Only In America. What Would A Teenager Be Doing With A Gun Beside His Bed?

[sandyRoe]

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/boy-shoots-through-window-kills-friend-trying-to-wake-him/ar-BBjVSD1?ocid=mailsignoutmd

[mushroom25]

only a few years ago, you could have said the same about some folks in belfast.

[sandyRoe]

Most of the arms that were here have been turned into ploughshares. America will never escape from incidents like this.

[mikey4444]

I have no doubt that the NRA will soon be on our TVs, telling how this youngster was upholding his right to bear arms. Americans seem not to care about this sort of thing, so why should we ?

We met and dealt with our gun problems after Dunblane. How many more Dunblanes does America have to have, in order that there should be an outbreak of common sense ?

Why are Americans so devoid of common sense ?

[Clanad]

Mikey, we've been here before, but this well written article from the U.K. clearly indicates some points that need reiterating... firstly there were only 200,000 handguns in all of Britain at the time of the enactment of the gun control law. This included small bore .22 caliber handguns.
Secondly, there are differng opinions as to the effectiveness of the law... but that's up to you all to determine.

Whereas, in the U.S. gun totals are difficult to determine... In 2007, the Geneva based Small Arms Survey estimated that there were over 270 million privately owned firearms in the United States. This estimate is a very rough educated guess at best, but is often used as a starting point for discussion. In all likelyhood, total gun ownership in the U.S. exceeds 300 million[i.

You can see the problem and the difference. The tragic shooting incidents in Britain percipitating the 1988 gun law delt with a very small number of firearms. Ours are such that no one can imagine the impossibility of control of those kinds of numbers.

Since the above is self-evident, I for one, will continue to have at hand at least one legally purchased firemarm with a permit to conceal carry firmly in by wallet. I will continue to teach my wife and children fireamr useage and safety.

As terrible as your article is, it has no bearing on self-defense of ones family, which resides unequivocally with [i]me]. All the gun related accidents such as your article describes total only about 1/5 of the people killed every year in car accidents. Are to regulate ownership of automobiles in the way you presacribe for firearms?

It has nothing to do with common sense, mikey...

[Clanad]

Ooops, forgot link to article:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/17/world/europe/dunblane-lessons/

[Clanad]

As well as this one:

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3644/britain_wants_its_guns_back

Which, significantly, carries the oft overlooked stat that in the U.S. legally owned handguns are used 80 times more often to defend ones self or family than to kill someone in a crime...

[Peter Pedant]

Clanad stats are bit cock eyed, as one would expect

rd deaths 2013 - UK 1,700, ( in 60m )... US 30 000 in pop 300m
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year)

and for gun deaths there is a good diagram here - illustrating what we all know - the gun rate deaths in the US are in outerspace compared even to the roughPortuguese
http://www.humanosphere.org/science/2014/03/visualizing-gun-deaths-comparing-the-u-s-to-rest-of-the-world/

and oops someone did it before me ( NYT )
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/16/gun-deaths-versus-car-deaths/?_r=0

gun deaths in US around 30 000 - and in the UK I thought around 100 but it is nearer 40.

The Brits just dont shoot each other and those in the land of the free .... do

[pastafreak]

As an American in the UK,I am constantly embarrassed and saddened by some of the statistics and attitudes that emanate from my country of birth.
Maybe if the possession of guns was outlawed full stop,it would not be necessary for anyone to have one or to feel the need to instruct their wife and children in their use.

[jim360]

It seems to me that Clanad's argument essentially amounts to "there's too many guns now so it's too late to try and control them". This may well be true, but even so it has to be acknowledged as a terribly sad state of affairs. The stark truth that stories like this show with chilling clarity is that the "safety" provided by guns is but an illusion.

[mikey4444]

Well said Jim ! Thanks God we had the common sense to deal with the situation after Dunblane. My thoughts tonight are with the family of the boy that was murdered, not with the people who keep guns concealed about their persons.

As Sandy said right at the beginning...only in America would a teenager have a gun beside his bed. And only a American would defend his right to have it.

[shoota]

//We met and dealt with our gun problems after Dunblane.//

What 'gun problems' did we meet? There were no 'gun problems' in existence.

[mikey4444]

Shoota...your ignorance knows no bounds !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre

Both Ryan and hamilton were licenced gun owners, After the Dunblane massacre, legislation was introduced to severely curtail gun ownership.

I would have thought all this was obvious, but its apparent that people need to be reminded once in a while.

[Baldric]

It's so good to know we've removed all the illegal guns from the streets, so the that criminals can no longer shoot us law abiding citizens.
That is what you mean isn't it Mikey?

[shoota]

I am not ignorant Mikey, I know more about the subject than you do.

You know only what you are fed in your chosen papers. These incidents were not caused by firearms but by mentally disturbed people. They would have perpetrated their murders by any means to hand. Had they run amok in a 4wd vehicle would they have been banned?

[shoota]

Exactly db, not a 'gun problem' but a people problem.

[jim360]

I expect that most of the anti-gun "lobby" recognises that guns don't cause anything. They just make it far more easier for someone so inclined to be destructive and deadly. No-one can drive a 4x4 around a school. A knife is not an effective mass-murder weapon. It takes guns to be particularly lethal in large numbers, as we've seen at any number of school shooting in the US -- many of which seem to pass without comment.

All arguments that guns improve family safety are based on two things: overlooking the danger it causes to yourself and your family simply by being there, gun-related accidents being far more common and fatal than most other possible accidents; and that "good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns", or words to that effect. Again, this may be true, but the problem is that the bad guys find it many times easier to get hold of a gun precisely because of the lack of regulation -- not to mention that "good guys" can easily become "bad guys" in certain circumstances.

Guns just do not make people safer, despite people's perceptions.

[andy-hughes]

shoota - //Had they run amok in a 4wd vehicle would they have been banned? //

No, because a vehicle is designed as a means of transport, using it as a weapon is against its intended purpose.

A gun is designed to shoot someone, or something, using it as a weapon is to use it precisely for its intended purpose.

This is an old and tired gun-supporter's argument, it was flawed the first time I read it, and it's flawed now.

There is a very simple (but sadly not possible) way to stop gun crime - simply ask someone (aside from those who need one for professional reasons) if they would like to own a gun. If they say 'yes' they are automatically banned from ever handling, much less owning a gun.

[shoota]

That's going to work isn't it?
'Do you want a gun Mr Homicidal Maniac?'
'No sir, I do not.'
'Ok, you my have one then'......