Mcdilly-Willy Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 Survivors of the worst shooting rampage in US history have criticised authorities for waiting too long to alert people a gunman was on the loose. The gunman killed 32 at Virginia Tech university, before killing himself. There were two hours between the two separate attacks - 30 of the victims were killed in the second one. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6562259.stm Surely they'll get the meesage now and change their gun laws... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Styles Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 I thought they had the right to bair arms in their constitution, so think it would be difficult to change. Plus the pro lobby are so powerful. Does seem a bit crazy though when you see Texans with automatic weapons etc. Would more control even make much of a difference? For example after Dumblane we got even more gun restrictions but gun crime is riseing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mcdilly-Willy Posted April 17, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 Gun crime in Britain may be on the rise, but some control is better than no control, if you get me... Our gun crime isn't any where near America's. I wonder why? Maybe because in America anyone can get one, and there affordable. Guns are extremely difficult to obtain in britain and I believe they are extremely expensive due to the risks of dealing with them... As for the constitution; theres no reason why they shouldn't change it. When is the UK likely to invade? There are so many reasons why they should. It's a no-brainer really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamnSaxon Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 I thought they had the right to bair arms in their constitution, so think it would be difficult to change. I thought the right they had was "to bear arms and form a militia". The USA has a cosiderable militia which seems not to need to call on armed citizens for assistance, so there really is no need at all for every citizen to own a gun. I'm with McDilly-Willy. How many more of these "incidents" do they need to make them wake up? But then, we all know how likely they are to listen to advice from this side of the pond ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junior Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 I think I'm right in saying that the Dunblane tragedy was carried out using legal weapons. The gun crime in the UK that is rising is with illegal weapons. They have a saying in the states that an armed man is a free man, and an unarmed man is a slave. With that kind of mind-set it will take a lot (more than 30 deaths 8O) to get the constitution changed. I agree, its a no-brainer. What I would say is more worrying than the liberal gun laws, is the fact the such a thing as a "school-shooting" (or "mall-shooting") actually exists. Not only does the adopting of a phrase for it show a nations casualness where mass-murder is concerned, it also indicates that there is a particular type of, not uncommon person, who's greatest desire is to kill as many people as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriebryan Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 I saw an interview with one pundit who was surprised the shooting took place because the university campus has a no firearms policy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Para Handy Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 This is just typical after something like this. The ban the gun lobby jumps on the band wagon. There as many people, killed by bad or drunk drivers every day, and I don’t see any of you leading the charge to ban cars or motorbikes, any thing can be used as a weapon it is people who kill people a gun is just a lump of iron it only kills when we the human race, who think we are superior to any other living thing on this plant, picks one up and uses it for that purpose as I understand the Swiss have no gun laws and any men between the age of 18 to 50 have to by law to keep weapons at home as part of the national service, they don’t seem to have any problems as for Dunblane if anybody read the inquire report it is clear that the police were at fault for giving Mr Hamilton firearms certificate, he should never have had one as for the US there are so many firearms out there that even if did changed the laws they would never find every gun out there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fjool Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 There as many people killed by bad or drunk drivers every day and I don’t see any of you leading the charge to ban cars or motorbikes Cars and motorbikes are not designed to kill. What other purpose does a gun have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriebryan Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 Without meaning to be cheeky, any chance of a full stop or two Para Handy. That's a pretty hard post to follow. I had to give up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claudias Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 ^ ^ ^ A deterrent? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fjool Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 A deterrent? Sure... from whom? Other gun users. Great plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claudias Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 ^ ^ ^ A gun is also a good deterrent against a group of youths armed with pinch bars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fjool Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 Why would they be armed with pinch bars when guns are just as easily available and much more effective? Plus, their target might have a gun, so they'd better have one too, just to be on the safe side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Inky Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 ^ ^ ^ A gun is also a good deterrent against a group of youths armed with pinch bars. A gun isn't nearly as effective in this sort of situation as you might think. Drawing a handgun, taking the safety catch off, and cocking it takes longer than you might imagine, especially when you've been taken by surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claudias Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 Why would they be armed with pinch bars when guns are just as easily available and much more effective? Plus, their target might have a gun, so they'd better have one too, just to be on the safe side. You can walk into any dozen garden sheds in Lerwick and find half a dozen pinch bars. You would not find one gun. Evil Inky wrote:- A gun isn't nearly as effective in this sort of situation as you might think. Drawing a handgun, taking the safety catch off, and cocking it takes longer than you might imagine, especially when you've been taken by surprise. I carried a pistol as my personal weapon for six years. It is amazing just how quickly you can get off six rounds. If you are taken by surprise by a group of youths wielding pinch bars,unless they kick down your door, you need a minder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.