• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Two simple measures to cut child shootings.

Wayne Jr said:
So you have no proof because you aren't actually some millionaire lawyer or an Olympic shooting champion as you say. Do you even own a gun?
Click to expand...

I never won the olympics nor make the two man team. I did make the finals for the team twice though
 
Maccabee said:
And how would you go about confiscating roughly 400 million firearms from about 100 million gun owners with only 900,000 law enforcement officers?
Click to expand...
Ah you say please and threaten to through anyone in jail that won't comply and then threaten to fine them ONE MILLION DOLLARS.:mrgreen:
 
Manc Skipper said:
Two simple measures to cut child shootings. Engineering a solution is simpler and safer than relying on people.

The U.S. General Accounting Office has estimated that 31% of unintentional deaths caused by firearms might be prevented by the addition of two devices: a child-proof safety lock (8%) and a loading indicator (23%).

Statistics on Gun Deaths & Injuries | Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
Click to expand...

Anyone that wants these devices on their firearms has 100% of my support.
 
Rucker61 said:
A good portion of those 900k law enforcement officers, especially county sheriffs, won't be taking part in the confiscation, anyway.
Click to expand...

Cops confiscate guns now all the time
 
apdst said:
The #1 rule is to check the chamber. The #2 rule is to treat every gun as if it's loaded.
Click to expand...

Wrong as always.

#1: Never point a gun at anything you dont want to destroy.
 
Lursa said:
Wrong as always.

#1: Never point a gun at anything you dont want to destroy.
Click to expand...

#1 know if your gun is loaded, or not. #2 treat it as if it is loaded.

The first thing you do when you first pick up a firearm is visually check the chamber. If it's clear, de-**** it. Depending on the circumstances, you may want to leave the bolt open, or insert a chamber flag.
 
apdst said:
#1 know if your gun is loaded, or not. #2 treat it as if it is loaded.

The first thing you do when you first pick up a firearm is visually check the chamber. If it's clear, de-**** it. Depending on the circumstances, you may want to leave the bolt open, or insert a chamber flag.
Click to expand...

"Always assume every gun is loaded"--never point it at anything you dont want to destroy.
 
Lursa said:
"Always assume every gun is loaded"--never point it at anything you dont want to destroy.
Click to expand...

Never assume a gun has a round in the chamber. Know if a gun has a round in the chamber, or not.

Not checking a weapon to see if it's hot is the biggest mistake a person can make.
 
apdst said:
Never assume a gun has a round in the chamber. Know if a gun has a round in the chamber, or not.

Not checking a weapon to see if it's hot is the biggest mistake a person can make.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ. Pointing a gun, loaded or unloaded or imagined unloaded is the biggest mistake. And then never putting your finger on the trigger unless ready to fire.

"Knowing" and "believing" and "assuming" can all be wrong. But if you dont physically enable that gun to destroy something (pointing, pulling trigger)...it cannot.

I've seen guns that have been "checked" and "believed" to be unloaded...fire. Fortunately those people were following at least some of the OTHER rules so there were no injuries.
 
Lursa said:
I beg to differ. Pointing a gun, loaded or unloaded or imagined unloaded is the biggest mistake. And then never putting your finger on the trigger unless ready to fire.

"Knowing" and "believing" and "assuming" can all be wrong. But if you dont physically enable that gun to destroy something (pointing, pulling trigger)...it cannot.

I've seen guns that have been "checked" and "believed" to be unloaded...fire. Fortunately those people were following at least some of the OTHER rules so there were no injuries.
Click to expand...

Those guns weren't cleared, obviously. If they had, they wouldn't have accidentally discharged.

I don't disagree with proper muzzle discipline, but bullets fragment, richochet, the fragments can richochet.

A cleared weapon can't accidentally discharge and that's the bottom line.

When soldiers go to the range, they draw their weapon from armsroom. First thing they do is insure that it's clear. Before they step onto the firing line, a range safety insures the weapon is clear. Before stepping off the firing line, a range safety insures the weapon is clear. When the weapon is turned into the armsroom, the armorer clears it.
 
apdst said:
Those guns weren't cleared, obviously. If they had, they wouldn't have accidentally discharged.

I don't disagree with proper muzzle discipline, but bullets fragment, richochet, the fragments can richochet.

A cleared weapon can't accidentally discharge and that's the bottom line.

When soldiers go to the range, they draw their weapon from armsroom. First thing they do is insure that it's clear. Before they step onto the firing line, a range safety insures the weapon is clear. Before stepping off the firing line, a range safety insures the weapon is clear. When the weapon is turned into the armsroom, the armorer clears it.
Click to expand...

Obviously. And that's the point. :doh

Believing something is cleared and something ACTUALLY being cleared are 2 different things. You cant make a mistake tho, if you never point the muzzle at something you dont want to destroy.
 
Lursa said:
Obviously. And that's the point. :doh

Believing something is cleared and something ACTUALLY being cleared are 2 different things. You cant make a mistake tho, if you never point the muzzle at something you dont want to destroy.
Click to expand...

I never believe my gun is loaded, or unloaded. I know my gun is loaded, or unloaded.

Everone who owns a gun should.
 
Wayne Jr said:
He doesn't have one. He just makes things up to get a rise out of people.

I notice that you aren't sourcing your numbers, either. Birds of a feather, I suppose.
Click to expand...


Turtle and I have had this debate a few times before, I've referenced mmy sources in previous threads.


Though in my last, I did post a source for gun deaths in the USA

Was there anything I posted that you doubt or need a source for ?
 
TurtleDude said:
more mental masturbation. you have already admitted guns cannot be banned in the USA so why do you spend so much time pining for something you admitted won't happen.
Click to expand...

Or in other words you can't back up your post with a source and have no answer or than a weak attempt at insult.


Sure it's not going to happen - but it's what's needed if effective gun control is ever to be passed in the USA.

The question keeps being asked "How can we contain and reduce America's insane gun problem?"

The answer is easy

Doing it is the hard bit.


So far no-one can argue that British gun control doesn't work. The best counter is that US law enforcement would never enforce it or could never enforce it.


Yes they would as it would be in their interests to.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Mass shootings are the result of mental illness, not access to firearms....
Click to expand...

People in the UK also suffer from mental illness.

Two particularly disturbed individuals committed notorious mass shootings in 1987 (Hungerford) and 1996 (Dunblane).

The British government acted swiftly on each occasion (both Conservative and Labour) and since 1996 the UK has only had ONE mass shooting.

Sure there are people who would commit another but they don't because they don't have access to guns.

Last year three Islamist terrorists went on a rampage in London, killing seven people and wounding many others:


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...borough-market-allah-eyewitness-a7771881.html


Knives.
They used knives...why do you think that was...when assault rifles would have been so much more effective ?



...even if you could waive a magic wand and remove all guns from criminal hands, which you can't, those violent people would just use other lethal means as was the case in the Boston Bombing and 9/11.
Click to expand...


But Boston and 9/11 were terrorist attacks and these are few in number....Britain suffered more than a few during the period of Irish terrorism in the 1960's-1980's
British gun control laws were never designed to defeat terrorism - but as with the link above, the casual/impulsive terrorist attack has its effects blunted by the lack of guns.

British gun control laws were designed to cut gun deaths and eliminate mass shootings. To that end they've been very successful.


In 2017 alone, the USA had 345 mass shootings - almost one a day.
 
Maccabee said:
And how would you go about confiscating roughly 400 million firearms from about 100 million gun owners with only 900,000 law enforcement officers?
Click to expand...

One street at a time.

The threat of heavy fines and mandatory imprisonment would, I think, ensure the vast majority of guns would be surrendered voluntarily.
 
Rich2018 said:
British gun control laws were designed to cut gun deaths and eliminate mass shootings. To that end they've been very successful.
Click to expand...

You should vote to ban all handguns, make licensing a requirement, gun ownership a privilege, and have SCOTUS overturn Heller. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke.
 
Rich2018 said:
One street at a time.

The threat of heavy fines and mandatory imprisonment would, I think, ensure the vast majority of guns would be surrendered voluntarily.
Click to expand...

Why doesn't the threat of heavy fines and mandatory imprisonment, ie, $250,000 and 10 years imprisonment lead criminals to turning in their guns? Why did those really nice Australians only turn in 70% of the guns that their government banned?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom