United States & Gun Control discussion.

[digrar]

There is a perception from outside looking in that the US has some sort of medical/pharma industry driven mass hypochondria, we're not at that point.

We also run a totally different type of gun culture. People have guns because they're primary producers, they're issued one for work, they're sporting shooters, or they have illegal weapons because they're crims. Outside of those groups weapon ownership is near on zero.

Mass murders in Australia since 96 have been more likely to happen from a building fire (x3), hammer strike (family domestic) or stabbing (family domestic).

 

[Brill]

Mass murders in Australia since 96 have been more likely to happen from a building fire (x3), hammer strike (family domestic) or stabbing (family domestic).

Well that's interesting! Blunt force trauma and stabbing someone kill more Americans than firearms (per FBI crime stats).

 

[Marine0311]

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Connecticut Gun Law


The U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday upheld Connecticut's ban on assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines, both of which were core provisions of the sweeping gun control law enacted after the December 2012 Newtown school shootings.

"New York and Connecticut have adequately established a substantial relationship between the prohibition of both semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity magazines and the important — indeed compelling — state interest in controlling crime," U.S. Circuit Judge José A. Cabranes wrote in the decision published Monday, ruling that the post-Newtown gun laws enacted in both states do not violate the Second Amendment right to individual gun ownership.



:wall:

 

[DA SWO]

Off it goes before the Supreme Court again, think they could call all the Federal Judges and tell them to knock it off?

 

[Marine0311]

That may be true, but that doesn't mean you can attribute it to gun control measures. Australia is an entirely different country with several different variables that affect why and how things happen-or don't.

I think culture would be one?

 

[CQB]

It's interesting to also note that there had only been a few (I think 8 in the previous 100 years) mass casualty shootings previous to that anyways. And from what I looked up, I think there has been 3 mass casualty shootings since the laws. So do I think it could be implemented with success in the U.S.? Most likely not.

The three you speak of would be Strathfield in Sydney, Hoddle Street in Melbourne and Port Arthur in Tasmania, which occurred before the laws and the three events were the reason the laws were implemented. There haven't been any since.

 

[x SF med]

The three you speak of would be Strathfield in Sydney, Hoddle Street in Melbourne and Port Arthur in Tasmania, which occurred before the laws and the three events were the reason the laws were implemented. There haven't been any since.

With your proximity to largely Islamic states, that have shown a marked increase in violence, rhetoric, covert action and have an eye on OZ/NZ, should a covert or overt incursion happen, what would be the chance of the 'normal citizen' to carry out his/her own defense prior to the arrival of Police or military assistance?

Not baiting you, just wanted to get another country's SOF guy's perspective, especially since you understand the UW/GW methodologies involved, and understand the behaviors of the planners and the doers.

After all these years, I finally formed a cogent and germane question to ask you where others can benefit from it.

 

[digrar]

Overt storming the North? Fuckers would all be dead inside 3 months. Just from nature.
Covert, cell based terror stuff is getting picked up on a fairly regular basis now. It's just the teenage kids who snap who are getting anywhere. And we're a long way from the populace thinking it would be a good idea to carry and start snapping off rounds at shifty looking 15 year old Habibs.

 

[Marine0311]

Off it goes before the Supreme Court again, think they could call all the Federal Judges and tell them to knock it off?

I can only hope that would be the case. This doesn't look good. I want to see the fallout first.

 

[CQB]

With your proximity to largely Islamic states, that have shown a marked increase in violence, rhetoric, covert action and have an eye on OZ/NZ, should a covert or overt incursion happen, what would be the chance of the 'normal citizen' to carry out his/her own defense prior to the arrival of Police or military assistance?

Not baiting you, just wanted to get another country's SOF guy's perspective, especially since you understand the UW/GW methodologies involved, and understand the behaviors of the planners and the doers.

After all these years, I finally formed a cogent and germane question to ask you where others can benefit from it.

Of course it could happen, but in the scheme of things it would be high probability, low consequence. But the guys who wish to do this are a very minute section of the population (as they are elsewhere). Muslims are about 1.8% of our total population, the bad guys are a minute percentage of that. How is the problem dealt with? It's the old duck on the pond scenario. A duck glides across the pond, you don't see the feet paddling furiously underneath. Google Operation Appleby and Operation Pendennis to see how it's done here.

To answer the second part of your question, the answer is virtually nil, di nada, bupkis, sweet fuck all. The problem is, do you arm a population to contain a low consequence threat? No, you don't, for terrorism is in reality just another crime, murder really and more people get killed in domestic violence attacks here than terrorism.

 

[Marauder06]

... terrorism is in reality just another crime, murder really and more people get killed in domestic violence attacks here than terrorism.

We used to think that too. In fact, although President Clinton issued directives indicating that terrorism was a national security problem, he treated it mainly as a law enforcement issue. Many other people saw it that way.

Then 9/11 happened. And although far more people get killed by Americans in any given year than by terrorists, I think we all know what happened after.

Sometimes terrorism isn't "low consequence."

 

[SpitfireV]

Yeah crime isn't either. CT is a funny one. It's a sliding scale on who deals with it, IMO.

 

[CQB]

Agreed, CT is difficult in a lot of ways.

 

[Brill]

We used to think that too. In fact, although President Clinton issued directives indicating that terrorism was a national security problem, he treated it mainly as a law enforcement issue.

You used past tense there...and wrong President too.

 

[Gunz]

Seriously, I don't think most of us are armed because we think we're going to run into terrorists or even crime. I think a lot of non-Americans (and many Americans, too, unfortunately) forget how deeply-rooted the traditions of gun-ownership and shooting are in this country, handed down from father-to-son (or daughter) for generations. We have the geography for it, plenty of places to shoot. It's extremely precious to us, it's a symbol of our independence...and when we hear threats to increase gun restrictions or even ban them it only strengthens our resolve and defiance. Americans love to shoot because shooting is fun.

My sister-in-law is a flaming Boston Leftist, a card-carrying pinko commie socialist bolshevik. A couple of years ago I took her down to my range with a Ruger 10-22 and taught her how to use it, gave her the patented Ocoka One gun-safety lecture, strictly supervised her every molecule...and she had a blast. Her whole attitude on guns changed. It was like Gandalf hit her on the head with a magic rock.

 

[pardus]

No, it's not confiscation, it's voluntary, if the Australian model is followed. This means you get a dollar value for a gun you have, no questions asked. I say it again: we have not had a mass casualty shooting for some time.

So you're saying that that it's legal to own a semi auto rifle in OZ? e.g. an SLR?

 

[CQB]

The short answer is yes, but it comes with conditions, that type is restricted to collectors and they have a particular class of license. You have to fight the paper war. The following applies to New South Wales:

http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data...ms_Collection_FACT_Sheet_-_7_January_2014.pdf

 

[ThunderHorse]

I'll keep my guns, thanks.

 

[Gunz]

The short answer is yes, but it comes with conditions, that type is restricted to collectors and they have a particular class of license. You have to fight the paper war. The following applies to New South Wales:

http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data...ms_Collection_FACT_Sheet_-_7_January_2014.pdf

That was interesting. "Paper war" indeed. I guess "I like guns because they're fun" would never qualify as a "Genuine Reason" in NSW. I appreciate you sharing it because it shows what could happen in this country if our Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms is infringed any more than it already has been.

 

[policemedic]

That was interesting. "Paper war" indeed. I guess "I like guns because they're fun" would never qualify as a "Genuine Reason" in NSW. I appreciate you sharing it because it shows what could happen in this country if our Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms is infringed any more than it already has been.

I read through all that and noticed that self-defense wasn't one of the listed genuine reasons for being issued with a license.

I also read through the list of prohibited weapons other than firearms; I've concluded that only harsh language and cans of Fosters are authorized for self defense purposes there.

I did meet an Aussie police officer at a conference in Mobile a few years ago. He was very forthright about the issue; he very clearly stated that the gun laws in Oz seemed to merely empower the criminals and violent crime rose.