(April 25, 2014 at 9:55 pm)Faith No More Wrote: Well, if enough of these laws get passed, we will see the effects.

(April 25, 2014 at 10:21 pm)Heywood Wrote: I would think a single state would have a large enough population to provide a reasonable sample.

^This

It's a dangerous experiment, but by going to such extremes this might provide compelling evidence one way or the other on gun control.

I personally think it will be a disaster though...

This law will have no negative impact on things. Mark my words and resurrect this thread in a couple of years to follow up on it.

I don't mean to insult US people really, but...
When it comes to guns, you seem slightly mongoloid. What is your problem?
More guns = more gun deaths.
Less guns = less gun deaths.

(April 26, 2014 at 7:41 am)zebo-the-fat Wrote: Living in England I simply fail to understand why any sane person would want to own a gun. In my almost 60 years of life here, the only guns I have ever seen here are the armed police occasionally at airports, and that's only in the last 10 years or so.

10 years? When I first visited the UK in 1995 I saw military type guards at the airport with machine guns. In fact it was the first time I ever saw a machine gun in real life.

---

(April 26, 2014 at 12:14 am)Minimalist Wrote: Once again with the "criminal" boogeyman, eh?

Quote:From 1993 to 2008, among homicides reported to the FBI for which the victim-offender relationship was known, between 21% and 27% of homicides were committed by strangers and between 73% and 79% were committed by offenders known to the victims.

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4557

That gun is far more dangerous to you or your friends/family than any "criminal."

What makes you think that no one is family or friends to all the criminals in the world?

Most rape victims know their attacker too.

But really, stating that most people are killed by someone they know therefore strangers are less dangerous is like that old joke about the person who heard most wrecks happen within 5 miles of your home so he moved.

(April 26, 2014 at 5:31 pm)sven Wrote: I don't mean to insult US people really, but...
When it comes to guns, you seem slightly mongoloid. What is your problem?
More guns = more gun deaths.
Less guns = less gun deaths.

Sven
You aren't the sharpest crayon in the box are you? Oh I love your picture.

Not a gun owner. But, I'm not anti gun. That said, guns aren't the issue, it's more that there needs to be some reform surrounding who is able to obtain one, legally. But, that's not to say that people who wish to obtain a gun and do harm to others with it, can't find a gun ILLEGALLY. But, anyway...that's my thoughts to it.

While I'm reading that study....it's 120 pages long and somehow I think KUSA's excerpt from a nut-job web site is not going to match up with the actual conclusions of the report...we have this excerpt of those 'responsible gun-owners' from fucking Georgia. Get used to this kind of shit.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/26/ge...-children/

Quote:FORSYTH COUNTY, Ga. —

Parents at a Forysth County park abruptly stopped a children's baseball game after growing suspicions of the behavior of a man carrying a gun in a waist holster Tuesday night.

"He's just walking around [saying] 'See my gun? Look, I got a gun and there's nothing you can do about it.' He knew he was frightening people. He knew exactly what he was doing," said parent Karen Rabb.

Rabb told Channel 2’s Tom Regan the parents grew so alarmed that they brought the game to a halt when the man declined a request that he leave a parking lot overlooking the baseball field.

---

Hmmm...well, the conclusion of that particular report as written by the authors...and not a bunch of end-of-the-world nutters... is:

Quote:CONCLUSION

The research agenda proposed in this report is intended as an initial—not a conclusive or all-encompassing—set of questions critical to developing the most effective policies to reduce the occurrence and impact of firearm-related violence in the United States. No single agency or research strategy can provide all the answers. This report focuses on the public health aspects of firearm violence; the committee expects that this research agenda will be integrated with research conducted from criminal justice and other perspectives to provide a much fuller knowledge base to underpin our nation’s approach to dealing with this very important set of societal issues.

This sounds ridiculous. I'm very anti-gun and to hear that people think they need to bring a gun to the friggin' library... c'mon!! This nation is built on fear. Everyone thinks someone is out to get them so they need their guns for 'self defense'. Accidents happen no matter what, and this bill being passed surely cannot be a smart move. People need to stop thinking every nutjob they see is going to shoot them.

(April 27, 2014 at 6:00 am)HarryStanluv25 Wrote: This sounds ridiculous. I'm very anti-gun and to hear that people think they need to bring a gun to the friggin' library... c'mon!! This nation is built on fear. Everyone thinks someone is out to get them so they need their guns for 'self defense'. Accidents happen no matter what, and this bill being passed surely cannot be a smart move. People need to stop thinking every nutjob they see is going to shoot them.

What make you think that a nutjob won't do nutty things to you in a library? Are there certain areas that we don't have to be vigilant in?

(April 27, 2014 at 8:59 am)KUSA Wrote: Are there certain areas that we don't have to be vigilant in?

Yes, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Scandinavia etc,etc.....

---

And of course, if the US had decent gun laws, nut jobs wouldn't fucking have guns in the first place.