OT Trump prematurely ejaculates

[MadAmster]

Hope you weren't that victim MA

Thanks for the thoughts GP. Maybe the fact that I wrote that they killed him provides the answer to your question

[ramAnag]

Ram's right on both counts Swale. you'r ignoring the per capita effect and you're being idealistic.

Edit: in fact you are demonstrating the exact behaviour that I've been talking about yet don't have a name for, trying against the objective evidence to justify a particular behaviour when it reflects badly on particular parts of society

So...just out of interest, are you, Ram and GP coming out in support of the gun lobby, the 2nd Amendment and the right to carry firearms?

[Andy_Faber]

So...just out of interest, are you, Ram and GP coming out in support of the gun lobby, the 2nd Amendment and the right to carry firearms?

If I were a USA citizen I would be so entrenched in my opinion on this that whatever side of the fence I was ten years ago I would be now and I will be til I die - that's part of the problem. As an observer, a former gun owner (a 4/10) and first hand observer of two accidents with firearms, my recommendation would be: 1) Don't look to repeal the 2nd amendment, its political suicide - almost all my US friends are Democrats, almost all 'carry' or have a legal gun in the home, almost all would vote Republican if it meant retaining the right - so forget that as idealism. 2) Work towards a point where a test of reasonableness can be applied, ie what amount and type of firearms can one person reasonably need for legitimate means. 3) identify the areas of life where possession of firearms for 'legitimate' (in their eyes) such as personal defence/law enforcement/hunting (for game that is then eaten)/stock protection becomes possession for 'illegitimate' means such as person on person attack in all its forms. 3) for those areas of life, initiate a two pronged 'attack' - 3a) zero tolerance towards perps (whole life sentences for instance) and 3b) probably most importantly, address the root cause of each (type of) incident and make serious steps to reverse whatever behaviours/trends/cultures have given rise to it. Trouble is even as I write that, especially 3b, it just reads like complete fantasy. Whats your position?

[Geoff Parkstone]

So...just out of interest, are you, Ram and GP coming out in support of the gun lobby, the 2nd Amendment and the right to carry firearms?

I tend to agree with Andy, it would be politically suicidal to repeal the right to bear arms and I'm not sure it would achieve anything. There are so many legally held guns in the states that driving guns underground wouldn't achieve anything in reducing numbers in circulation but would allow for profiteering for generations to come in the newly opened illicit trade.

Would control and licensing achieve anything? Probably a little and some element of evaluation of an individual's need for a gun and disqualification for misuse would be appropriate. But you would then create a split legal/illegal market.

It's a mad system where you can walk into a sweetshop and be offered a handgun to go with your Christmas candy, as I was in Charlotte's ville, Virginia one year.

So I'm afraid that it's another one of those issues that should be looked at and regulated better but even if one could overturn 2nd amendment it wouldn't achieve a lot. I suspect if any president tried, he'd end up shot. If not, then he would match Trump in being a one term president.

As to the observation that, pro rata, most victims are black on black crime, that may well be so but, if I can coin a phrase which might catch on, "black lives matter". Stop shooting each other -

[AdiSalisbury]

How would people feel if they were told that they were no longer allowed to drink alcohol?

I'm a (normally) responsible drinker, I never drink drive, yet others do and people lose their lives as a result. So should I, we, lose our right to a beer, glass of wine, owing to the negligence and stupidity of others? Having a beer is very much a part of our culture, and many businesses profit from it.

That's the type of thing you're up against with the gun laws, it's not as simple as just turning it off, it's a large part of their culture and economy. I don't think that anyone other than police officers, military personnel, and farmers, should have the right to a firearm... but it's not up to me, and simply telling people that they must give them up is not going to win their support.

[ramAnag]

If I were a USA citizen I would be so entrenched in my opinion on this that whatever side of the fence I was ten years ago I would be now and I will be til I die - that's part of the problem. As an observer, a former gun owner (a 4/10) and first hand observer of two accidents with firearms, my recommendation would be: 1) Don't look to repeal the 2nd amendment, its political suicide - almost all my US friends are Democrats, almost all 'carry' or have a legal gun in the home, almost all would vote Republican if it meant retaining the right - so forget that as idealism. 2) Work towards a point where a test of reasonableness can be applied, ie what amount and type of firearms can one person reasonably need for legitimate means. 3) identify the areas of life where possession of firearms for 'legitimate' (in their eyes) such as personal defence/law enforcement/hunting (for game that is then eaten)/stock protection becomes possession for 'illegitimate' means such as person on person attack in all its forms. 3) for those areas of life, initiate a two pronged 'attack' - 3a) zero tolerance towards perps (whole life sentences for instance) and 3b) probably most importantly, address the root cause of each (type of) incident and make serious steps to reverse whatever behaviours/trends/cultures have given rise to it. Trouble is even as I write that, especially 3b, it just reads like complete fantasy. Whats your position?

My position takes three forms. Firstly I find it frustrating that you and GP (Ram59 is at least consistent) can seldom actually make your minds up, albeit for different reasons, and take a stance. You did the same thing over Brexit, both voting against it, both sometimes arguing against it but eventually coming out in some sort of vague support for it and, in GP’s case, regularly heaping scorn on those who continue to think it represents imminent disaster...or in your case suggesting that those who oppose gun control are nothing more than ‘idealists’. Take a stance that you believe in.

Decisions can be influenced by time and changing circumstances. No one in their right mind would have legalised the widespread selling of cigarettes and alcohol had they known what they know now. Conversely, 15 years ago it would have been difficult to believe that smoking in public places would have ever been banned and going even further back...in the late sixties/early seventies(?) the notion of any objection to drinking and driving and the use of breathalysers would have been opposed on the basis of some infringement of civil liberty. Unpopular legislation can be passed if the argument is strong.

I completely accept the greater need for landowners/farmers to own certain guns in the US. Beyond that and despite their ‘Wild West’ history, there is, imo, no justification for ordinary people to own a gun which they keep in the home and on their person and there is absolutely no need and no justification for individuals to have the right to own rapid fire automatic or semi automatic weapons. Things need to change, people need to - for want of a much, much better expression - stick to their (metaphorical) guns, and the US needs to have a rational, logical national debate about the issue.

For the sake of argument, and completely hypothetically, if we in the UK were now to try and change laws relating to gun control, ownership and availability to being like those in the USA would you support such change? Y/N...no pontificating...take a stance!

[Ram59]

So...just out of interest, are you, Ram and GP coming out in support of the gun lobby, the 2nd Amendment and the right to carry firearms?

If I was living in the US now, I would definitely have a legal firearm for my own protection and probably to enjoy the sport of target shooting once more. What I would vote against, is the right of normal citizens to own fully automatic weapons and guns that fire larger calibre bullets.

With illegal gun ownership so widespread in the US, I don't think that it'll ever be possible to take away the right of law abiding citizens to own a firearm for their own protection.

Would I support it in this country, no way. Having said that, I was upset to lose my own pistol used for sporting purposes only. I believed at the time and still do, that the ban was too general. In my instance which was the most common category, my pistol was a single shot .22 pistol. Even if I practiced hard, I would struggle to reload the single bullet in less than 5 seconds, this bullet being only around 5mm in diameter. It would be impossible for someone to go wild with such a weapon causing multiple fatalities. Put it like this, if I was put in a room with someone else for a fight to the death and was given the choice of such a weapon or a kitchen knife, I would choose the knife every time.

[MadAmster]

Quite happy not to have one. In Holland there are strict Laws and strict checks. Not only checks when you want to buy one but also checks that you are keeping it i accordance with the Law. Apart from military, police and farmers, there are also licenced "pest controllers" who also may own a weapon.

If you belong to a gun club (target shooting in a sporting way, the types of shooting seen at the Olympics and other multi sport events) you can also get alicence to buy and keep a gun. Again, there are strict Laws as to how and where you keep it (locked away, separate from the ammo etc). Break the regs once and that's it. No more gun, ever.

With regard to the USA, I'd say that, other than the military, nobody needs an AR15 or similar weapon.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Isn't it refreshing to be told by an enlightened Liberal that we should not have open minds but must form fixed opinions rather than see both sides of an argument. I'm thinking this is precisely the situation that Andy was searching for a word for yesterday.

The world is full or grey rA, not everything is black and white.

To answer you final point, no I wouldn't want that change made here, but I'm struggling on the relevance of that to the entirely different position in the USA. You are, culturally and socio economically comparing chalk to cheese.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Oh yes and also both my father and brother have in the past been firearms dealers and I have spent my entire life around guns and using them. I think there are probably around 20 still in the parental home. None of my family have ever killed anyone, the guns are kept in a strongroom that had direct lines to police. Have seen some very interesting things handed in during amnesties that "grandad who just died kept in the loft after the war"