[Closed] That shooting spree in the USA - Obama's comments...

The shooter is described by his uncle as a bit wierd and socially detached. Pictures of him wearing a jacket with a Rhodesian and apartheid era South African flag. The father gave his son a gun for his 21st birthday. Not a smart move.

great to hear him say it, will be even better if he can actually do anything about it. I think his will is there, but he is really up against it.

He said something similar last time. He has no chance of changing anything though. American's have an irrational love for their guns. I seriously doubt he could even get a law through with a majority in both houses, a lot of Democrats would vote against gun control.

There is nothing irrational in wanting a gun to defend yourself against those who are armed and mean you harm.

There is nothing irrational in wanting a gun to defend yourself against those who are armed and mean you harm.

But it is irrational to think that the threat is so great that you need to arm yourself with a gun.

Pretty much sums it up… bit sweary/nsfw if you're offended by that sort of thing.

Obviously in the case of the church shooting there was a threat. How many lives might have been saved had the gunman been shot by armed citizens as soon as he began his rampage? The same question could justifiably be asked of the terrorist attack on the Texas Mohammad art exhibition.

What do you call an unarmed person? - A victim!

14 times he's had to make that kind of speech.

Sadly I think he'll be making that speech a few more times before he leaves office.

Nothing will change in the US regarding gun laws.

To my mind, that puts him head and shoulders above a lot of recent presidents, even though he has zero chance of getting into law.

It is refreshing to hear a US politician say it but given that he has limited time left in Office, he has less than no hope.

As Chris Rock said (paraphrase): "They should make bullets cost $5000 each, then someone will really have to deserve it to be shot".

Obviously in the case of the church shooting there was a threat. How many lives might have been saved had the gunman been shot by armed citizens as soon as he began his rampage?

How many lives would have been saved if they locked the door?

None, he was in the congregation.

How many lives would have been saved if they banned churches?

the-muffin-man - Member
Sadly I think he'll be making that speech a few more times before he leaves office.

Nothing will change in the US regarding gun laws.

I fear you a so very right 🙁

"How many lives might have been saved had the gunman been shot by armed citizens as soon as he began his rampage?"
Seriously ? Butter enters church opens fire armed citizen reacts returns fire concerned citizen hears gunshots turns round sees armed citizen capping off into congregation opens fire on armed citizen family man at front decides to save those around him draws his piece and starts laying down surpressing fire on the back of the church so they can make a run for the alter door. Cue making a mass slaughter out of a massacre . Gun fights involving trained individuals trying to apply rules of engagement go horribly wrong and kill innocents and friendlies armed civilian populations is just a recipe for a clusterduck.

scotroutes - Member
How many lives would have been saved if they banned churches?

You stay classy.

Seriously ? Butter enters church opens fire armed citizen reacts returns fire concerned citizen hears gunshots turns round sees armed citizen capping off into congregation opens fire on armed citizen family man at front decides to save those around him draws his piece and starts laying down surpressing fire on the back of the church so they can make a run for the alter door. Cue making a mass slaughter out of a massacre . Gun fights involving trained individuals trying to apply rules of engagement go horribly wrong and kill innocents and friendlies armed civilian populations is just a recipe for a clusterduck.

Hoi-sin?

Obama words are welcome and no doubt sincere but he's a lame duck president. Ultimately he can say what he likes but he's unlikey to change anything this far into his second term

The serious counter argument to Sandy Hook ( which was a hoax to allow the liberals to into gun laws) was to force teachers to undergo mandatory shooting lessons.

When this ****nugget is running to be the next president

[img] [/img]

And it's partly based on less gun control, then you know we're screwed

^^[campaign motto] WE SHALL OVERCOMB!! [campaign motto]^^

Obama is right
Sadly to many americans think the answer to gun violence is more guns
You can see why they think this but it just does not work as their own history shows you every single year.

It wont change.

Fortunately, it's mostly poor folk who get killed in random gun violence in the US, so it doesn't actually matter very much, if at all.

Perhaps a bigger issue is why there seem to be so many people willing to do this. Is there perhaps more social isolation fir some and lack of social and mental health care?

Probably but it massively exacerbated by there being no laws to restrict the gun ownership amongst such people.

Sane happy people dont do sprees nor angry unhappy people who dont have guns.

Probably but it massively exacerbated by there being no laws to restrict the gun ownership amongst such people.

Sure about that?

The trouble is that due to the proliferation of guns, too many people see that as the answer to their grievances. If you change the gun laws you won't necessarily get rid of the grievances but people may stop seeing guns as the answer.

I won't happen over night. I may even take a few generations, but they have to start somewhere.

Obviously in the case of the church shooting there was a threat. How many lives might have been saved had the gunman been shot by armed citizens as soon as he began his rampage? The same question could justifiably be asked of the terrorist attack on the Texas Mohammad art exhibition.

I don't think the majority of Americans carry guns everywhere. None of the ones I know do.

Quick googling found figures for Florida, looks like about 7.4% of the population have carry permits.

Unfortunately they love their guns. This couple with obamas lack of usable time left in office and the corresponding election means that nothing is likely to be done in the foreseeable future.
One way that Americans who want more gun control can influence the debate is by joining the NRA and voting down all their attempts to block moves for more control.

Nothing to do with guns.

It's more to do with the person who intend to kill with or without guns that person would kill.

🙄

It's more to do with the person who intend to kill with or without guns that person would kill.

chewkw - Member

Nothing to do with guns.

That US President Barack Obama hasn't got a clue what he's talking about. You tell him chewwy.

That US President Barack Obama hasn't got a clue what he's talking about. You tell him chewwy.

Applause! 🙂

ernie_lynch - Member

chewkw - Member

Nothing to do with guns.

That US President Barack Obama hasn't got a clue what he's talking about. You tell him chewwy.

Yes, I will ask him this question.

[b]Is this a hate crime?[/b]

You may answer on behalf of the President then I give you the reasoning.

🙂

mikewsmith - Member

It's more to do with the person who intend to kill with or without guns that person would kill.

Yes but without a gun it would have been a lot less successful. The answer to the fear of guns is not more guns.

Ya, it's like saying alcohol related death should means banning alcohol ... 🙄 You don't seem to drink yourself to death does that not mean alcohol does not kill if you consume in moderation?

It takes a little more dedication to kill yourself with alcohol.

It's really rather hard to kill someone else with alcohol.

It's especially hard to kill lots of other people with alcohol.

AFAIK it's a lot harder to buy alcohol in most of the US than it is to buy a gun [especially if you're <21].

JJefferies got the gun control thing right. Sadly I found that his rape jokes were less admirable. He's no Bill Hicks.

gofasterstripes - Member

It takes a little more dedication to kill yourself with alcohol.

Yes, the end result is the same if you consume excessively.

The question remains ...

[b]Is this a hate crime?[/b]

🙄

Dude, you can kill yourself with water [not a suggestion].

gofasterstripes - Member

Dude, you can kill yourself with water [not a suggestion].

Dude ... you haven't answered the question.

[b]Is this a hate crime?[/b]

Dude! Hi-five! Chest bump! 😆

Hmm.

*Shrug*

This aggression will not stand.

Hate is such an ugly word.

It's certainly a crime.

gofasterstripes - Member

Hate is such an ugly word.

It's certainly a crime.

Are you sure this is a crime?

Define crime ... hmmm ? (further inflection of tone)

Hi-five! Dude! 😆

Just saying, like...

[url= http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/1000-knife-crime-victims-in-london-each-month-shocking-new-figures-show-8681511.html ]UK version[/url]

Yep 11 people died from knife crime in a year, it's still much harder to get 11 in one sitting with a knife.

chewkw - Member
Are you sure this is a crime?
Define crime ... hmmm ? (further inflection of tone)

So it's OK to take the lives of others because you don't like the way they look and what that represents for you?

Or claiming that this didn't actually happen?

Or that the 'crime' was committed by the society and culture that nurtured the individual, and not by the racist turd?

Chewkw has a point or had one at one stage but as usual he's expressed it so poorly the point is lost.

Guns aren't the whole of the problem you also need to consider how mental health issues are dealt with in the USA.

Woppit I'd definitely take the UK knife crime over the us gun crime. They are not a direct replacement either The US has high knife crime figures on top of astronomical gun crime.

The UK version was the Dunblane et al shooting gun laws were made even stricter after that.

Guns aren't the whole of the problem you also need to consider how mental health issues are dealt with in the USA

No one will argue with that.

If white kids getting shot didn't bring change then black folks getting killed certainly wont.

The UK version was the Dunblane shooting gun laws were made even stricter after that.

[img] [/img]

Statistically in a country with a population the size of the states you're always going to get 'a lot' of people willing to do this sort of thing, even with wonderful mental health services and a fair and equal society. You can't fix every fruit loop, so the pragmatic and sensible thing is to take away the tools of the crime. They may still flip out and machete people occasionally, but experience suggests that it's not so likely and also aot less effective at killing large numbers when they do.

Unfortunately the gun lobby in the States is the antithesis of pragmatic and sensible, so it's not going to happen any time soon.

As a fella that lives in Dunblane, I've got to say, one of the best things the UK has ever done is ban handguns. Yeah, it doesn't stop people who are determined to get a gun but, when I was a kid (a long time ago), there were quite a few incidents in my local little village (not Dunblane) where random folk had guns and waved them about. Thankfully, nobody died but one or two were shot. Don't see that nowadays in equivalent places. Simple empirical evidence ... ban guns ... less guns on the street ... less incidents.

As a few folk have said above, not the entire solution to this type of horrendous crime but ... Every little helps.

As an aside ... A wee story from a Texan work colleague. He came into the office in Houston one morning and told his boss the police might be in that day asking about him but not to worry. He'd been sitting out back of his house enjoying a beer the night before. A black kid (and I use that phrase advisedly) jumped over his fence. Our guy pulled a pistol from its concealed holster under his patio table and shot the kid. Apparently, he was running away from a gang who wanted to beat him up but, it was OK, our guy only winged him.

In what rational world is this OK?

There were 30 fatalities in 2012/13 which resulted from offences involving firearms; 12 fewer than the previous year and the lowest figure since the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) was introduced in 2002/03.

I really can't believe some of the comments here (actually, I can in STW: it's as bad as mum's net)

Yes, this is a crime; yes, this is a hate crime: hate towards black people, hate towards religion, hate towards himself, probably.

Gun crime is not comparable to knife crime: a gun allows you to be detached from your victim; it allows you to remain out of harms way, it allows you to remain free from your victims blood.

Using a knife, especially for multiple victims, requires more skill, determination and ruthlessness than the vast majority of people possess. In short, guns are an easy way out.

I'm just going to ignore the alcohol comments because they are ridiculous beyond belief and completely irrelevant.

Take away guns and all those people won't immediately turn to using knives. Do you think this guy would have the guts and skill to take on a church of people with a knife? If he was then perhaps the special forces should sign him up.

My tuppence on this.

Obama talks about guns but makes no mention of the root cause. the country he leads has a real issues around race. This is the main problem, the gun availability is the very unfortunate way that people display their hatred of others. Obama should be shouting out loud that prejudice will not be tolerated.

In this instance its a hate crime, I agree with chewkw. Lets get working on the route cause and not get distracted by arguing about guns (yes I know that needs solving also). The people who hate are where the effort needs to go.

Don't see that nowadays in equivalent places. Simple empirical evidence ... ban guns ... less guns on the street ... less incidents.

But as has already been stated above, banning handguns and semi auto weapons(legitimately held) did not stop handgun crime or mean less guns on the street as licenced gun owners who handed in their weapons which were all on a police register and therefore accounted for were usually not the ones doing the crime.* if you want an illegal weapon you don't apply for a firearms certificate.

* apart from the 2 tragic incidents that meant changes to the firearms act.

In this instance its a hate crime, I agree with chewkw. Lets get working on the route cause and not get distracted by arguing about guns (yes I know that needs solving also). The people who hate are where the effort needs to go.

get working on the route cause

I doubt they really want to go down that road...

😉

Most gun crime in the UK and the US is criminals shooting each other, not mass shootings, these are different phenomena. The former you can't really do a lot about but the latter you can. Not being able to affect the former is no excuse for not taking action on the latter.

* apart from the 2 tragic incidents that meant changes to the firearms act.

And given that with both of them there was a very extensive history of police failings that meant neither of them should have had firearms if the existing regulations had been applied properly.

mikewsmith Personally I'd start on the hate issues first because there are to many vested interest to solve gun control. Once the attempts to build a more tolerant society are underway i think gun control should be tackled. A start with something is needed, the gun control argument seems to become a distraction and prevents anything being done at all (though I agree it needs doing).

I listened to to Obama's speech and listened to those in Charleston. It seemed to me that those involved understood the hate issue and wanted that addressed and were less fixated with the gun ownership problem.

PS have family from that city.

PPS "I doubt they really want to go down that road.." you may be right but if we don't address these sort of issues no amount of gun,knife,bow & arrow, hammer,stick,weapon of choice control will work. I'm aware of my general naivety.

apart from the 2 tragic incidents that meant changes to the firearms act.

Hungerford, Monkseaton, Dunblane and Cumbria were legal firearms. Making it harder will help reduce such events happening, it won't stop gun crime all together of course.

It's simply the fact that doing one doesn't prelude the other. The level of none hate violence is still applaing and there is no justification for owning hand guns or most others. I'd like to think that attitudes can be changed but in some ways it's a generational thing, the same could be said of gun control.

How many lives might have been saved had the gunman been shot by armed citizens as soon as he began his rampage?

Best case: one fewer than had the gunman not had a gun in the first place.

Reality: more lives would have been lost because it requires a high proportion of the population to be armed and ready, and the side effect of this is that there will be more deaths, through accidents involving their children getting hold of guns, through suicides that wouldn't have happened were it not for the ready availability of means, through situations that are unnecessarily escalated by the ready availability of guns (e.g. fat-bot-fat's Texan colleague), and because if the population is armed to "protect" themselves, the criminals will come armed.

The UK version was the Dunblane shooting gun laws were made even stricter after that.

Everyone knows it takes two things a gun and a will to go n a murder death spree.
You can decide which you think is easiest to remove from society and which is most to blame but to pretend neither is a factor is short sighted.

Abosutly junkyard but there is no good reason to have hand guns etc in your home. There are a lot of dubious reasons but no real good ones. If your society is at a point where normal everyday folk need guns something else is very broken.

I think you are mixing your metaphors to an extent there junky, you're discussing the ease of removing firearms from a society in which they have been regulated since 1919.

The issue you face with applying this to the US is that there are already approaching 300 million firearms in circulation - how do you propose removing thrm ?

Gun crime is not comparable to knife crime: a gun allows you to be detached from your victim; it allows you to remain out of harms way, it allows you to remain free from your victims blood.

I'm sure the victims ar grateful for that.

ninfan, SNAFU isn't really a good argument to do nothing.

mikewsmith - Member
It's more to do with the person who intend to kill with or without guns that person would kill.

Yes but without a gun it would have been a lot less successful. The answer to the fear of guns is not more guns.

You don't get to kill so many with a crossbow.

But hey this is the USA, what happens when you send your religious extremists, political outcasts and the irish to inbreed. If you have been brought up in a land that openly condones the state opening fire randomly on students protesting, then you cannot blame some of them taking up arms to protect themselves. Or you have no state funded health system to care for the mentally unstable, then where else are they going to melt down but in the community. The country is a mess, beyond help or rational argument, yet we have countless UK politicians from Blair down, who seem to want to import every trend they have going, to 'improve' our lot, from de regulating the legal system to privatising our healthcare, we are indeed lucky to have strict gun control, not that our borders are tight enough to prevent arms arriving with certain sectors of our immigrants.

There is no answer we are humans and lots of us are scared and stupid so kill each other or encourage others to do it for us, we teach our children the joy of it via video games whilst the rest of us tut tut when they exceed the narrow boundaries set by electronics.

We permit absolutely idiotic religious doctrine that encourages violence as the principle answer to all problems and wonder why so many of our electronically developed youth clamour to try the real thing in foreign lands, then blame a hard pressed security service for letting them go.

Anyone else spot the lunacy of it all?

Everyone knows it takes two things a gun and a will to go n a murder death spree.
You can decide which you think is easiest to remove from society and which is most to blame but to pretend neither is a factor is short sighted.

Good job no one did.

It's a funny old situation. I don't think the majority of Americans are keen on the current gun laws. My in laws are staunch Republicans opposed to Obama-care and who have referred to Obama as a socialist. But they don't understand why the gun laws are how they are, and this seems to be a wide spread point of view from most Americans I have met.

The gun lobby is a small but very vocal minority, with a bizarre right written into their constitution backing them up. I think if something was done to take them by the majority of Americans, for example if there was a referendum, gun control could happen. But such is the vocality of the gun lobby it'd be a foolish president that calls for that.

On a positive note gun ownership (households) is decreasing in the US.

[img] [/img]

Although the total number of guns owned is rising....

Hungerford - 1987
Monkseaton - 1989
Dunblane - 1996
Cumbria - 2010

Its not exactly common in the uk and there has only been one since Dunblane and the tightening up of the gun laws

Personally I think adequate health care and screening should go alongside tighter gun control - but it will never happen unfortunately

Its not exactly common in the uk and there has only been one since Dunblane and the tightening up of the gun laws

It's also as if not anyone can hold a a firearm licence has an effect. How weird is that?

Good job no one did.

Plenty of guns in Switzerland. It's not just a gun problem.

The solution is not easy to find, there are so many guns in circulation in the US if the law was changed only the law abiding will hand in their weapons. People talk about the power of the "gun lobby" but democratically Americans don't want gun control, any candidate who stands on that policy is voted down. Obhama hasn't really tried in 7 years as President to change the law.

I don't think the majority of Americans are keen on the current gun laws.

33,500 deaths on US roads in 2014. 32,500 firearm deaths. Both are crazy statistics.

Plenty of guns in Switzerland. It's not just a gun problem.

Anyone got any idea what chewwy is blethering on about with his "hate crime" question?

They are classing it as a hate crime. Seems pretty likely.