could get their hands on fully automatic weapons, then I'm sure we could match the United States killing sprees much better.

Always easy to point the finger rather than accept there are issues closer to home.

Let's not even talk about knife crime in this country.

Well it's certainly easy to point to facts. IIRC Dale Cregan killed 4 people, I can't see how that is comparable to a typical shooting spree in the US.

Grenade attacks, a little more of a step on from shootings.

Always easy to point the finger rather than accept there are issues closer to home.

Well the US has massively higher gun violence than this country. 10.3 gun deaths per 100,000 people as opposed to 0.25. So yes it is easy to point the finger in this case.

Let's not even talk about knife crime in this country.

Always easy to point the finger rather than accept there are issues closer to home. 😉

Grenade attacks, a little more of a step on from shootings.

Do you think the rarity of grenade attacks might be connected to the fact that owning a grenade is illegal in the UK ?

To pretend that the UK has simular issues with regards to killing sprees as the US is bizarre.

Always easy to point the finger rather than accept there are issues closer to home

You can ignore it if you like, but close to 1000 knife related crimes in London alone every month. Not exactly great statistics.

Do you think the rarity of grenade attacks might be connected to the fact that owning a grenade is illegal in the UK ?

close to 1000 knife related crimes in London alone every month. Not exactly great statistics.

So the fact that carrying a gun is illegal isn't helping ?

To pretend that the UK has simular issues with regards to killing sprees as the US is bizarre

To ignore our own problems and concentrate on another countries is even more bizarre.

😯

If you legalised them grenade attacks would still be rare.

Well I don't understand why owning a grenade is illegal then.

Right I'm out of here.

.

EDIT : [i]"To ignore our own problems"[/i] Because of course I argued that the UK was free of all social and crime related problems ? Priceless ! 😀

Well I don't understand why owning a grenade is illegal then.

You can ignore it if you like, but close to 1000 knife related crimes in London alone every month. Not exactly great statistics.

To ignore our own problems and concentrate on another countries is even more bizarre.

😕

And they say Americans don't understand irony (or should that be hypocrisy). You're American right?

And the answer to our knife crime problem is to legalise guns I suppose?

You're American right?

Nope.

Just find it bizarre that a nation who has HUGE social issues and a knife crime culture spiralling out of control is so transfixed on solving another nations problems first.

Guns / Grenades / Knives - they all kill people. Only just recently we had a horrific machete attack in broad daylight on the streets of London.

Any person who has psychological issues like these cases will find a weapon and kill people. No amount of legislation will stop that.

Quite, but it's the nature of that weapon that's the issue. Would you rather a nutter go on a spree with a breadknife or with an assault rifle?

Just find it bizarre that a nation who has HUGE social issues and a knife crime culture spiralling out of control is so transfixed on solving another nations problems first.

What do national boundaries have to do with it?

[i]Only just recently we had a horrific machete attack in broad daylight on the streets of London. [/i]

which would have been a lot less horrific if the perpetrators had had easy access to automatic weapons?

The UK gangs seem to be about where the US ones were in the 60's and 70's with knife crime. Let's hope it doesn't escalate to guns the way it has done in the US.

You can ignore it if you like, but close to 1000 knife related crimes in London alone every month. Not exactly great statistics.

You know the first thing that listening to More or Less on R4 (A program I heartily recommend) as taught me is that when presented with a big number like that you should always ask is "is it a big number?". It certainly appears to be big but given that there are just over 8 million people in London it may not be. There is also no comparison with any other data with which to compare it. Additionally there is the question of what constitutes "knife related crime"? Does stealing a kitchen knife from a shop count, does being threatened (but not harmed) by someone carrying a knife count, does the knife have to be visible for it to count? Basically you've thrown out an irrelevant number in the hope of distracting from the valid criticism of gun deaths in the US. Not a very good debating technique really.

And the answer to our knife crime problem is to legalise guns I suppose?

....or hand grenades? 😀

The UK gangs seem to be about where the US ones were in the 60's and 70's with knife crime. Let's hope it doesn't escalate to guns the way it has done in the US.

Unlikely unless they start selling assault rifles in Tesco

Its desperately tragic that (I think), the NRA said after teh school shooting that a bad guy with a gun could be stopped by a good guy with a gun..

So here we have a bad guy with a gun in a building full of good guys with guns....

I remember getting into this conversation with a guy in a bar on the quayside in New York, basically, it came down to the fact he didn't feel safe or properly dressed without "Mr Heckler and Mr Koch". Sure enough, he was carrying a gun... and did so every day.

I can't understand it in 2013... just seems nuts. But the public gets what the public wants I suppose.

You're American right?
Nope.

Could have sworn you've said you were American on previous threads. You've certainly been weirdly defensive about America before.

Just find it bizarre that a nation who has HUGE social issues and a knife crime culture spiralling out of control is so transfixed on solving another nations problems first.

We have a 'knife crime culture spiralling out of control' and 'HUGE social issues'? Maybe London does, I don't know but things seem pretty peachy in general in this country.

You know the first thing that listening to More or Less on R4 (A program I heartily recommend) as taught me is that when presented with a big number like that you should always ask is "is it a big number?".

The answer is no.

Compare them to road deaths, tobacco deaths, pretty much anything you like. The chance of getting killed with a gun is so close to zero you can forget about it.

They definitely need to start making more of an effort to kill people with cars then. Maybe more drunk driving?

Basically you've thrown out an irrelevant number in the hope of distracting from the valid criticism of gun deaths in the US.

January 2013:

1,038 victims of kife crime
410 injuries
4 murders
Remaining were threatened (mugged etc)

Living in London, I would say that its a pretty significant number to be concerned. No distraction, just concerned.

I also think that having someone hacked to death with a machete is more horrific than being shot with a gun.

You've certainly been weirdly defensive about America before.

Weirdly defensive versus weirdly critical.

The difference being acknowledgement of problems in ones own country first.

The US has far greater social issues than the UK imo.

Why is it that, per head, even thought Canada has nearly as many firearms than America its gun violence tally is far, far lower?

Not the page I wanted (comparing gun crime in the US to a developing nation or one at war isn't really fair), but it proves a point: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/schoo-shooting-how-do-u-s-gun-homicides-compare-with-the-rest-of-the-world/

This is before we get into countries like Switzerland, where I believe you keep your national service weapon...

the point you are failing to get LHS is that 1 person was hacked to death with a machete and 20 people were shot

more horrific or not 11 more bereaved families, because of the weapon used

The difference being acknowledgement of problems in ones own country first.

I acknowledge we have problems in our own country (but not as many as America).

Now can we get on with talking about the topic please?

Why is it that, per head, even thought Canada has nearly as many firearms than America its gun violence tally is far, far lower?

I suspect because they don't have the same ridiculous culture of fetishising guns and violence (and they have less social problems).

I also think that having someone hacked to death with a machete is more horrific than being shot with a gun.

Can we start a league table then? Being dispatched from a distance, with a snipers rifle, is clearly almost like dying naturally in your sleep, at a ripe old age, having lived a full and rewarding life. But what would be at the top?

For me it'd be being thrown into a pit of genetically modified, psychotic zombie gerbils, with little mini chainsaws?

What about you?

I am a fan of Sam Harris and this is on my reading list for later.

[url= http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-riddle-of-the-gun ]The riddle of the gun[/url]

Can we start a league table then? Being dispatched from a distance, with a snipers rifle, is clearly almost like dying naturally in your sleep, at a ripe old age, having lived a full and rewarding life. But what would be at the top?

I think the point you're missing here binners is that one machete death is worth roughly 20 gun deaths, in terms of horrificicity.

So we need some sort of more complex comparison table as each death doesn't have the same weight, apparently.

So extrapolating from January (I know that's fairly problematic) that gives an annual death rate from knives at 0.6 per 100,000. Given earlier data of over 10 per 100,000 in the US for gun deaths it would appear that adding the knife and gun deaths in the UK together would give a death rate in the UK less than that for gun deaths alone in the US. Assuming the knife death rate in London is representative of the UK as a whole.

On that basis I'm going to go with the gun problems in the US are an order of magnitude worse than the combined gun and knife problems in the UK.

Compare them to [b]road deaths[/b], tobacco deaths, pretty much anything you like. The chance of getting killed with a gun is so close to zero you can forget about it.

On the road deaths front, according to wikipedia, the US had 33000 road deaths in 2009, it had 11000 firearms homicides. Whilst there's obviously a big difference, it's not as stark as you make out.

I'm not sure how stark I made it out to be, but I don't worry at all about dying in my car. I'd worry 1/3 as much about getting shot.

I don't worry at all about dying in my car.

Really? You don't take reasonable steps to decrease the likelihood of you having a serious car accident owing in part to an awareness of the consequences of such an accident? Are you sure?

The difference being acknowledgement of problems in ones own country first.

I don't see the connection. The two things aren't exclusive. The USA has worse social problems than the UK does, that's pretty clear.

the shooter worked in IT- maybe thats where the problem lies....

Really? You don't take reasonable steps to decrease the likelihood of you having a serious car accident owing in part to an awareness of the consequences of such an accident? Are you sure?

http://guns.periscopic.com/?year=2013

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

Although I confess to being not that interested; it seems that America as a society is content to accept the consequences. They can't even sort out a health care system, so gun control is way beyond them.

I drive a huge 4x4 if that's what you mean?

I think he means stuff like looking before pulling out of junctions, not overtaking into oncoming traffic etc.

Oh and driving a 4x4 isn't any safer than a well designed normal car, btw 🙂

STOP with the big hand, small map statistics for gun crime in the USA. It is a 'king big place with more diversity than most Europeans appreciate.
Look at the urban / rural aspect and yes, the race aspect. This might educate a few people:

[url= http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-03-23/national/37959221_1_guns-and-suicide-gun-deaths-gun-control ]guns-and-suicide-gun-deaths-gun-control[/url]

Firearm homicide is the leading cause of death for African Americans ages 1-44.

African Americans make up nearly 13% of the U.S. population, but in 2009 suffered almost 24% of all firearm deaths – and over 54% of all firearm homicides.

Number of Deaths Due to Firearms per 100,000 Population by Race/Ethnicity
White Black Other
9.2 16.9 3.3

[i]in 2009 suffered almost 24% of all firearm deaths – and over 54% of all firearm homicides[/i]

So there's a lot of white people getting killed by guns where it's not homicide? Those stats make it look like over 50% of firearm deaths aren't homicide?

Stat wars ! How does that break down with income ? 20% of all children live in poverty cf 46% of black children

STOP with the big hand, small map statistics for gun crime in the USA. It is a 'king big place with more diversity than most Europeans appreciate.

I know. I've lived and travelled there.

[url= http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/gun-deaths/ ]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/gun-deaths/[/url]

This shows, by State and race, firearm deaths - homicide and suicide.

STOP with the big hand, small map statistics for gun crime in the USA. It is a 'king big place with more diversity than most Europeans appreciate.

Indeed, but many on here don't understand that. The USA is 40 times the size of the UK with a massive diverse population spread from the Arctic down to the Gulf of Mexico.

I think he means stuff like looking before pulling out of junctions, not overtaking into oncoming traffic etc.

Indeed, but many on here don't understand that. The USA is 40 times the size of the UK with a massive diverse population spread from the Arctic down to the Gulf of Mexico.

So no one in Europe can comment on anything in the US because "it's a big place"? That seems like an odd viewpoint.

So no one in Europe can comment on anything in the US because "it's a big place"? That seems like an odd viewpoint

That's not what was stated, no where did it say no one in Europe can comment, it's just that there are a lot of toothless goons who don't take into consideration the vast diversity within the US.

The real issue that should be debated is the lack of investment / support for mental health issues within the US. This is really where a lot of the issues arise and many people fall between the gaps in society due to lack of funding of mental health issues on free government healthcare schemes and of being on low income to be able to afford private health cover.

So no one in Europe can comment on anything in the US because "it's a big place"?

I didn't say that. Few Europeans really appreciate how big the USA is. When I say big, at times it is almost too big to get your head around on the scale of a single country. I would guess that Russia and China are similar in that respect but I haven't travelled there. It isn't until you travel around in the USA (and drive rather than just fly) that things really start to click with regards size and diversity - and indeed how the size drives many aspects we Europeans see as 'different'.

America is huge, just vast, I visited 6 states in 2 weeks last year (all of New England) albeit briefly, and we were hardly off the road to do that, the mileages were massive. And that is just one tiny corner of the USA, a tiny, tiny percentage.

I think the place is just so big and so diverse that it really is unmanageable, it's easy to see why these mentally ill people fall off the radar, and why 'the state' can't keep tabs on everyone.

Their gun laws are questionable, obviously, but as for everything else, it just seems nigh on impossible.

So, let me get this straight - is the US quite large? I'd never realised.

Obviously.

It took me 4 days to get across on the train!

that's more to do with the trains being rubbish than anything else.

Obviously.

Funny cos when I was travelling across America on buses it was over in a flash - seemed so tiny, like San Marino or something.

that's more to do with the trains being rubbish than anything else.

They were a bit trundly, but a nice way to see lots of the country, even though going to sleep looking at fields and waking up looking at fields was a good introduction to the above mentioned idea that it is actually very bloody big.

Still got a problem with guns though. 9 children under the age of 5 were shot in New York while I was there; through the front door...

The real issue that should be debated is the lack of investment / support for mental health issues within the US.

That's a symptom of a much more fundamental issue. The US is founded on the principle of small government. That means that they are supposed to do the absolute minimum in all areas and let the pepole sort themselves out.

So when people aren't capable or equipped to sort themselves out, that's when problems occur.