My compromise for gun control

So ya if they don't want us having semi autos they can give up all of theirs too.

 

Mac

Which begs the question which ones and why?

.

Well I have access to a drill press. And have you ever heard of a thing called Hackspace, it is a place anyone can go to do machining?

Which just strengthens the case for regulation in favour of public safety.

 

Mac

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation

You are comparing using CPR with using a gun in self-defence?

Comparing something designed to try and save life with someone designed to try and take life?

How are they comparable? I mean for a start CPR is not about personal protection it can’t be done on oneself.

In the UK in workplaces there have to be so many first aiders (who are trained in CPR) per employees (I’ve been taught how to do it) this means that many people in the UK have been taught it and there are calls for it to be part of the driving test.

Martial Arts

As to martial arts, that involves a lot of time, training, inclination, dedication and usually money (the local Krav Maga classes near me are £50 a month membership fees).

A gun you can just pick up and shoot and still be lethal.

In the UK the majority of people don’t take up martial arts so they can main or kill someone if needs be they do it for fitness or sport. My kid did judo for a while but ended up preferring swimming instead.

So are you saying that if you couldn’t have a gun you would take up a martial art (with all the time and expense that would cost you) because you would still fear been attacked?

Again that seems like a personal choice are you saying you would want the government to pay for your martial arts courses as well as for you gun training?

 

Mac

Why do you feel you need an edge?

You say you are not afraid but what person who isn’t afraid of been attacked is thinking about wanting an ‘edge’?

CPR is not an offensive action it is not about attacking or threatening attack, it is not about alleviating the fear of been attacked like wanting to own a gun or learn a martial art.

 

Mac

As I’ve said CPR is a passive not an aggressive action, and many employers pay for it in the UK. And if someone has such a dangerous job that they need to be trained in martial arts and guns use because of it I would presume the employer would also pay for that (or the person looking to get the job).

But it seems to me that the vast majority of gun owners in the US don’t have such jobs, I mean the gun lobby want anyone that wants one to have easy access to guns not just those in dangerous jobs.

So you are in a dangerous job and that is why you fear you might be attacked and feel the need to have ‘assault weapons’ - may I ask what that job is?

 

Gun buy backs and registration for starters. There's little evidence that either played a great, if any role in reducing gun violence and only serves to burden otherwise law abiding citizens.

Do they allow you to do weapons parts?

Which entails what? The Glock, one the most mass produced handgun in the market, can be converted into an automatic weapons with illegal parts. What do you propose to stop this.

 

Absolutely. I'm comparing a well known, but not actively sought after skill set with another. Both aren't used everyday however both can be vital of the situation arises. Also, self defense IS a life saving skill. Self defense saves the life of the intended victim(s).

Some aspects can in fact be done on oneself like if you're choking, you can use a table corner or chair to dislodge the thing choking you. Conversely, self defense isn't purely protection of oneself. Sometimes you need to intervine on someone's behalf.

And that's good.

That's kinda the point of having a firearm for self defense. You don't need to be in peque physical condition or have extensive training to successfully defend yourself. Anyone from a Navy SEAL to 80 year old grandma can defend him or herself if they needed to with minimal training and physique.

Again, I don't fear being attacked. Also, a martial art would be in addition to my firearm, not a replacement. Truth be told, it's been awhile since I've practiced with an actual firearm or taken self defense classes due to time and financial restraints. However, if it counts for anything, I have taken up the sport of airsoft which has many similar traits to live fire practice and I've recently took a first aid course.

They already do. The sheriff's offices and police departments in my area host citizen's academies and they provide a women's self defense class.

 

I think that your argument is faulty about the weapon being a tool to save lives. Usually what happens is somebody misuses it. There's suicides or shootings, murders, etc. Are we supposed to ignore that? You don't have to answer; I'll answer for you: We're not supposed to ignore that.

People are dying. There is some kind of problem. You've proposed some changes that are steps in a worthwhile direction. But we will not get that far without sacrificing some of the luxuries of ownership that we enjoy at present.

So, in the hands of trained soldiers - cops, security, armored car guys - these things serve a purpose. I think the main theme with those three is crime prevention. You don't need a bazooka for crime prevention...

 

Maybe he's really bad at hitting things...

 

People have been building semi autos for over 400 years, its ridiculous to think they can put cat back in the bag now.

The World’s Oldest Existing Revolver – 1597

1597 ! Imagine if they had the tools and materials we can buy in Home Depo ?

 

Mac

Martial Arts

As to martial arts, that involves a lot of time, training, inclination, dedication and usually money (the local Krav Maga classes near me are £50 a month membership fees). A gun you can just pick up and shoot and still be lethal.

LOL but that’s my point

I was pointing out the things are not comparable martial arts, takes time, training, and dedication that is why not everyone can do it - BUT - any old slob can just pick up a gun and kill someone.

That is why it is imperative that guns to be properly regulated so they don’t fall into the wrong hands.

So to you the only reason for learning a martial art would be to help you if you were attacked?

 

Mac

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation

You are comparing using CPR with using a gun in self-defence? Comparing something designed to try and save life with someone designed to try and take life?

Sorry I don’t see it - you seem to be saying that using something that is meant to try and save a person’s life is the same as using a gun to main or kill someone.

They would seem the very opposites of each other, you seem to be trying to say that chalk and cheese are the same because they both begin with a C.

One [CPR] is to try and save a life the other [shooting a gun] is about trying to injure or take a life

That is not the same.

So you do fear been attacked?

You feel your very life is threatened and that is why you have a gun?

Why do you feel that threatened?

 

Mac

Well that is why there is a need for regulations to try and stop guns falling into the hands of the irresponsible and criminals.

I mean converting the glock would be a criminal act and if the gun was owned legally it would be discovered the next time it was inspected (as per the gun control proposals above) the gun would be destroyed and the owner would then be fined, banned from ever owning a gun again and possibly have to serve a custodial sentence.

 

Mac

Well Gun buybacks/Amnesties have been successful in other places for example in Australia - The "National Firearms Buyback Program" in 1996 was held for 12 months and retrieved 650,000 guns. The 2003 handgun buyback ran for 6 months and retrieved 68,727 guns – wiki

Thing is that it doesn’t seem to cause much harm and even if only a few thousand guns are taken out of circulation that is a few thousand that then can’t inadvertently fall into the hands of the irresponsible or criminals

As for been against ‘registration’ I’m unsure what you mean? Wouldn’t you need some form of registration to know who was a legitimate gun owner and was following the regulations for owning a gun?

Also as pointed out gun ownership seems to be a personal choice (that most Americans don’t take up) and that choice should come with the responsibilities (you might say burdens) attached to it regarding public safety.

 

Public Safety

To me prudent gun control is based on public safety, protecting the public in a society that has relatively easy access to guns (where there are those that feel it is their personal right to own a gun if they wish).

As a matter of public safety I think everything should be done to protect the public in this matter. That does not mean the complete banning of all guns but their regulations to try and lessen the likelihood of them falling into the wrong hands.

Therefore the burden is on the gun lobby to prove that public safety regulations are not needed rather than the other way around.

The problem seems to be that the gun lobby don’t seem to have any good arguments against public safety regulations.

However their argument seems so often comes back to - we don’t want them, and there reason for that stance – because we don’t.

Some in the gun lobby seems to reject all regulation others accept some but the stance on both seems to come back to - we just don’t want them.

 

But why?

The thing that has always interested me in the discussions around gun ownership in the US is why?

Why do these people want to have guns?

I’m not talking about the supposed right to have them but the reasons why they want to have the guns.

I mean if people chose not to own guns, and some 70% of Americans don’t, then the ease of access to guns in US society would drop and the likelihood of them falling into the wrong hands would lessen.

Now for all the protestations of individual gun owners and the gun lobby there does seem to be a lot a fear attached to gun ownership fear of personal attack or an attack on the group.

Now I’ve said in the past that there does seem to be attitude among many Americans that sees the threat of violence, intimidation and suppression as legitimate means of societal control, and that if people think that way they would expect others to also think that way.

As such they are likely to see the world as a threatening place where at any time they could be the victim of criminal or political action.

Fear would be the natural state however conscious or unconscious that might be.

Within the framework of such a worldview guns seem attractive as a means of ‘equalising’ the individual against what they perceive as threats, it makes them feel that they are also ‘powerful’ and intimidating and that they too, if needs be, can deal with, in other words suppress the threatening.

The problem is that such attitudes can build up an irrational barrier between reality and myth, between what they see as prudent and sensible and what actually is prudent and sensible.

In the two areas most put forwards by gun owners for having a gun, crime and governmental malpractice guns do not seem the best means of tackling either but the idea that they are I feel can result in this group not looking for better ways of tackling them.

And politically the group is likely to gravitate toward those politicians and politics that reflect their attitudes but also leaves them open to political manipulation by politicians that however falsely encourage them in their beliefs – that the country is a dangerous and threatening place full of people that wish to take away their lives and liberties.

 

To which I agree.

It's not the only reason but it is the main reason. That is the entire premise of a martial art to begin with, after all.

 

THANK YOU! Been saying this for years. This is what worries me. The modern day gun has made killing so easy, toddler's literally do it. Maybe just maybe ending a human life shouldn't be that easy and accessible.

 

You're injuring or taking someone's life to protect the life of yourself and/or others. It's the reason why security, police, and military have weapons. It's the reason why some civilians choose to carry. So yes, self defense and carrying a firearm for protection is in fact a life saving skill and tool.

Simple, I don't. Don't fear being attacked anymore than you fear being in a car accident. The potential for both is there so you take precautions. Some might do the bare minimum like buckling your seatbelt or avoiding sketchy areas at sketchy times with sketchy people. Some might take it a step further light having a dash cam or taking up self defense classes. Still others might take even further by researching and buying the safest car on the market or buying a firearm. And then there are those who take defensive driving courses or sign up for tactical firearm classes. It's all a matter of personal preference and how much you want to invest on your personal safety.

 

So we need tanks, then....