Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

If you ever think when has a a mass shooting been stopped by a armed civilian USA Watch

    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    The majority being suicide and people wanting to kill themselves, who would find a way anyway.
    That's not really true. There may be a minority of suicidal people who are absolutely determined to go through with it, but most suicides are committed on the spur of the moment, on impulse. The vast majority of people who survive a suicide attempt recover and never attempt it again. Having a gun, however, denies people that second chance - suicide by firearm is many times more deadly than other common suicide methods.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JMEisjames)
    Even if you arm them, you have to then get them training, which should be around 300 hours a year, we then have to hope there are no uniteneded casulaties, then you have to place them in the 470,000 colleges and 570,000 hospital.

    Or we could just stop the mass murderer from getting a gun in the first place
    Even in the U.K. you can't stop a guy from getting a gun. You should have realized that by now.

    I'm just guessing but I would say 10% of cops are what I would call "shooters". People who like guns and enjoy shooting. Most of these are well above average shots. The rest of them blow the cobwebs off their guns long enough to qualify then holster them again.

    Most people who are confident enough to walk around with a loaded weapon are probably decent shots. By decent I mean as good as your average cop.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anosmianAcrimony)
    That's not really true. There may be a minority of suicidal people who are absolutely determined to go through with it, but most suicides are committed on the spur of the moment, on impulse. The vast majority of people who survive a suicide attempt recover and never attempt it again. Having a gun, however, denies people that second chance - suicide by firearm is many times more deadly than other common suicide methods.
    Women take pills men shoot or hang themselves. I would wager more people have survived suicide attempts by gun rather than by hanging.

    From what I've read most suicides are Thought about for some time before committing it.

    Suicide is the leading cause of death in adult males in Britain. Do you know how many of these are by firearm?
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oldercon1953)
    Women take pills men shoot or hang themselves. I would wager more people have survived suicide attempts by gun rather than by hanging.

    From what I've read most suicides are Thought about for some time before committing it.

    Suicide is the leading cause of death in adult males in Britain. Do you know how many of these are by firearm?
    How much would you wager that suicide attempts by hanging are more deadly than by gun?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I love how pro-gun Americans always totally ignore the part of the second amendment regarding a well regulated militia and focus on the right to bear arms part.

    I wonder whether people would be so keen to have guns if they had to serve in the military for a year in order to do so.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anosmianAcrimony)
    How much would you wager that suicide attempts by hanging are more deadly than by gun?
    it seems it all depends on where on the body the bullet enters. shots to the chest and hanging were tied for lethality. shots to the head had a 10% greater chance of being lethal. A 10% more chance of survival is minimal at best.

    I got my stats off a site called Lost All Hope

    You said people who survive an attempt usually never try again. According to this site a survivor of suicide is 100 times more likely to have a successful attempt in the future.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aula)
    I love how pro-gun Americans always totally ignore the part of the second amendment regarding a well regulated militia and focus on the right to bear arms part.

    I wonder whether people would be so keen to have guns if they had to serve in the military for a year in order to do so.
    I support a well regulated militia. I think it's called the National Guard. It's against the law for a private citizen to raise an army within the borders of the U.S..
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oldercon1953)
    You could ask the people who have survived mass shootings that same question.
    You will most likely get the same response as you would from anyone with a lick of common sense; of course you should..
    More people die from falls in the bathtub.
    Well perhaps we should give everyone nuclear weapons just in case world war three breaks out and the army's fail to detonate properly.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oldercon1953)
    Here's the crux of it' some prefer to throw their hands up and lay their security at the feet of GOV. (The left wing.)
    Others prefer to exercise the responsibility of their own security and retain all the rights that come with it by doubling down on the Second Amendment.
    I would describe myself as politically right wing yet I'm not in favour of everyone being their own personal security so your sweeping assumption is wrong. The simple fact of the matter is developed countries with stricter laws on guns have fewer homicides


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aula)
    I love how pro-gun Americans always totally ignore the part of the second amendment regarding a well regulated militia and focus on the right to bear arms part.

    I wonder whether people would be so keen to have guns if they had to serve in the military for a year in order to do so.
    Except that the founding fathers had stated that it means the right for citizens to bear arms.

    https://youtu.be/MW_noXjj6w8
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    So am I.



    You labour under a misapprehension about British culture. Our police forces have no role to play in animal protection. If I had an ass i was worried about I would call the RSPCA - the Royal Society for the Protection of Animals.

    I'd call the police if I were worried about my arse though.
    I can assure you the police will not be there in time. You would be better off owning a firearm.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Except that the founding fathers had stated that it means the right for citizens to bear arms.

    https://youtu.be/MW_noXjj6w8
    Well yes, but many of the the founding fathers were also slave-owning religious nutters who suppressed women and didn't live in the twenty-first century.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    In fact, the USA appears to be a country deeply embedded in the past. Late in banning slavery, extremely late in overturning apartheid, still intensely religious even now. I reckon it is about fifty to a hundred years behind Europe in terms of justice.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Well yes, but many of the the founding fathers were also slave-owning religious nutters who suppressed women and didn't live in the twenty-first century.
    Yet they also abolished and outlawed slavery in the constitution
    1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

    If we are going over the constitution should we also remove that?

    Messing about with the constitution is like letting the torys change your rights in this country, neither should be allowed.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Yet they also abolished and outlawed slavery in the constitution
    1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
    Eh? Slavery was not abolished in the USA until the 1865 thirteenth amendment. Do you think the founding fathers did that? They would have been rather old.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Eh? Slavery was not abolished in the USA until the 1865 thirteenth amendment. Do you think the founding fathers did that? They would have been rather old.
    That might be a mistake.

    Maybe they are immortal and just in hiding.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oldercon1953)
    I trust this will put an end to the anti-gun nonsense on this site.
    Now we must consider the hundreds of times that arming the public with weapons has led to a mass shooting in the first place.

    Nice try though

    Also, why is the OP of this thread using an England flag despite clearly being American?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucabrasi98)
    Now we must consider the hundreds of times that arming the public with weapons has led to a mass shooting in the first place.

    Nice try though

    Also, why is the OP of this thread using an England flag despite clearly being American?
    I'm not American.
    I haven't even been to America.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Although I am going to nyc in September.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucabrasi98)
    Now we must consider the hundreds of times that arming the public with weapons has led to a mass shooting in the first place.

    Nice try though

    Also, why is the OP of this thread using an England flag despite clearly being American?
    I'm at a loss to remember an incident that you've described. I can't even imagine a scenario in which an armed populace would trigger a mass shooting unless a sort of reverse mass shooting might occur where a group of armed citizens might turn
    their weapons on a single individual.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    Well perhaps we should give everyone nuclear weapons just in case world war three breaks out and the army's fail to detonate properly.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    There's a constructive comment.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.