Gun Crime In America

[musculargirl]

I'd be much happier with 17 year olds. At 15 here you can drive with an adult in the car and at 16 after you pass the test you are able to drive.

[oscarmadison]

Them's the rules here. It's the addage of two wrongs don't make a right. Yes trespassing in someones home isn't right, but many would see the retention of a makeshift weapon, in close proximity to a householders bed, as an act of premeditation.

There is then the possibility that any kind of physical contact with such a weapon, when used in those circumstances, could count favourably in the intruders sentancing, I.E. reduce his sentance a little, whilst implicating the householder or other acting resident, in an act of premeditated criminal intent.

It could also be classed as taking the law into your own hands. Something along the lines of "If anyone ever tries to come into property, I'll be ready with this golf club" type attitude. A kind of vigilatism gone wrong some might say, as opposed to the "good" kind, where you rugby tackle someone, who is trying to steal money off someone at knife point, for example.

The countries way to try and impose a does as we want, not do as you wish type system, I suppose to suppress mild outbursts of anarchy .

a good tackle that wasn't meant to injure the criminal?... this is some of the most ridiculous babble I've ever encountered on this fitness forum. please stay as passive as possible in the face of a fookun intruders rights, don't want the thought policia up yer arse for you thinking of injuring a criminal with a pre-positioned baseball bat........... me runnin!!!!!!!

[Boss Man]

No, it's not about being as passive as possible. You're allowed to get physical with intruders, but in a manner deemed restrained.

I.E wrestiing them to the ground, a moderate whack to the Leg to fell them etc etc, but not do something where the person ends up with broken ribs and stitches to their face, or something like that, otherwise people would complain that smacking another person about, would be legally permitted in your own hone, but not outdoors or public places and this could mean the law could be misinterpreted, I.E. you own a bar, inn, tavern or pub, so it's a public place, but also your home, so the bar owner could then say it was okay for them to beat senseless a burgler, because it was permissable in your own home.

So we don't permit repetitive violence against intruders, just conservative acts of restraint, that can't be interpreted as taking the law into your own hands.

Get this. You cannot tie up or handcuff intruders, or lock them in a shed, room or garage, or anything like that, as it's deemed as holding someone against their will.

Which is technically true, as burglers don't burgle your house with the intention of being locked in the upstairs toilet, but nonetheless it could count against the person who did it, or maybe even give the intruder a lighter sentance, in lieu of them having an illegal act enacted against them.

Hey, I don't make the rules up, I just accept them as they are.

[oscarmadison]

Hey, I don't make the rules up, I just accept them as they are.

that sounds more dangerous then the beating up of intruders..............

[Boss Man]

Well if accepting rules keeps me out of prison, I'm all for it .

[musculArgirl2]

x

[musculArgirl2]

x

[fitoverforty]

more laws won't keep bad people from getting guns - they don't follow the laws.

if you elimintate the vast majorority of guns in this country you eliminate the vast amount of the problem!!

How do you propose to eliminate the guns already in circulation? Owned by millions of Americans? There is NO way you can pass a law that will somehow magically get rid of guns from the millions of homes across America. I'm not trying to argue, just looking for the answer, just like you.
I'm not pro gun, or a nra supporter, and I agree that something needs to change in this country in regards to how we protect our children, and lives from the danger of gun crimes.

[musculArgirl2]

x

[Boss Man]

Possible ways for America to legislate.

Restrict guns to the police, miltary, museums and licensed gun clubs, who must follow strict guidelines and also maybe people who are licensed to keep guns at home, providing they're decommissioned, I.E. antique guns, old second world war pistols etc.

The issues this would cause is, that without gun shops, no government incomes from taxable profits and taxable salaries from owners / managers and other staff, who would potentially require state handouts.

You might also get a reduction in gun manufacture, causing loss of taxable operating profits and possible reduction of staff numbers in manufacturing facilities, costing the government tax from salaries and possible state handouts to the unemployed.

I doubt however, that this would impact, if at all, on gun exports to other countries as part of the countries defence incomes.

proposals would also increase trafficking problems and could slightly increase the cost of policing it and redirect some police resources away from other potential crimes, possibly reducing the rate at which certain crimes could be tackled, leading to a small increase in crime statistics, relating to unsolved crimes of certain types, depending on what sort of police people were redirected to tackle the increased gun trafficking.

You could also have an amnesty, where for 2-3 weeks, people could leave what would have become illegal guns, at police stations without penalty, however it would cost the government or someone some money, to destroy or smelt down the guns offered up.

However people like Lanza couldn't do what he did, if his mother was someone failing the aforementioned criteria and couldn't have a gun in the first place, for him to purloin and use.

Thre might result in a slightly higher level of deaths and injuries from illegal guns, but if you significantly reduce deaths and injuries from legal guns, then you should create a reduction in injuries and deaths overall.

However, I suspect the American government would look at the financial aspects I noted and decide not to do anything so radical.

I think You're right, that there probably are a lot of pro gun people in America and I suspect many of whom would feel a sense of compassion, to friends and relatives of the gunmans victims and the people in the local community, but wouldn't change their stance on guns, especially if they possessed one.

That then potentially becomes a case of, I'm quite happy to have laws, that prevent nutters legally buying or acquiring guns, as long as said laws don't prevent me doing it, which menas what exactly, that people with histories of mental illness should be prevented from acquiring legal guns?

Fair enough, providing you have safeguards, but how could you make gun shop owners aware of how many people in their area, are or have been mentally ill and therefore should not be allowed a gun?

Alternatively maybe people who want guns, should consent to undergo some kind of mental assessment or screening process, before being allowed to buy a gun from a shop and have proof of the assessment process when purchasing.

I don't see any of what I've said ludicrous or way off beam, but the American government, would probably not do such things, for stated reasons above.

Whatever happens your country has serious issues to ask of itself, but whether it arrives at serious answers is another thing in itself.

[musculArgirl2]

x

[Boss Man]

Nutters is a term sometimes used in this country to describe people who are not mentally normal or lacking in sanity.

In case, I wasn't using the terminology in that way, I was talking about someone with a warped mind, not a damaged mind.

[Nokie173]

I am personally for more gun control. I understand our 2nd Amendment is the right to “Bear Arms” but that was back in the days where we had basic guns and not a lot of mental illness people who can easily get a hold of it. It breaks heart to hear such tragic news from mall to movie theaters to school?!?!?! It’s sad to say but the bigger the news… people tend to do them more! Recently, local news are reporting people making threats at multiple schools and have to go on lock down. It makes me wonder of our future since we are an ideology country… and we all have our own views… times like this, instead of clashing views we need to compromise what’s best for the country’s future... Not just gun control but our finance & other stuff too!!!

[Boss Man]

The problem your country has is it's financial side of the argument.

If gun shops closed, the people working there would not be paying tax and would need government subsidies to live and the shops would generate no taxable operating profits, or any other possible taxes.

Another possibility would be if any guns were manufactured in America, as there could be a reduction in the number of guns made in a factory, leading to some job losses, no taxes from such people and subsidies required to live and less taxable operating profits and other taxable incomes from the facility, assuming that none of any such facilities didn't become bankrupt, in which case, any bankrupt facilities would cause a total loss of any potential taxes and taxes from salaried employees, who would then require subsidies to live.

I don't think your governments' leaders are happy to do things, that compromise revenue stream going directly to your treasury, seeing as it has been for a number of years, the richest economy on earth, although recent financial intelligence indicates, that China may have now done what was predicted for some time and overtaken America in that department.

Winston Churchill once said that America always does the right thing; when it's tried everything else. Perhaps he was over-exaggerating some of Americas' shortcomings, but in essence, America does quite often confuse a shoot first ask questions later mentality, with rationale and deductive reasoning, I.E. Waco. So I think what America does now, will largely dictate whether they go against a lot of the worlds' perceived grain, or keep producing the kind of grain, a lot of the world has been forced to swallow in the past.

[musculArgirl2]

I sometimes think honestly of moving to a different country. where there is universal health care is thought of as normal, guns are prohibited and limited, violence is lower and we aren't the main target when it comes to things like terrorists and nuclear weapons. seriously i'm feeling more and more like that. i probably wouldn't ever do it. i love country but i get really tired of the politics.