And yet they still have extreme gun violence as has been pointed out. Banning guns doesn't end gun violence. It just ends the ability of law abiding citizens to defend themselves and allows would be mass murderers to gun down more people before they get gunned down.

Also not that I said "more civilized" with the quotes which means I was being a bit sarcastic.

Your sarcasm was misplaced. The Brevik shooting was a very unusual incident, whereas shootings are commonplace in the USA. You people really are fucking idiots.

I'm leaving this discussion. You go wank over your gun collection, you fuckjob.

Personally, I don't own a single firearm of any sort. Haven't touched one since my Marine days. But I support the rights of others to carry one if they so feel it necessary.

"I'm referring to anyone who does a home invasion. Criminal element does not refer to organized crime exclusively. Anyone with a record of B&E is part of the criminal element of society. Anyone with a record of car jacking or of gangbanging or of bank robbery or of... You get the idea."

You ridiculed my comment: "Besides, "the criminal element" aren't the only ones murdering people, legal guns are used in murders too." So are previously law abiding school shooters etc. part of that criminal element or not?

No, they would be the mentally unstable element.

What does Obama have to say about gun control:

http://www.policymic.com/articles/90921/obama-just-said-what-we-were-all-thinking-about-mass-shootings?utm_source=policymicFB&utm_medium=main&utm_campaign=social

http://boingboing.net/2014/06/11/tom-the-dancing-bug-how-to-te.html

How to tell the difference between an open-carry patriot and a deranged killer, read this, it could save your life

Open Carry is what White Privilege looks like.

Careful there, maple...

You're coming dangerously close to making a fair point wittily and in a way that might force me to agree with you for once...

And I don't think either of us are ready for that in this relationship.

That could be my 1st +1 for Obi .... he so funny !!

When did Obama become the Messiah?

When we all finally got sick and tired of waiting for the Hippie Jew to get up off his ass and return to save the human race already...again.

Yeesh, some people just have NO ability to commit to a project!

It always makes me chuckle listening to fellow Brits in these arguments. Americans could be forgiven for imagining we were a gun free country. The reality is I live within a 10 minute walk of around 30 privately owned guns that I know of, and that doesn't include the local gun shop.

Still, the American situation is very different. Whilst I would never own a gun myself I can see a lot of valid reasons for doing so. European style gun laws would eventually decrease gun crime in the US, and vastly reduce accidental shooting, but the short term period in which the bad guys are armed and the good guys largely not would likely be rather painful.

I just wonder why a Canadian and a few Brits care so much about what Americans do or don't do with regards to firearms. Y'all don't have a dog in this fight, but yet you guys seem to be obsessed with the issue.

More people are killed by honey bees in the US than by the highly sensationalized shootings. I agree that they are tragic, and I feel for the people whose lives are touched by them. However, as I have said over and over, the issue (at least for me) is about self-defense. Anti-gun folks want guns banned to "protect people" -- a sentiment that I actually respect. What I don't respect, however, is the notion that one innocent life is more valuable than another. Meaning, it's ok in the mind of an anti-gun person that and innocent is killed because their right of self-defense was taken away legislatively, but wholly unacceptable that another innocent is killed in a shooting. Why is one more acceptable than the other? How do you tell someone that they're not allowed to defend their family, that it sucks, but they just have to be a victim because their life and the life of their children are as important as those that MIGHT be hurt by a firearm. Such an attitude is completely incongruous, IMO.

*aren't as important*

If only the manufacture and distribution of arms and weapons only led to the death of American citizens I don't think there would be the interest from overseas, but the nature of world trade nowadays means that the arms business has an massive effect the world over.
The US are not the only villain, just the biggest so an easy target.
Also any social philosophy that includes citizens that need/like/want to arm themselves when popping out for some groceries seems totally anathema to a Western Civilized 1st World Democracy ..... I see that a lot of people over the pond think it is a great freedom to carry a loaded gun in public, but if you are half-normal is it ?? Too may mindless idiots, the education system failed them.
2nd Amendment blah blah blah blah ...... grow up !!

Just be clear -- and before MapleLeaf jumps all over me calling me names -- I am NOT a gun nut. I have a very healthy respect for the dangers of guns. Further, I understand the anti-gun position intellectually, but I disagree with it politically. As I said above, the issue to me is the right of self-defense.

" but the short term period in which the bad guys are armed and the good guys largely not would likely be rather painful."

Try *extremely* painful. I don't own a gun, but until we can get guns out of criminal hands at a much higher level, I believe every law abiding, mentally sane citizen fo legal age should have the privilege to own one if they choose. I don't believe in forcing them upon people but I also don't believe in stripping them away completely. There is a middle ground and many on both sides refuse to see this.

First, toughen up the criminal violations. Criminal caught with an illegal weapon? Life without parole. Use a gun in the commission of a crime where no one gets killed? Live without parole. Someone gets killed? Death penalty. Make it so the penalty is so extreme that no semi sane criminal will *want* to use a gun or get caught illegally owning a gun.

Second, toughen up the difficulty for getting a gun. Require training courses for any gun classification (classification being revolver, semi-auto handgun, semi-auto rifle, bolt-action rifle like a hunting or sniper-style rifle, shotgun). Doesn't matter if they are conceal carrying or not. The would be buyer must take a course in firearms safety and prove proficiency in a gun classification. You can't drive a semi, bus, limo, or motorcycle without just a plain ol' driver's license. You need an endorsement, so let's make that happen with gun licenses. Background checks should be more inclusive. Currently a number of states don't send their mental history records to the federal database. Fine the states millions per day until they start. They'll quickly get off their asses and start sending the info when they not only loose federal funds, but start getting find for violating federal law.

Finally, start recording all *ammo* purchases. They can only be to people who hold valid gun licenses for that type of ammo. Yes, I know some munitions cross over, but not much does. And where it does, they still have to have the valid endorsement for one of the classification of firearms that uses that ammo. And make the license and endorsement have to be renewed with a refresher course periodically. It won't force them to return the guns they own, but it will force them to renew to get ammunition for the weapon.

Lastly, and it can be done with the previous put in place, limit the amount of ammunition purchased in a given time frame. We do it with drugs that contain pseudoephedrine - we can do it with munitions *if* we have the licensing I laid out above in place.

"If only the manufacture and distribution of arms and weapons only led to the death of American citizens I don't think there would be the interest from overseas"

Um, Spain, Italy, the UK, Germany, France, Russia and the former Soviet states... All of these countries have *multiple* manufacturers of firearms. Dude, don't lay the manufacture of weapons all on the US. We are but one country known for making guns.

http://www.waoline.com/detente/sport/hunt-/ArcheryLinks/ArmsLinks.htm

A list of gun manufacturers by country of origin. Italy has at least a dozen and I saw 6 in the UK in a pretty quick scan down the list.

@Nigee,

Again, I am going to try to focus my argument on self-defense. I take the attitude that it is better to have it and not need it, than need it and NOT HAVE IT. There are a myriad of precautions that we take in life that are to protect us from those highly unlikely catastrophic events, to me a gun is no different. We put lightening rods up, we have insurance, we wear seat belts and helmets, we have generators, all of which we don't want to need, but are unwilling to go without just in case. I just don't understand how one places a different value on protection from harm. Saying, "guns harm people therefore they should be banned..." completely ignores all the lives that are SAVED in self-defense situations by guns. Now, anti-gun folks like to talk about how unlikely those things are, and come up with all kinds of scenarios and probabilities in an effort make strengthen their position. They'll tell use that "no burglar wants to murder you..." and the like. "Oh don't worry, that storm is miles off...you're not going to get hit by lightening, we can play the last few holes...don't worry."

"2nd Amendment blah blah blah blah ...... grow up !! "

@Nigee - You actually started off pretty good (except for trying to lay nearly all the gun manufacturing in the world on the US) but then you went down your usual road of insulting an entire nation's founding documents. You Brits with your "we don't need to write our constitution down" mentality will never get our "the Constitution *is* the guidelines for our government and having it keeps the government in check" view. We are just to different in that regards. We used to be under your system and got tired of a king (your king at the time) who would change the law on a whim fucking us over from overseas.

Draugnar you are spot on with your suggested answers regarding guns but the reason why it is not happening is because caring intelligent sane individuals are not in control of this process, rich greedy capitalists are and there are enough thick as shit morons wandering around thinking that there civil liberties have been eroded if they cannot carry a loaded weapon. Rich powerful people run this world and that is why the will of the masses is secondary to the wishes of the financial elite.
One day when both parties stand on the gun control ticket you could have a sensible debate and you may end up with sensible legislation but before that can happen you have to take the bribery and corruption out of politics.

@Nigee,

Grow up? Do you have a family? Do you feel responsible for their protection from harm? If so, how would you protect them in the event of a violent (or potentially violent) situation? How do you reconcile the fact that your nation has told you that no matter what the circumstances, you DO NOT have the right to defend yourself nor your family with lethal force even if such force is TOTALLY justified legally?

MM - education is a beautiful thing, did educators teach you that carrying a gun was a good thing, did academics tell you it was a good thing, did scientists suggest it was a great idea. Think of the people that support more arms, are they your people .... are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

The 2nd Amendment isn't the direct source of the gun problem in America, it's the NRA. The NRA uses the 2nd Amendment as a way to mask their primary goal of selling as many guns as possible and making as much money as possible, and somehow convinces people they're just protecting people's right to own a gun and are the brave patriots protecting our freedoms from a tyrannical government. If the NRA really was just about protecting our right to bear arms, they would be working with the government on creating better gun laws, rather than blindly fighting any and all measures that put any restrictions on who can buy a gun and what kind of gun they can buy. I guarantee you that when the top NRA dudes get together each time to discuss the latest mass shooting, their sole focus is to work on spinning the situation to keep their sales up. They're just as bad as the bankers and investors that generated the housing bubble. More money right now is all that matters.

Educators? You mean the Libtards in universityies that tech people like Putin that Communism and Socialism are these great bastions of humanity and Capitalism and dependence on self are bad? No thanks, I'm a firm believer in capitalism and making my *own* way in life. I don't want the government taking over all my decisions and making them for me and then giving me what I "need" according to them. If that means I have to deal with some other issues, they are minor compared to what the socialist and communist issues are (no motivation because, be honest, people are motivated by *profit* being just one of the bigger ones that drive the smaller ones because without motivation for profit, you have economies that are seriously repressed).

Nigee,

I'll answer your questions, but please also answer those that I asked of you.

You don't have to tell me about the power of marketing and the corporatocracy that we live in -- I am well aware of their influence.

No, I never had an (formal) educators nor academics teach me that carrying a gun is a good thing. However, one's "education" isn't all formal, i.e., in classrooms. A great deal of who I am as a man has developed from my personal study of great minds from around the world and through out time. Personally, I feel that my personal ethos (without being an isolationist/martyr) does not fall into the "slave to corporate marketing" category -- or at least far less than many of my fellow Americans.

Further Nigee,

As I have grown older (I'll be 41 next week) and become a father, my opinions have really sways toward self-reliance. IMO, there is far too much governmental control of the people, and too many people expect the gov't to "protect them." I can tell you for certain that the US Courts have repeatedly held that the police ARE NOT THERE TO PROTECT YOU like many people think they are. They are agents of the state, not of the people. The logical continuation from that court hold is that one is responsible for their OWN protection from harm.