Happy Holidays.
:)
Printable View
Happy Holidays.
:)
yes you are right - I would off all the meth people - meth has killed way more than lanza but i would let you do coke which you are obviously on. no penaltyQuote:
Originally Posted by gloomyDAY
Both sides? I didn't know there was another side! :( I thought we were all striving for some means to effect some sort of gun control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Now I read that some nutter ambushed a fire crew going to a fire that he started, and then shot the firefighters. I suppose it will take another week for wacky Wayne to think of how to put swat teams all over the United Sates of America, designate them as [b]"Good Guys"/b] and have them shoot anyone watching a fire engine crew fight a fire.
Where this will end, God knows, but I am willing to bet that I won't be around when something is finally worked out.
There have been in excess of 100 people killed in gun crime in the USA since Lanza, including on duty and armed police on routine enquiries.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Here you go - i suppose you Euro's want to ban cars now
Chinese man drives car into students, injuring 13 - SFGate
And I thought that the members of this board had the restraint and good taste to leave the subject alone over Christmas. Obviously I was wrong by at least three. And a Merry Christmas to you all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valve Bounce
And the same to you and everyone here as well, Race. :wave:Quote:
Originally Posted by race aficionado
Well, let's be serious here. We are all worried how things are shaping for the safety of people - I am not sure that this was ever meant to be a ghoulish argument. Having said that, if you didn't want to discuss anything about this topic over Christmas, you could have logged onto the F1 forum instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
Sadly, 26 families will not be able to ignore this over Christmas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
It is time that the 'gun lobby' members in the USA took their heads out of the sand and recognised that much as they like: playing with their 'big boys' toys', the feeling of apparent security that carrying and possessing a gun carries, their rather tenuous claim to be members of a militia that has the right to bear arms and the other arguments put forward, the reality is that any move to reduce the number of these lethal devices in circulation will reduce the likelihood of people being killed by them. So they should be formulating means of achieving a cut down in ownership and incresed controls.
And please, let's not have any smart-alec sarcastic comments about moderators not being allowed to express a personal opinion.
One of the reasons that I said I had no interest in becoming involved in this thread or this discussion is because I felt it would go down the same path as every other thread we've had on this topic. And for the most part, sadly, it has.
May I propose something new? Would it be possible for most of us (no matter where we stand on the issue of civilian gun ownership in the United States) to agree on a few things... based on the facts? Let me start by presenting this fact: a large percentage of the gun crimes committed in the United States are committed by people who are already legally prohibited from owning or possessing firearms. Can we all agree that, since it's already illegal for these people to own or possess firearms, they shouldn't have them and we could reduce gun crimes if we could determine how they are procuring these weapons and go after that supply chain? According to a 2002 study on the United States Dept. of Justice website:
- Of inmates who carried a firearm during their offense, 8 in 10 had a handgun
- Fewer than 1 in 50 State and Federal inmates used, carried, or possessed a military-style semiautomatic gun or a fully automatic gun during their current offense.
- In 1997 among State inmates possessing a gun, fewer than 2% bought their firearm at a flea market or gun show, about 12% from a retail store or pawnshop, and 80% from family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source.
By Caroline Wolf Harlow, Ph.D. BJS Statistician
Rather than continuing to beat a (long) dead horse about which guns should or should not be legal in the U.S. or how Americans should or should not feel about gun control and private ownership of firearms, in my opinion, this discussion might actually go somewhere if we could leave the emotion aside (even though gun tragedies evoke emotions). Solutions that are based on data and facts would probably be more meaningful and effective than those based on emotion and knee jerk responses. For anyone who wants to have a fact based discussion, I'd love to take part. But for those who just want to throw darts back & forth, I have no interest in doing that. Please take a look at the link that I pasted. There's some interesting data in there and it's not biased to one side or the other. It *could* provide the basis for a good, healthy discussion/debate here. Since most of us have known each other for awhile and I think there are a lot of intelligent people here, isn't it worth a try?