Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The article you posted shows that a 5 year old and a 30 year old were shot.

    #1 I don't think the 5 year old would have been able to do much with a gun.
    #2 What the hell was the 30 year old going to do? My assumption is that he wasn't expecting to get shot. Unless he's quicker than a bullet it's not like he can pull out his gun and shoot back before they've already shot him.
    #3 Why would more bullets flying across a London street have helped anyone.
    #4 The gangs did not target these two people, it was an accident as they were caught in crossfire. If civilians had fired back, what's to say more people wouldn't have got caught in THEIR crossfire?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cicerao)
    Step 1) Research how many school and university shootings have happened in the US, where guns are widely available.

    Step 2) Research how many school and university shootings have happened in the UK, where guns are really hard to gain access to.

    Step 3) Make your own conclusion.
    If you swap "US" for "Switzerland" you'd get very different results. It's worth noting that much US gun crime is committed with illegal, not legal, firearms.

    You could however argue that we're culturally much closer to the US than Switzerland.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hardballer)
    compare all of them and you'll see theres no correlation between legal gun ownership and gun deaths
    Prove it.

    (Original post by Hardballer)
    your reply is retarded
    Good one.


    (Original post by Hardballer)
    I don't wanna go around shooting people
    Doesn't sound like it.

    (Original post by Hardballer)
    guns haven't killed anybody, only people are capable of that
    And you trust everyone in the UK?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's all about Concealed Carry. Texas ftw. Hopefully we can get it on college campuses soon :/
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I don't care what dubious figures anyone pulls out - I will simply not accept that increasing the availability of guns will result in guns being used less. Where is the sense in that?

    Maybe it's just me, but I like living in a place where you aren't surrounded by people carrying dangerous weapons that are designed to, and can easily, kill people with little to no notice. (I know there is a knife problem but it's not remotely similar when you consider virtually no-one will be carrying a knife at any given point). I also find it highly reassuring that we don't have a highly armed police force required to police us because of it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kenny_uk)
    I saw a daily mail link...That is all.
    **** me you are boring
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    wow, you're so right. i mean a limited amount of guns on the street leads to the rare horrific episode like that so the sensible thing to do would to be to flood the streets with even more guns?

    lets theorise that guns were legal in this scenario. these kids would have chased their targets into the shop and still shot the girl and man. then a flurry of bullets would have been fired back at these kids from equally ****ty aimers hitting even more innocent people. I know you are a troll and that this may seem pointless to reply, but seem people are actually as stupid as you are pretending to be.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bobifier)
    I want to pre-emptively assasinate my rivals to defend myself. "I want to do it to defend myself" is not inherently a valid argument.

    Your thread, your outlook and your life are retarded. Get off the internet, and if ever you do manage to get a gun use it to rid the world of your incomprehensible idiocy.
    I already own one, your personal attack failed
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hardballer)
    I already own one, your personal attack failed
    If you already own one why do you see it as an imperative to distribute it even further? Surely you now hold an advantage over the rest of the population. In regards to self-defence a gun owner in a gun-restricted society is probably a better place to be than a gun owner in a guns-for-all society.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fusilero)
    If you already own one why do you see it as an imperative to distribute it even further? Surely you now hold an advantage over the rest of the population. In regards to self-defence a gun owner in a gun-restricted society is probably a better place to be than a gun owner in a guns-for-all society.
    Ok, I own a semi automatic shotgun. I want a fully automatic assault rifle. you see where my problem lies?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hardballer)
    Ok, I own a semi automatic shotgun. I want a fully automatic assault rifle. you see where my problem lies?
    I sympathise.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hardballer)
    Ok, I own a semi automatic shotgun. I want a fully automatic assault rifle. you see where my problem lies?
    And why the hell do you want one of them? Want to play with something like that? Earn the privelige by joining the armed forces. I like my country as it is, not like Helmand province thank you very much.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's obviously an ego thing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I stopped reading at 'www.dailymail'
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moonkatt)
    And why the hell do you want one of them? Want to play with something like that? Earn the privelige by joining the armed forces. I like my country as it is, not like Helmand province thank you very much.
    why do I want one of them? to have fun shooting? earn the "privalege" by joining the armed forces? free men don't ask to bear arms only slaves do.

    you don't want the country ending up like helmand province? this country already has enough religious extremists to put helmand province to shame and if you think that Britiain would turn out like helmand province with the right to bear arms then you obviously haven't been to America
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jimmyjango)
    It's obviously an ego thing.
    I don't think your comments could get any more narrow minded or arrogant even if you put "because I'm ****ing awesome thats why" at the end of every one of your replies
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    successfultrollissuccessful.jpg
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Due to the relative harm guns can do, it's not surprising that we have restrictions on their ownership. For rifles and shotguns, these restrictions are not particularly onerous. The blanket handgun ban imposed after Dunblane, however, is unjustifiable. Still, the suggestion of a universal right to bear arms - including things like automatic assault rifles - is inherently a bit dodgy. It's not even ideologically consistent unless you're going to let the public run around with heavy artillery or nuclear bombs.

    Guns for personal protection are an interesting situation. Yes, a gun can save your life. Equally, even if you were surrounded by the best armed bodyguard in the world, harm is still not avoidable if the other party is carrying a gun. Assuming there was a chance of someone breaking into my home, or I had been personally threatened, then yes - I'd want to own a gun.

    (Original post by limetang)
    How on earth are guns meant to keep you safe when you're more likely to get killed if you carry a weapon.
    I think you've just failed statistical analysis.

    (Original post by Apagg)
    Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated):


    USA (2001) 3.98
    England/Wales (2002) 0.15
    Scotland (2002) 0.06

    http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm

    Your suggestion of increasing the supply of guns will increase the number of criminals with guns. If you can't see how this would lead to more deaths by shooting then there is no hope for you.
    The United States is basically the Godwin's Law of gun politics. Gun ownership rates, internationally, do not correlate directly with gun crime, so kindly stop pretending they do based on a frightfully concise study of... oh, two countries.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I often hear the argument that guns should be legal because we have a right to "defend" ourselves. But this doesn't seem to make any sense?

    A gun is a weapon for attack, not a for defence. How are you supposed to defend yourself with a gun, against someone else who has a gun? Are you meant to shoot at their bullet and knock it off course or something? If you want to defend yourself, you can get yourself a bulletproof vest; it'll protect you from bullets better than any gun will.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    Have we not banned these stupid pro-gun trolls yet? :rolleyes: Its the same thing over and over:

    Gun nut starts pro-gun thread full of poorly disguised propaganda.
    Gun nut gets roundly thumped in ensuing argument.
    Gun nut waits a week.
    Gun nut starts another thread, hoping that the people who smashed him in the last debate are on holiday.
    They're not, crushing defeat follows.

    and so on ad infinitum.
    Same for the conspiracy theorists and religious nutjobs too. I don't mind a good debate, but usually they are incoherent and refuse to consider any evidence that doesn't support their ideas anyway.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 21, 2011
The home of Results and Clearing

3,557

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Will you be tempted to trade up and get out of your firm offer on results day?
Useful resources

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

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