[Mitch]

It was a horrible story coming out of Virginia today. It always makes me wonder how our gun laws can be so perverse to allow individuals to accumulate so many weapons of mass destruction. I fully believe every American should be allowed to have guns if they need it for hunting, or protection, hell even recreational sport. But, how many is too many? Also, limits on the amount of ammo one can purchase would also seem prudent. Thoughts?

[Borek]

I doubt you can avoid accumulation once guns are allowed at will. Permits that are necessary will not serve their purpose when there are so many guns in private hands.

[DrCMS]

Live by the gun, die by the gun.

[P]

Gun crime is apparently on the up here in the UK.  A few years ago in a place called Hungerford, a bloke went mad in a school with a gun, which was absolutly tragic. The govement paniced and banned firarms compleatly.  Now, people who legitamately owned firearms for sport are not allowed them anymore. The criminals (who never had firearm licences anyway) still have their guns and will always continue to have then, whereas the normal people who owned guns legitimately are no longer allowed them.   STUPID DUMB ~#@er's.

[DrCMS]

Gun crime may be up in the UK but it very rarely impacts innocent people the way it does in the USA.  Gun crime in the UK tends to be mainly criminals on criminals, especially inner city drug dealers killing their rivals.  Guns are available in the UK but not like they are in the USA.

After Hungerford the Goverment banned handguns and pump action shotguns. 
Rifles and std shotguns are still legal, with a licence, and a number of my friends and family have them for shooting rabbits and clay pigeons etc.  There is no need to have a guns for personal protection in a country like the UK and long may that continue.

The USA with its stupid outdated pigheaded insistance on the right to bear arms has got itself in a postion that has no good solution. 

In 2002 there were 81 deaths by guns in the UK compared with 30242 in the USA.
Thats 77 times as many in the USA than UK per head of population.  You reap what you sow. 

[P]

I agree with your post DrCMS,  but why ban the hobbyist from his toys when the criminals will get their guns anyway.  I don't want it be like the US, but why can't an enthusiast have these things legally when the crims will be getting them regardless of whether they are legal or not? As you said - the crims will shoot each other anyway.

[DrCMS]

If legal handguns are available you end up with the American situation.

[hmx9123]

You can argue up one side and down the other with statistics, and you can use the VT shootings to push whatever political envelope you want.  The gun deaths in the UK are skewed anyway--look at the number of people in the UK vs the number of people in the US, the number of guns in each, and the number of violent deaths by other means.  Over half the gun deaths in the US are suicides.  Take a look at the number of suicides in the UK by something other than a gun.  You can draw conclusions about how we have a more efficient way to commit suicide--it really is just BS statistics.  Besides, without citing sources, you're just full of hot air.

Honestly, I wouldn't live in the UK, because the police over there are shooting your own people and the govenment spies on their own citizens even more than we do, which is bad enough.  Guns aren't the problem, nor are they the answer--education is the answer all around.  We need to educate our people about firearms.

I love the US, and for all our civil rights, not just the 2nd amendment.  One of the strengths of this country is the plethora of civil liberties we enjoy.

The only real piece of legislation that needs to be changed concerning guns (IMHO), is that we should completely ban foreigners from owning and/or purchasing firearms here in the US.  It won't stop them, but it will make it harder to obtain firearms for them. [Edit: Please note replies below]

Live by the gun, die by the gun.  Give me liberty or give me death.

Many, many more people own firearms legally here in the US and never use them for criminal purposes; while I agree it is a tragedy that some people do use them for criminal purposes, that is the price that you pay for having the civil liberties that we do.  I've talked to a number of foreigners that believe they will be shot when the get here to the US.  Guess what? The world media hypes up the gun deaths here like crazy--it's all hype.  What is your chance of actually getting shot here?  Infintessimally small.  And whoever said that most of the gun violence in the UK is criminal vs criminal in the inner city--IT'S THE SAME HERE IN THE US.  I suspect it's the same across the world in general.

You look at some sensationalistic media hype like is being done now, and you freak out over 30 people dying.  You fail to realize that we have sent over 3,000 of our own people to their deaths in Iraq, and killed tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.  Seriously, we need to get our priorities straight.  The crimes at VT are henious, and they are tragic, absolutely, but they are nothing compared to the world-wide destruction we're causing abroad.

For that matter, though I may sound like an anti-patriot for saying it, all the casualties of September 11th are a drop in the bucket for our population as well.  Look at all the knee-jerk reactions to that which are still creating problems for us at home and for those of you abroad.

This post, of course, will do nothing to persuade you, as you have already made it abundantly clear that you have your opinion formed already.

There are no simple solutions.  Gun control, anti-gun control--none of the simple solutions posed by either side are useful.  Let's teach our children how to get along, let's treat them with attention and respect, and maybe we'll have a little better world to live in.

[Borek]

I know you are on the second side - ie you love your guns - so I am not surprised by your post. I was ready to agree to disagree, but at least once you have moved too far.

The only real piece of legislation that needs to be changed concerning guns (IMHO), is that we should completely ban foreigners from owning and/or purchasing firearms here in the US.  It won't stop them, but it will make it harder to obtain firearms for them.

IMHO this is racist comment. Brenda Ann Spencer, Richard Farley, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, Charles Carl Roberts. Are they really better than Seung-hui Cho?

There are no simple solutions.  Gun control, anti-gun control--none of the simple solutions posed by either side are useful.

That's were we meet. However - do you obey speed limits? They serve the same propose as gun control can. And - just like gun control - they can limit your rights for the sake of community.

[hmx9123]

Borek, let me explain a bit.  I wrote this fairly quickly, and I can see how this could be seen in a bad light:

The only real piece of legislation that needs to be changed concerning guns (IMHO), is that we should completely ban foreigners from owning and/or purchasing firearms here in the US.  It won't stop them, but it will make it harder to obtain firearms for them.

IMHO this is racist comment. Brenda Ann Spencer, Richard Farley, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, Charles Carl Roberts. Are they really better than Seung-hui Cho?

The comment wasn't meant to be directed at any race or nationality.  None of the aforementioned assholes are any better than the other.  I didn't mean this to be a 'ban foreigners from owning guns because it will prevent things like this'.  Actually, I know a few foreigners here who aren't planning on becoming US citizens and are perfectly responsible gun owners.  However, as far as I'm concerned, unless you're a US citizen, our constitution doesn't protect you; therefore, we should not sell guns to foreigners--it's more of a constituational philosophy issue.  The last part of it was meant to answer the question 'will they still be able to get guns?'  Yes, of course, anyone, citizen or not, can get a gun--anywhere in the world in fact--if they are willing to do things illegally.

I apologize to anyone out there who believed this was a bigoted/racist/etc. comment.

The USA with its stupid outdated pigheaded insistance on the right to bear arms has got itself in a postion that has no good solution.

And this isn't a racist/nationalist comment?  That's blatant name-calling.  DrCMS is getting into some serious USA-bashing.

BTW, as far as I can tell, it wasn't a racist comment--it was a nationalist comment.   (This is meant to be humorous...)

As for speed limits, sometimes I do, sometimes I don't.  But you have to look at the penalty, too.  If it were just a ticket that no one really cared about and could easily be fixed by the court system, I bet a lot more people would be buying guns illegally.  There's a VERY large difference in penalty for breaking gun laws and breaking the speed limit.

Also, to respond to Mitch's original question (which I skipped over in lieu of the USA-bashing), the shooter only used two firearms, one of which was a .22, the most common and least-powered firearm on the market.  There are plenty of people out there with more firearms which have never been used in a crime.

Ah, well, I think I've just fanned the fires of a flame war.  Perhaps I should have posted in the somethingawful.com FYAD forums...

[joeflsts]

Wow, since when was referring to someone as a foreigner the same as being racist?  That is the real leap in this thread.  Had the poster said ban all gun sales to black people I might be inclined to agree with you Borek.  That isn't what he said.

Guns aren't the problem, people are the problem.  The man had two guns, hardly a stash of weapons of mass destruction as it was described.  Weapons of destruction?  Surely, but that is only because the young man decided to use them to kill people.

The situation is quite sad, but I guess you all expressed just as much disgust and anguish over Darfur... right?

Joe

[Earthdowser]

Joe, I enjoy reading your dialog.  I have registered just to read it.  Thank you!  (I am a female in the process of single-handedly taking the color pink back from those of us who cannot think)

[Donaldson Tan]

Earthdowser: It is quite hard to read your comments. Red colour might be easier for the eyes.

Why not make bullets more expensive? If the sale price of bullets is $500/round, the person shot dead really deserves to die.

It is okay to have guns. The US Constitution gives every American the right to own a gun. Regulate the supply of bullets instead.

[Mitch]

People would just make their own bullets anyways...

[Dude]

Not to be insensitive here, however, I have a hard time believing that one person (even with unlimited and pre-loaded clips) could wipe out 32 people.  Doesn't anybody fight anymore?  Why wasn't this guy tackled and beat up after one round (i.e 10-13 shots depending on the state)?  Part of the problem in the U.S. is everyone assuming that "someone else" will solve their problems.  I guess it's a generational thing.  I can't remember a week going by without getting into a fight between the age of 10 and 20.  I guess the war-time studies from Vietnam are true.  For every one person firing a gun on the battlefield, there are 5 people cowering for cover and ineffective. 

In terms of guns, I see absolutely no need for handguns.  They have poor accuracy and are easily concealed.  Unfortunately, I would not like to see them regulated because of the precedent it would set for other guns.

By the way, the "American situation" isn't as bad as some.  On the day that Philadelphia, PA, USA "celebrated" their 100th murder, Rio de Janiero, Brazil celebrated their 1,000th murder.  Even with population adjustments, this is a significantly higher value.