"Replica" vs "Toy"

[rhaig 0]

Bignugget

Solution, don't have an environment like that, and cops might not have to react the way they did.

Ok, let's take Chicago then... how would you eliminate that environment where all those violent criminals already have guns?

Serious question... What would it take to remove guns from the thousands of violent criminals in that city? What would you propose?

--
Rob

[Calvin19 0]

If you guys don't stay on topic I swear to god I'll turn this thread around.

[rhaig 0]

yes dad

--
Rob

[turtlespeed 212]

Bignugget

***It's NOTHING to do with the number of guns floating around in the world.

It has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that a kid was walking around with a very realistic looking toy gun.

In a country like the UK with very high gun control (compared to the US) if armed police believe you are carrying a weapon and you act in a manner that they believe is threatening, they will shoot you.

Google "Mark Duggan" - a UK man shot dead by UK armed police because they had intelligence that he was carry a weapon. When they went to stop his vehicle, according to the police's version of events, he reached down in the vehicle as if to grab something and then moved upwards in a manner consistant with someone bringing a weapon to bear on a target. So they shot him.

The moral of this story is not gun control, but to not walk around in a public place with a firearm (or toy firearm) exposed. And when armed police point their weapons at you, do exactly as they say and don't make any sudden movements that could be construed as threatening.

At the end of the day, if they don't know if the weapon is real or not then why should they wait to see if it is if that person makes threatening gestures with it? No rational human being would allow themselves to be shot first.

***************Yes it is a shitty situation. Especially for those deputies and family of the kid.


Chuck

To me, there is no such thing as a toy gun, and I don't feel I stole any part of my kids' childhood by making them treat toy guns like the real thing. Like my granddaughter, my kids grew up shooting at an early age. One is a "pistol packing momma".

I like this sentiment.

All guns are capable of being used to kill. Even the ones that can't shoot.

You wouldn't intuitively think you could kill yourself with a plastic toy gun, but you would be wrong.

This kid proved that.


Like Masterrig said though, when you allow guns to proliferate so much you have to expect cops to shoot first, and never ask questions.

If there were only a million guns floating around instead of 300 million I could see a better case for the cops waiting another 3 seconds to see if it was an actual weapon or not. Me? I think the parents are 100% at fault here.

300 million guns "floating around"? Ok, lets start with Chicago first. It is more dangerous than a tour in Afghanistan these days, and until these "floaters" around the country are removed from the criminals and insane, the killing will go on.

"If there were only a million guns floating around...." Nope, there are more than a million law abiding gun owners in this country.

That is my point. Since there are 300 million guns floating around, and apparently Chicago is more dangerous than Afghanistan, cops shoot first, and don't worry about questions.

Solution, don't have an environment like that, and cops might not have to react the way they did.

Correct me if I am wrong here.

I though UK cops didn't all carry guns.

I thought that only certain UK units were armed all the time.

Is that wrong?

It would seem to support my point if that is the case. Because they don't have 300 million guns in the hands of their citizens, they don't all walk around armed as well, and as such when they randomly stop a suspicious kid with a plastic AK, they have a lot of TIME to think about things, and position themselves safely etc, while backup arrives.

That is the whole point. 15-20 seconds of time that the cops could have spent properly evaluating the situation (while remaining safe) could have saved this kids life.

And MAYBE having the same number of guns as the UK is a good start. MAYBE that means our cops don't have to act like they do.

But hey - you are just a plane ticket away!

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Bignugget 0]

I don't honestly care if kids get slaughtered.

I don't have any.

I certainly don't care enough to try and move over-seas.

I barely care enough to post in forum threads.

[yarpos 4]

Calvin19

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/24/us/boy-13-carrying-toy-guns-is-shot-dead-by-deputies.html?_r=0


I'm not a huge fan of cops, or guns really, but I'm pretty sure I would think that is a real gun if I saw someone with it.

I owned and enjoyed an AK for a few years (legally, not in my home country, blah blah) and that looks very realistic down to safety/semi/full auto lever, mag release , sights. For me only the screws in the side of the butt are initial clues that its not real, especially if its anything near full scale.

If someone wheeled around with that in their hands I would feel in danger. Add local context and its easy to see why the kid got shot, sadly.

regards, Steve
the older I get...the better I was

[kelpdiver 2]

A few hundred local kids protested the shooting today.

http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Students-march-to-protest-police-killing-of-teen-4926947.php

love the Che flag. kids are such fucking idiots.

"Some marchers carried replica guns and wore shirts in memory of Andy. Several drivers honked support as they passed. One demonstrator carried a sign reading, "A badge is not a license to kill," and others held placards reading, "Andy R.I.P."

[Backintothesky 0]

You are correct, only certain police units are armed.

But this isn't really anything to do with levels of firearms in the country (there are a lot - legal and illegal: did you know you can legally own an AR-15 in the UK)

It is because the philosophy behind British law and order is that the British police are "policing by consent" I.e. The public consent to their authority, the public allow them to police. The common consensus is that having all police armed would break that philosophy, turning them into a more "paramilitary" force that rules through threat of violence.

There have been calls in recent years following the murders of unarmed police officers to arm all police officers with firearms but it has been rejected by the establishment because of the factors I mentioned.

The police officers I know don't want the responsibility of a firearm, one mistake and you're going to jail for murder.

An unarmed officer would never attempt a stop on a potentially armed suspect if they could avoid it. The instant a member of the public calls the police to say they've seen a weapon they send out Armed Response. Armed Response spend their days cruising around in unmarked vehicles and can respond to incidents very quickly.

Armed response (I think they used to be called SO19) have a LOT of work on their plate, there are thousands of incidents requiring them every year in London alone.

The UK is not some utopia despite what Piers Morgan says on US television, the banning of handguns after the Dunblane massacre has achieved nothing except stopping law abiding citizens from practicing handgun shooting in the UK. Our Olympic handgun team has to train in Ireland, stupid law that doesn't stop criminals obtaining handguns and killing each other and innocent bystanders.

Bignugget

Correct me if I am wrong here.

I though UK cops didn't all carry guns.

I thought that only certain UK units were armed all the time.

Is that wrong?

It would seem to support my point if that is the case. Because they don't have 300 million guns in the hands of their citizens, they don't all walk around armed as well, and as such when they randomly stop a suspicious kid with a plastic AK, they have a lot of TIME to think about things, and position themselves safely etc, while backup arrives.

That is the whole point. 15-20 seconds of time that the cops could have spent properly evaluating the situation (while remaining safe) could have saved this kids life.

And MAYBE having the same number of guns as the UK is a good start. MAYBE that means our cops don't have to act like they do.

[Bignugget 0]

Backintothesky

You are correct, only certain police units are armed.

But this isn't really anything to do with levels of firearms in the country (there are a lot - legal and illegal: did you know you can legally own an AR-15 in the UK)

It is because the philosophy behind British law and order is that the British police are "policing by consent" I.e. The public consent to their authority, the public allow them to police. The common consensus is that having all police armed would break that philosophy, turning them into a more "paramilitary" force that rules through threat of violence.

There have been calls in recent years following the murders of unarmed police officers to arm all police officers with firearms but it has been rejected by the establishment because of the factors I mentioned.

The police officers I know don't want the responsibility of a firearm, one mistake and you're going to jail for murder.

An unarmed officer would never attempt a stop on a potentially armed suspect if they could avoid it. The instant a member of the public calls the police to say they've seen a weapon they send out Armed Response. Armed Response spend their days cruising around in unmarked vehicles and can respond to incidents very quickly.

Armed response (I think they used to be called SO19) have a LOT of work on their plate, there are thousands of incidents requiring them every year in London alone.

The UK is not some utopia despite what Piers Morgan says on US television, the banning of handguns after the Dunblane massacre has achieved nothing except stopping law abiding citizens from practicing handgun shooting in the UK. Our Olympic handgun team has to train in Ireland, stupid law that doesn't stop criminals obtaining handguns and killing each other and innocent bystanders.

***

Correct me if I am wrong here.

I though UK cops didn't all carry guns.

I thought that only certain UK units were armed all the time.

Is that wrong?

It would seem to support my point if that is the case. Because they don't have 300 million guns in the hands of their citizens, they don't all walk around armed as well, and as such when they randomly stop a suspicious kid with a plastic AK, they have a lot of TIME to think about things, and position themselves safely etc, while backup arrives.

That is the whole point. 15-20 seconds of time that the cops could have spent properly evaluating the situation (while remaining safe) could have saved this kids life.

And MAYBE having the same number of guns as the UK is a good start. MAYBE that means our cops don't have to act like they do.

Thanks for the explanation.

There might be a lot, but there is nowhere near our number.

America takes 2nd place to no one, don't you know that?

[Backintothesky 0]

Yeah, you've got more people in total. I'd be interested to see the figures as a percentage, I guess the US would top out there as well.

What's interesting is when you look at countries such as Switzerland where every household has military weapons in the house - that country is armed to the teeth as they do indeed have a militia style military. But they don't have school, mall and cinema shootings like you do in the US.....

I love America and Americans, it's a great place (especially Vegas ) and I have family over there. But, I think there is something quite fucked up in the general culture and mentality that causes people to go nuts and kill people cos they got fired or they weren't the popular kids at school.

There's a strong culture of violence in your nation - most of your movies essentially promote violence as an effective way to deal with problems. When someone hurts you, even by accident, you sue them. It's a very "fuck you" mentality, a very "us" and "them" theme running through your social and political discourse. I've never seen such hatred between two people just because they are on different sides of the spectrum politically. It seems people cease to become a human being and just become a label like "republican" or "democrat" or "liberal". It's very easy to hurt someone when you don't view them as a person but as a one-dimensional label.

That's the problem in my humble opinion. Not the gun.

Bignugget

Thanks for the explanation.

There might be a lot, but there is nowhere near our number.

America takes 2nd place to no one, don't you know that?

[masterrig 1]

***Yeah, you've got more people in total. I'd be interested to see the figures as a percentage, I guess the US would top out there as well.

What's interesting is when you look at countries such as Switzerland where every household has military weapons in the house - that country is armed to the teeth as they do indeed have a militia style military. But they don't have school, mall and cinema shootings like you do in the US.....

I love America and Americans, it's a great place (especially Vegas ) and I have family over there. But, I think there is something quite fucked up in the general culture and mentality that causes people to go nuts and kill people cos they got fired or they weren't the popular kids at school.

There's a strong culture of violence in your nation - most of your movies essentially promote violence as an effective way to deal with problems. When someone hurts you, even by accident, you sue them. It's a very "fuck you" mentality, a very "us" and "them" theme running through your social and political discourse. I've never seen such hatred between two people just because they are on different sides of the spectrum politically. It seems people cease to become a human being and just become a label like "republican" or "democrat" or "liberal". It's very easy to hurt someone when you don't view them as a person but as a one-dimensional label.

That's the problem in my humble opinion. Not the gun.

I'd have to agree with you. We push violent films and video games. For instance, the 13-yr. old who recently stole his dad's car. The kid wrecked a police vehicle with his dad's car. When asked about it, later, the kid replied that he wanted to play 'Grand Theft Auto', for real. I think, a person sees enough violence in movies and etc., it has to have some effect on that person.


Chuck

[wmw999 2,120]

Quote

There's a strong culture of violence in your nation - most of your movies essentially promote violence as an effective way to deal with problems. When someone hurts you, even by accident, you sue them. It's a very "fuck you" mentality, a very "us" and "them" theme running through your social and political discourse. I've never seen such hatred between two people just because they are on different sides of the spectrum politically.

It seems as though a lot of parents are just fine with their kids seeing all kinds of sick violence on the screen, just as long as there's no sex

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Bignugget 0]

Backintothesky

Yeah, you've got more people in total. I'd be interested to see the figures as a percentage, I guess the US would top out there as well.

What's interesting is when you look at countries such as Switzerland where every household has military weapons in the house - that country is armed to the teeth as they do indeed have a militia style military. But they don't have school, mall and cinema shootings like you do in the US.....

I love America and Americans, it's a great place (especially Vegas ) and I have family over there. But, I think there is something quite fucked up in the general culture and mentality that causes people to go nuts and kill people cos they got fired or they weren't the popular kids at school.

There's a strong culture of violence in your nation - most of your movies essentially promote violence as an effective way to deal with problems. When someone hurts you, even by accident, you sue them. It's a very "fuck you" mentality, a very "us" and "them" theme running through your social and political discourse. I've never seen such hatred between two people just because they are on different sides of the spectrum politically. It seems people cease to become a human being and just become a label like "republican" or "democrat" or "liberal". It's very easy to hurt someone when you don't view them as a person but as a one-dimensional label.

That's the problem in my humble opinion. Not the gun.

***

Thanks for the explanation.

There might be a lot, but there is nowhere near our number.

America takes 2nd place to no one, don't you know that?

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


We have over 2x the amount of guns per capital as your Swiss example, and roughly 15x more than England/Wales.

You are 100% correct, glorifying and promoting violence is not a good thing. Add to it 15x more guns per capita than you have, and you get a lot more gun violence playing out.

[rhaig 0]

Right... so back to Chicago.

What would you do to make that environment go away? You know... all those violent criminals have guns and it's very difficult to legally own and be proficient with a gun in Chicago. How would you make it so there isn't an environment like that so the cops wouldn't have to react the way they did?

--
Rob

[Bignugget 0]

rhaig

***
Solution, don't have an environment like that, and cops might not have to react the way they did.

Ok, let's take Chicago then... how would you eliminate that environment where all those violent criminals already have guns?

Serious question... What would it take to remove guns from the thousands of violent criminals in that city? What would you propose?

It would take a fundamental change in the culture that promoted the buildup of 300 million guns.

Because the problem can't be managed on a micro level like that. Short of putting a Berlin style wall around Chicago.

But once you convince the nation that having 300 million guns doesn't make us any safer, then you increase penalties for possession of weapons, stop manufacturing guns in the U.S., and start collecting them up as they enter the public light.

With no production you only need to worry about the stuff being smuggled in, so the right wingers should celebrate the increased attention on the borders.

A few generations of that and you will have markedly fewer guns floating around, maybe I'm wrong....lets try it and see?

[Backintothesky 0]

In that case you should see half the amount of gun violence in Switzerland than you do in the US. But you don't, it is MUCH lower than that.

I believe in Switzerland there has only been one mass shooting in recent memory - there has been a number in the UK despite the laws.

Rather than banning something and restricting the rights of a large portion of your country who have done (and will do) nothing wrong with firearms, perhaps it would be fairer for all to look at alternative models where firearms are used without the catastrophic effects it is currently having in the US.

By attempting to ban guns you would also be ignoring all the lives that have been saved by private ownership of firearms.

Like everything in life there are two sides to the argument. Yes by banning all guns you might stop some mass shootings but you would also be condemning to death all those people who have been confronted in their homes by armed criminals.

Extreme solutions are NEVER right. Both anti-gun lobbies and the NRA are equally wrong - banning all guns or giving everyone a gun is not the solution.

The solution is not less guns, it's a change in culture in the way people view and use guns.

Looking at the Swiss firearms culture is a good place to start.

Bignugget

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


We have over 2x the amount of guns per capital as your Swiss example, and roughly 15x more than England/Wales.

You are 100% correct, glorifying and promoting violence is not a good thing. Add to it 15x more guns per capita than you have, and you get a lot more gun violence playing out.

[Bignugget 0]

Backintothesky

In that case you should see half the amount of gun violence in Switzerland than you do in the US. But you don't, it is MUCH lower than that.

I believe in Switzerland there has only been one mass shooting in recent memory - there has been a number in the UK despite the laws.

Rather than banning something and restricting the rights of a large portion of your country who have done (and will do) nothing wrong with firearms, perhaps it would be fairer for all to look at alternative models where firearms are used without the catastrophic effects it is currently having in the US.

By attempting to ban guns you would also be ignoring all the lives that have been saved by private ownership of firearms.

Like everything in life there are two sides to the argument. Yes by banning all guns you might stop some mass shootings but you would also be condemning to death all those people who have been confronted in their homes by armed criminals.

Extreme solutions are NEVER right. Both anti-gun lobbies and the NRA are equally wrong - banning all guns or giving everyone a gun is not the solution.

The solution is not less guns, it's a change in culture in the way people view and use guns.

Looking at the Swiss firearms culture is a good place to start.

***

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


We have over 2x the amount of guns per capital as your Swiss example, and roughly 15x more than England/Wales.

You are 100% correct, glorifying and promoting violence is not a good thing. Add to it 15x more guns per capita than you have, and you get a lot more gun violence playing out.

I disagree with the sentiment that you will have more gun violence with 1 million firearms vs. 300 million firearms in a nation.

We KNOW what kind of levels of gun violence we get with 300 million guns floating around.

We AREN'T Switzerland. So while the Swiss may very well be able to maintain a healthy amount of firearms while not maintaining an equally healthy amount of gun violence, we don't seem to be.

It does suck when the (relative) few screw it up for the many, but that's life.

[Backintothesky 0]

Apologies if there was a miscommunication on my part, I never said there would be more gun violence with less guns - I'm saying having less guns won't significantly reduce the level of social violence with guns (and other weapons).

Rather than sticking a band-aid over the problem by banning guns (a questionable tactic that may or may not work), the focus needs to be on actually preventing people from getting to the point where they feel violence is a way to solve their (often petty) problems.

Bignugget

I disagree with the sentiment that you will have more gun violence with 1 million firearms vs. 300 million firearms in a nation.

We KNOW what kind of levels of gun violence we get with 300 million guns floating around.

We AREN'T Switzerland. So while the Swiss may very well be able to maintain a healthy amount of firearms while not maintaining an equally healthy amount of gun violence, we don't seem to be.

It does suck when the (relative) few screw it up for the many, but that's life.

[rhaig 0]

Bignugget

It would take a fundamental change in the culture that promoted the buildup of 300 million guns.

So we agree that it's a cultural problem. You just want to blame the gun, while I feel it's the blame of the acceptance of violence being the answer to conflicts.

Quote

Because the problem can't be managed on a micro level like that. Short of putting a Berlin style wall around Chicago.

But once you convince the nation that having 300 million guns doesn't make us any safer, then you increase penalties for possession of weapons, stop manufacturing guns in the U.S., and start collecting them up as they enter the public light.

so once you "increase the penalties for possession" implies you've banned or licensed ownership. You skipped the part where all the violent criminals turned in their guns to avoid these stiffer penalties. Oh wait... that's because it won't happen.

Quote

With no production you only need to worry about the stuff being smuggled in, so the right wingers should celebrate the increased attention on the borders.

A few generations of that and you will have markedly fewer guns floating around, maybe I'm wrong....lets try it and see?

there would be no LEGAL production in your scenario, but to believe that nobody would produce weapons is a rather simplistic view.

What you're essentially proposing would turn into a police state (more so than what we currently have) and wouldn't address the violence in the culture.

We have a violent crime problem. Not a gun problem. We disagree on that second point, but the first is pretty universal. Your "solution" starts with a grand "reprogramming" of the culture to remove the acceptability of firearms. Yet you don't take the step to realize it's a violence problem.


As with many gun grabbers, you're focusing on a symptom. Too simplistic.

--
Rob

[Bignugget 0]

I didn't skip anything.

After you increase penalties for possession, and ban ownership, and stop legal production. you start collecting guns as they come to light.

When people commit crimes with guns, when guns are discovered during other investigations, when grandpa dies and you don't want to keep hiding his 30 guns that are all life sentences.

Then after a few generations of that, lets say, from 2015 to 2115, we can re-evaluate and see how many guns we still have floating around, and how we are doing in the world rankings of violence.

What you misunderstand is my first step addresses exactly what you claim I refuse to acknowledge.

"It would take a fundamental change in the culture that promoted the buildup of 300 million guns."

The culture that promoted the buildup of 300 million guns, is the culture that glorifies and promotes violence as the only solution to other violence.

Once that is fundamentally different, once we go from an individualistic society to a collectivist society, then step 1 is complete, and you can continue on in my step by step program of harmony.

Please do not skip step 1.

[kelpdiver 2]

Bignugget

Then after a few generations of that, lets say, from 2015 to 2115, we can re-evaluate and see how many guns we still have floating around, and how we are doing in the world rankings of violence.

can we win the war on drugs first? And how well are we doing there? (hint, Nixon declared war in 1971).

I suppose we could get some synergy by combining the DEA and the ATF - this would be an organization that would be envied by Emperor Palpatine himself.

[Bignugget 0]

You skipped step 1.

You are not allowed to help me assemble my moon launcher.

I need people who can follow directions.

[kelpdiver 2]

Bignugget

You skipped step 1.

You are not allowed to help me assemble my moon launcher.

I need people who can follow directions.

Nah, you need people who understand how culture is formed.

and ones with basic understanding of statistics.

[Backintothesky 0]

Violence is often the only solution to other violence - in a lot of cases to not use violence will result in your death.

But your culture does NOT promote violence as the only solution to other violence - it promotes it as the best solution to MOST PROBLEMS.

Therein lies the problem. Ban guns and other weapons will be used because your country has a massive problem with violence.

I think (and others think) that your world ranking in violence will not change much if you banned all guns.

I do think there should be laws in place around firearms. I actually think that owning a firearm should be something you receive after military training in a citizen program. You would have monthly training in your local groups. Having a concealed weapon carry permit should be a right you have after regular training in these citizen groups.

Make guns serve a greater purpose - making people feel part of the protection of their local area in times of peace and war. This will go a long way to firstly keeping an eye on everyone who has firearms for signs of mental instability, but will also provide a sense of purpose and collectivism that would help prevent people lashing out.

Bignugget

is the culture that glorifies and promotes violence as the only solution to other violence.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

People (and news aticles) are fast-forwarding to the point where the cops have their weapons drawn, are yelling orders, and anything other than perfect compliance means you're dead. And then they are concluding, "well yeah he turned around with what could easily be mistaken as a weapon, of course the cops did the right thing."

This case is not that simple, the object looked very much like a rifle.