• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

Las Vegas.

Tashyboy said:
Thought exactly the same last night. It is 2017 not 1817. For me the reason they will not get rid of guns is down to the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Click to expand...
just think how many people are in employment in the gun trade in the US.
You can buy one in Walmart ( Asda ) in the US.
Thats why nothing will change!
we need a worldwide ban on automatic weapons but dought if USA would agree.
 
Reading earlier on how Pres Trump was massively against guns especially assault rifles. When he decided to run for president he was informed he would not have a chance unless he supported the gun lobby. So he changed his mind of ownership on guns within the USA.
 
Some shocking reports on the news tonight about the room, the guy and the attack. I can't see how anyone in power can see the logic in the current legislation and it takes a real man of power to take that first step to make a change. That's not Trump
 
HomerJSimpson said:
Some shocking reports on the news tonight about the room, the guy and the attack. I can't see how anyone in power can see the logic in the current legislation and it takes a real man of power to take that first step to make a change. That's not Trump
Click to expand...

They can't see the logic in the current rules because there is no logic in it. As sensible an idea as it might have been when it was drafted into their legislation, those circumstances no longer exist. However there are now too many people in positions of power making too much money out of it for one man to ever change it I'm afraid.
 
I am against gun ownership, especially semi or fully automatic, like most people in this thread...




But it is people killing people, not guns killing people. If somebody wants a weapon they can get hold of one.
 
Dasit said:
If somebody wants a weapon they can get hold of one.
Click to expand...

Blatant fallacy. The effort required would be greatly increased and it would obviously prevent a massive amount of people getting hold of the weapons they wanted and especially ones capable of such massacre.
 
Dasit said:
But it is people killing people, not guns killing people. If somebody wants a weapon they can get hold of one.
Click to expand...

I get that, but would he have planted a massive bomb if machine guns weren't available? I doubt he would.
The fact that the tools for mass murder are readily available over there is the main issue, just like if he could have bought an RPG he would have used that as well I imagine.
 
Dasit said:
I am against gun ownership, especially semi or fully automatic, like most people in this thread...




But it is people killing people, not guns killing people. If somebody wants a weapon they can get hold of one.
Click to expand...

We have 35 gun deaths a year in the UK. The US has 85 a DAY. The US has a people/mental health/SSRI problem for sure, but they also have a HUGE gun problem as well.
 
Beezerk said:
I get that, but would he have planted a massive bomb if machine guns weren't available? I doubt he would.
The fact that the tools for mass murder are readily available over there is the main issue, just like if he could have bought an RPG he would have used that as well I imagine.
Click to expand...

you try making a bomb. i write this during my lunch break at an anti terrorism course. only 30 minutes ago the police have been showing us photos of multiple failed home made explosives.

America accounts for 36% of the worlds mass shootings
 
I saw an interview with some muppet in Las vegas who was trotting out the "guns don't kill people" rubbish and he actually claimed that if this guy didn't have any guns there would be nothing to stop him getting 1000 knives and throwing them. I kid you not!
 
The guns are already out there, are you expecting everyone to hand them back?


It is a much bigger issue than just saying guns should be banned.


If the voting public want to be allowed to have guns, why should the politicians take that right away from them, it is a democratic society.



Americans have a different mindset to us.
 
Dasit said:
If the voting public want to be allowed to have guns, why should the politicians take that right away from them, it is a democratic society.
Click to expand...

Except that they don't. Most Americans don't own guns and the vast majority are in favour of some sort of gun control. But powerful vested interests have bought off the Republican party to the extent that it is almost impossible to get any gun control legislation passed.

Doesn't sound like democracy to me.
 
Dasit said:
The guns are already out there, are you expecting everyone to hand them back?

It is a much bigger issue than just saying guns should be banned.

If the voting public want to be allowed to have guns, why should the politicians take that right away from them, it is a democratic society.

Americans have a different mindset to us.
Click to expand...

Yes, the AR-15's and other assault rifles anyway. Should be illegal to possess assault rifles at the very least. The same with bump fire stock. Using a bump fire stock makes the gun illegal, so why is it even legal to sell them? There should then also be extensive background checks required to purchase a firearm at a bare minimum. They should be allowed to own guns but the amount should be limited, the types of guns should be far more limited and the amount of ammunition must also be limited. It's nuts that a guy like this was able to legally obtain over 20 guns and stockpile huge amounts of ammunition. Just leaving it as it is because that's how it's always been will just result in more of these mass shootings. What is it going to take to force the rules to be changed? I'd have thought the 350 dead in the last 7 years would have been enough.
 
I dont see the relevancy of what the number of guns used is? One gun, 30 magazines, or 30 guns, 1 mag each. Same difference. Limiting the number of guns one person can own is a bit pointless.
 
Even if they want to continue their gun culture there should be limits on how many and what type you can buy. A 6 shot handgun is less worse than an automatic rifle for example in terms of danger to the public. Should also be more vetting and refresher vetting for pyschological state of owners.

They cant or wont get on top of the problem but it could be managed/controlled more tightly you'd think. Other countries with frontier histories like Canada and Australia seem to have managed ok.

Corporate business profits and its influence on politicians drives the impasse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

3offTheTee
New General Manger appointed
Replies
12
Views
807
kp17
kp17
V
Powakaddy FX7 battery replacement
Replies
2
Views
101
Bunkermagnet
Bunkermagnet
Reemul
Dentist Issue
2
Replies
29
Views
4K
The Squirrel
The Squirrel
spongebob59
Hoselock autoreel
Replies
6
Views
911
KenL
KenL
IanM
Apps to manage Swindles/Fiddles/Roll Ups
Replies
8
Views
366
backwoodsman
B
Top