# Child, 2, kills self with gun from mom's purse, police say



## The Inspector (Apr 21, 2016)

Child, 2, kills self with gun from mom's purse, police say

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...s-self-inflicted-gunshot-police-say/83323128/


INDIANAPOLIS — A 2-year-old boy died Wednesday after he shot himself with a gun he found in his mother's purse on Indianapolis' northwest side, police said.
The mother "had momentarily stepped away," police said, when her toddler climbed to a kitchen counter, removed a pistol from his mother's purse and shot himself about 9 p.m.
Officers arrived and found the boy with a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the shoulder. The child was taken to Riley Hospital for Children at IU Health in critical condition, where he later died.

I am sure she felt a little safer having that gun in her purse


----------



## Jackie22 (Apr 21, 2016)

Sadly, this is a daily occurrence in this country.


----------



## BlunderWoman (Apr 21, 2016)

Very tragic. I'm glad someone has invented the biometric trigger guard. I wish they would make it mandatory for gun owners soon. 

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...rt-guns-dont-solve-what-were-trying-to-solve/


----------



## BobF (Apr 21, 2016)

The Inspector said:


> Child, 2, kills self with gun from mom's purse, police say
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...s-self-inflicted-gunshot-police-say/83323128/
> 
> ...



It has become a real darn shame that so many locations in the US have become unsafe for normal families to live without some sort of protection.   It would be nice for folks to once again feel safe without needing some sort of defensive methods at  hand.


----------



## Butterfly (Apr 21, 2016)

BobF said:


> It has become a real darn shame that so many locations in the US have become unsafe for normal families to live without some sort of protection.   It would be nice for folks to once again feel safe without needing some sort of defensive methods at  hand.



Ain't that the truth!!


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 21, 2016)

BlunderWoman said:


> Very tragic. I'm glad someone has invented the biometric trigger guard. I wish they would make it mandatory for gun owners soon.
> 
> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...rt-guns-dont-solve-what-were-trying-to-solve/



BW, this is what many of us from outside the US cannot understand. We are not against guns per se. They are a tool with a purpose but most tools have inbuilt safety mechanisms designed to minimise accidents. There are also regulations about proper storage and licenses required to operate dangerous machinery.

However, whenever even the mildest suggestions are put forward to make guns safer or to make sure that they are not in the hands of irresponsible people, there is such an outcry that you would think that the very fabric of US society was about to be torn apart. We look on in amazement and shake our heads because we just don't get it.


----------



## BobF (Apr 22, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> BW, this is what many of us from outside the US cannot understand. We are not against guns per se. They are a tool with a purpose but most tools have inbuilt safety mechanisms designed to minimise accidents. There are also regulations about proper storage and licenses required to operate dangerous machinery.
> 
> However, whenever even the mildest suggestions are put forward to make guns safer or to make sure that they are not in the hands of irresponsible people, there is such an outcry that you would think that the very fabric of US society was about to be torn apart. We look on in amazement and shake our heads because we just don't get it.



The *first* right to have weapons legally at home is in our Constitution. 

The honest folks do follow the law but the criminal ones don't seem to care they are breaking the laws.   Those folks are why some folks do get permission to carry weapons outside of the home.   A *second* right to carry a weapon.

The criminal folks don't care about those granted efforts so the threats to our lives just gets worse every day.   Deaths by the criminals is not abating at all.   Some areas are so bad that even the police don't like going into those areas at all.

Some day the US will have to change and make it unbearable for the criminal mind sets to exist.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 22, 2016)

The child in the OP wasn't killed by the gun of a criminal.
Does it hurt less if your child is killed by a criminal or by your own gun?


----------



## BobF (Apr 22, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> The child in the OP wasn't killed by the gun of a criminal.
> Does it hurt less if your child is killed by a criminal or by your own gun?



Just more of your twisted logic.   It was not the gun that killed that child.   It was the unfortunate person that left the weapon within the victims reach.   Guns are inanimate and do not kill without some outside effort.   That is a fact.

Until the US does change the Constitution and the laws, guns are legal and allowed.   Till the criminals are punished for using guns illegally there will be a high order of deaths by guns.


----------



## Debby (Apr 22, 2016)

BobF said:


> Just more of your twisted logic.   It was not the gun that killed that child.   It was the unfortunate person that left the weapon within the victims reach.   Guns are inanimate and do not kill without some outside effort.   That is a fact.
> 
> Until the US does change the Constitution and the laws, guns are legal and allowed.   Till the criminals are punished for using guns illegally there will be a high order of deaths by guns.




And we'll continue to have opportunities to talk about idiots that leave their guns where kids can get them.


----------



## BobF (Apr 22, 2016)

Debby said:


> And we'll continue to have opportunities to talk about idiots that leave their guns where kids can get them.



Your comments about the person that you called an idiot is definitely wrong.   She was able to get to purchase the gun.   She also was able to get a 'carry permit'.   So she is not some idiot at all.   She definitely put the purse on the counter and walked from the room.   It is definitely an oversight as the child somehow climbed up and opened her purse.   Was he going for the gun?   Or just being a nosy kid and being busy while left alone?   We don't know.

Now you out of town folks think you are so cute but your countries also have problems that many folks in the US think are stupid.    In UK there is the case of some one that used a weapon to defend his property.   The intruder died and this person has been charged with murder.   I think this was posted on this forum.    In the US that would be considered ridiculous.   But not a point we should challenge as that apparently is the law over there.   Just as having a gun in the US is legal and should be allowed without nasty comments.   Don't like the US then it is easy to just look to other places or ideas.   Don't ever come here to visit if we are so terrible.   I consider this anti guns stuff by out of country folks to be nothing but unnecessary trash talk.


----------



## Jackie22 (Apr 22, 2016)

....I hang my head in shame...no words.


----------



## Debby (Apr 22, 2016)

BobF said:


> Your comments about the person that you called an idiot is definitely wrong.   She was able to get to purchase the gun.   She also was able to get a 'carry permit'.   So she is not some idiot at all.   She definitely put the purse on the counter and walked from the room.   It is definitely an oversight as the child somehow climbed up and opened her purse.   Was he going for the gun?   Or just being a nosy kid and being busy while left alone?   We don't know.
> 
> Now you out of town folks think you are so cute but your countries also have problems that many folks in the US think are stupid.    In UK there is the case of some one that used a weapon to defend his property.   The intruder died and this person has been charged with murder.   I think this was posted on this forum.    In the US that would be considered ridiculous.   But not a point we should challenge as that apparently is the law over there.   Just as having a gun in the US is legal and should be allowed without nasty comments.   Don't like the US then it is easy to just look to other places or ideas.   Don't ever come here to visit if we are so terrible.   I consider this anti guns stuff by out of country folks to be nothing but unnecessary trash talk.




Sorry if I've offended you Bob but seriously?  Leaving a gun where it is in the reach of children?  That is what should offend you.  I never said anything about gun laws, or rules or beefing up the regulations or changing your Constitution.  And the fact that she can fill in all the questionnaires and didn't have a felony conviction or whatever it takes to preclude her getting a gun doesn't change the fact that she left a gun where a little child could get it and now that child is dead.  In my books, that counts as an idiot.

And you're right, every country has their own particular problems, but this is about a woman who was negligent enough that her baby is dead.  If she had left that kid in a hot car, you'd be all wound up that she was stupid and irresponsible for leaving the kid in the car to die and yet because 'your' precious gun rights are involved, I become the bad guy because I simply stated the obvious.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 22, 2016)

BobF said:


> Just more of your twisted logic.   It was not the gun that killed that child.   It was the unfortunate person that left the weapon within the victims reach.   Guns are inanimate and do not kill without some outside effort.   That is a fact.
> 
> Until the US does change the Constitution and the laws, guns are legal and allowed.   Till the criminals are punished for using guns illegally there will be a high order of deaths by guns.



Bobf, I don't know how many times I have to say this. I am not arguing for the banning of all guns. I am arguing for better gun safety of legal guns. I repeat my earlier post with further comments in blue



> BW, this is what many of us from outside the US cannot understand. We are not against guns per se. They are a tool with a purpose but most tools have inbuilt safety mechanisms designed to minimise accidents. There are also regulations about proper storage and licenses required to operate dangerous machinery.
> 
> How is it that an infant can access and fire a gun? In the 21st century can't something be done to make failsafe mechanisms to prevent that. My car screams at me if I forget to remove the ignition key or turn off the headlights. Hubby's car automatically turns off the headlights when he leaves the car. Surely hand guns could be modified to provide safety catches that are always on unless the owner deliberately disables them.
> 
> ...


----------



## Debby (Apr 22, 2016)

I think the idea of better safety mechanisms would be excellent too Warrigal if for no reason other than to protect children from themselves and each other (and the whims of adults?).  Hey here's another safety thing that works in our cars and thats the bell that rings incessantly if you don't put your seat belt on.  That must work when there's weight in the seat and the belt isn't clicked in, so surely they can figure out something that stops a gun from firing if it's held certain way (not level perhaps) or the hand holding it isn't large enough to touch several key spots on it?


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 22, 2016)

Now you are thinking, Debby. My car does that. It even goes off if I place heavy groceries on the front passenger seat. It assumes that someone is sitting there without wearing a seat belt. It has caused me to modify my behaviour and I now make sure I put them in the boot or on the back seat.


----------



## BobF (Apr 22, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> Bobf, I don't know how many times I have to say this. I am not arguing for the banning of all guns. I am arguing for better gun safety of legal guns. I repeat my earlier post with further comments in blue



Live by the laws of your land and let the US live by the laws of our land.   Should the US masses choose to change our laws we will do so.   Your posting is just not taking into account that the US does have ways for making and changing the rules and laws and all this out of country complaining and griping is doing nothing to make us copy your countries ways.

Take care of Australia's problems and let the US take care of problems as we see them.   This is sort of like the US President in UK telling them how to act and then the UK press telling how they feel about the US President.    You are just as out of order as our President is and was in the UK visit.

This also fits for any out of country folks whining about our ways.   Develop that special safety way and sell it to the gun manufacturers around the world.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 22, 2016)

> let the US take care of problems as we see them



Apparently there is no problem so no need to look for any solutions.


----------



## Debby (Apr 23, 2016)

BobF said:


> Live by the laws of your land and let the US live by the laws of our land.   Should the US masses choose to change our laws we will do so.   Your posting is just not taking into account that the US does have ways for making and changing the rules and laws and all this out of country complaining and griping is doing nothing to make us copy your countries ways.
> 
> Take care of Australia's problems and let the US take care of problems as we see them.   This is sort of like the US President in UK telling them how to act and then the UK press telling how they feel about the US President.    You are just as out of order as our President is and was in the UK visit.
> 
> This also fits for any out of country folks whining about our ways.   Develop that special safety way and sell it to the gun manufacturers around the world.




Calm down Bob.  You're going to give yourself a heart attack.  Good grief, we're talking and if you want to discuss Australian ways or Canadian ways of doing things, I'm pretty sure Warrigal will be more than willing to discuss it as will I.  Neither of us mentioned changing your laws or anything like that, we're talking about the stupidity of A single mom who left her loaded gun on the counter when there is a two year old in the house!  How many mothers go nuts trying to baby proof their homes when they have toddlers and this one leaves lethal weapons lying around!  And we're talking about a gun industry that doesn't appear to have the will or common sense to figure out how to prevent these sorts of tragedies seeing as how some people are too ?????? to figure it out for themselves.

And I'm betting that mother is sitting there at her kitchen table this morning (or whenever this happened), planning a funeral for her baby, drenched in a flood of tears and personal recriminations and asking herself also how she could be so stupid. I know I'd certainly be wracked with guilt for the rest of my life if I was in her place and the stupid gun would be gone.  Heck, when my youngest had her first job and rushed out the door late at night to go to it, she fell over the little knee high fence I'd temporarily put up to keep my dogs from running out to the street and I still flinch every time I remember it and mentally apologize for not having told her it was there!  This situation, I'd never get over it.  In fact I'd have to move because every time I looked at that counter where I had put my purse with the gun inside it, I'd see my baby and the blood.........yep, the best reason ever to move.


----------



## BobF (Apr 23, 2016)

Debby, I have known Warrigal for years now and for years she was well above putting down others.   Especially the US as there are so many other countries that are much worse than the US in many ways.   What has happened to make Warrigal decide to choose the US as her favorite target I will never know.   All this name calling and finger pointing is doing no good at all.   It just puts you in to the same place of revile as our President got himself into in the UK yesterday.

Now for the two of you, there are plenty of things in your own countries that need fixed for the good of your country.   Certainly more important for you than this inability of the US to change our ways as our Constitution must be changed first in order to allow the US to just change because some out of country folks think we should.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 23, 2016)

Bob, it is true that we have conversed for years now and you know my passions pretty well. I staunchly defend Australia's quarantine laws for the very good reason that our native environment is unique and has suffered too many incursions by animals and plants brought here by well meaning settlers. Because Australia is the driest continent  if you exclude Antarctica, I oppose any development that puts our underground water systems at risk. I recall that you did not understand why Di and I, political opposites, were so united in our opposition to coal seam gas extraction. You probably have to be a native born Aussie to understand why we are passionate about some issues. 

When it comes to the subject of gun deaths in America, there is very little point raising the subject with people other than Americans. I am not a native born American and I am trying to understand the mindset of a people who hold an 18th century law above the lives of so many children. I just don't get it although I do now realise that talking about laws is fruitless. That is why I have begun conversations about gun safety. If gun ownership is sacrosanct, then surely it is reasonable to explore ways that it might be made safer?

How is this putting people down? A difference of opinion does not necessarily mean hostility or contempt. I have long admired the spirit of the American people but I sometimes find it very puzzling. I honestly don't get some things - one of these is the common US belief that guns make them safer. I'm not alone here.


----------



## BobF (Apr 23, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> How is this putting people down? A difference of opinion does not necessarily mean hostility or contempt. I have long admired the spirit of the American people but I sometimes find it very puzzling. I honestly don't get some things - one of these is the common US belief that guns make them safer. I'm not alone here.



You may not be alone with that idea but you certainly are of the minority.

The guns are of the majority of the peoples wants and wishes.   The anti gun folks are a minority at best.    Politically the gun lovers are of both major political parties so it is not just a political thing at all.   Some day it may all be changed.   But someday means that I probably won't be around to see our Constitution trashed and the US turned into some political managed country with darn little voice from the population leading the way.   

Since the early 1900's that has been the way this country has been driven by our politicians.   They want to change it into something different where the President operates as if a King.   Our current President has operated this way since first elected.   For his efforts we are now $19+ trillion in debt and rising every day, driven up from the $7.5 trillion debt of Clinton and Bush years.

We are a gathering of states that decided to have a federal government to help all oversee our needs for defenses and guidance for our laws.   So our Constitution was created and it has proven to be quite strong and capable.   We our still in our original creation and many countries are well into their second, third, or more descriptions and controls.   I see no reason for the US to fall away into such marginal federal leaderships and we should not have to as long as we keep our states strong and the federal control of all things diminished as it should be.


----------



## Debby (Apr 24, 2016)

BobF said:


> Debby, I have known Warrigal for years now and for years she was well above putting down others.   Especially the US as there are so many other countries that are much worse than the US in many ways.   What has happened to make Warrigal decide to choose the US as her favorite target I will never know.   All this name calling and finger pointing is doing no good at all.   It just puts you in to the same place of revile as our President got himself into in the UK yesterday.
> 
> Now for the two of you, there are plenty of things in your own countries that need fixed for the good of your country.   Certainly more important for you than this inability of the US to change our ways as our Constitution must be changed first in order to allow the US to just change because some out of country folks think we should.




I think what you are seeing Bob is that more and more people are not relying on Fox or CNN or CBC or CTV or any of the mainstream media as their sole source of news.  There are innumerable news sites out there that aren't beholden to the small group of ultra rich who now control (by ownership) what the people hear, and because they aren't beholden, they are speaking out and digging and doing research that 'journalists' have quit doing.  Here in Canada especially, if you listen to our MSM, you can immediately tell that the different stations are all reading off the same Reuters news feeds instead of digging for the truth like they used to.  Journalism in mainstream media (MSM) is kind of dead in my opinion.

As a result of being able to access more real facts (with documentation/photos/videos) we're hearing the why's and wherefores and hearing the 'other guys' side like never before instead of being limited to what the governments put out there to further their agenda's.

And you're right, there are lots of things in each country that need to be fixed, no argument there.  I can't speak for Warrigal, but I firmly believe that sometimes outsiders have a much clearer view of things because we don't have an inherent bias clouding our vision.  America wants to continually pat itself on the back with exclamations of being 'exceptional' (remember Obama's speech?), but your CIA has a history of being the catalyst in humanitarian tragedies around the globe, your government puts out information that is either incomplete or even untrue.......you've made yourself the target for scepticism and criticism.  

And while you think that your problems are only yours to deal with, I would say that you are very wrong on that.  When America catches a cold, the rest of us start sneezing too.  You are one of the largest economies in the world, your dollar and your corporations (remember Wall Streets role in the 2008 economic melt down that had the globe teetering on the edge of a financial abyss?)  affect our economies, your government puts sanctions on other countries to ruin them, your choice of 'friends' causes pain and suffering for others (Israel/Palestine, Saudi Arabia/Yemen, terrorists/Syria....) need I say more on why the world is both interested and concerned.  The list of ways that America affects the world is long and troublesome, as well as good.


----------



## Debby (Apr 24, 2016)

I went to an RCMP site and this is what our police have to say about 'your' guns Bob.  '

The United States is the primary source for smuggled firearms or firearms parts entering Canada, due in part to its close proximity, differences in gun control legislation, and a large firearms manufacturing base.....There continues to be significant cross-border firearms movement, particularly in British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, and the Atlantic region, where many of the seizures are concentrated.
In British Columbia, a large number of firearms originate in the United States, with a high proportion coming from Washington State.
In Alberta, most of these firearms come from Washington State, Idaho and California.
In Ontario, the I-75 corridor is the main supply vein for illegal firearms from Florida, Georgia, Ohio and Michigan.
In Quebec, the following states are key sources for illegal firearms: Vermont, New Hampshire and Maryland.
There is an increasing number of illegal firearms reported being smuggled across the New Brunswick-Maine border, entering the Atlantic region.
Most firearms smuggled from the United States are high quality, semi-automatic handguns.'
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/ci-rc/reports-rapports/traf/index-eng.htm

A further look at a Canadian Justice department website says the following:

Several U.S. studies have documented the relative ease with which criminals, including juvenile offenders, can illegally obtain firearms (Decker _et al._, 1996; Sheley, 1994; 1994a; Sheley and Brewer, 1995; Sheley and Wright, 1993; 1995). Approximately 68 percent of offenders who were interviewed soon after their arrest in a major U.S. city indicated that they could obtain a firearm in less than a month; 21 percent thought they could get one in a day or less. Only seven percent of offenders said they could not get a firearm (Decker _et al.,_ 1996: 38). Offenders who admitting to being involved in dealing drugs or in gangs reported even greater ease of access to firearms (_Ibidem_).....Stolen firearms seem to be plentiful on the black market. In the United States, researchers estimate that approximately half a million firearms are stolen annually (Cook _et al._, 1995). Based on the national survey on private ownership and use of firearms conducted in 1994, Cook and Ludwig estimated that criminals stole one or more firearms from 0.9 percent of all households containing firearms in the United States in that year. They estimated that 593,000 firearms were stolen; 211,000 of which were handguns (Cook and Ludwig, 1997:7).Based on the limited information available in Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom, it would seem that thefts of firearms most often occur in private residences (e.g., Cook and Ludwig, 1997; Corkery, 1994)...... The 1997 Annual Report on Organized Crime by the Criminal Intelligence Service Canada suggests that the United States is the source of most legal and illegal firearms in Canada. According to that report, "it is relatively easy for Canadians to acquire firearms in the United States either through an American accomplice or ‘straw’ purchaser, or directly by themselves.   http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/wd98_4-dt98_4/p9.html

So Bob, while you might like to think that 'your' guns are only your business, apparently our RCMP, our Justice Department and CSIS would strongly disagree.


----------



## BobF (Apr 24, 2016)

One thing you have missed is that in the US those guns that were registered by honest owners of the guns are not used in crimes.   Only about 3%, or up to 10%, are taken and used in crimes.   The rest are safely in the hands of the registrants.

Additionally there are somehow thousands of unregistered guns available for use by those wanting to do criminal things.   

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html

So there is no real reason to not allow the honest folks from have access to guns at all.  They are not the problem if over 90% to 97% of their purchases are kept in safe and legal means.   Higher levels of registered and kept secure would be desired but thefts can and do happen.

If Canada does know of all these illegal locations for transactions I hope they do tell the US criminal catching folks exactly who and how it happens so things can be corrected.

Here is how some buying guns could try to identify status of guns existence.   If stolen, don't buy it.

http://www.hotgunz.com/


----------



## Debby (Apr 24, 2016)

One thing you are ignoring Bob, is that if there weren't guns in so many homes, when those homes are burglarized, there wouldn't be so many guns stolen and thus getting onto the street to be smuggled into Canada.  You're also ignoring the fact that our Justice system has referenced American studies that attest to the relative simplicity for American crooks and criminals (including juveniles who haven't learned to control their violent impulses) getting their hands on guns.  

And while we've gotten away from the original post subject here a little, my point is and always will be that whatever 'you' do or don't do affects us (and many countries of the world) which in my books, gives us a bit of right to be concerned AND to express an opinion which you seem to either not realize or to ignore which seems to be (to me anyway), a rather arrogant attitude. 

Because you mentioned a number (3%/10%) of guns being stolen and used in criminal acts, I went on a search for the number of guns in America, and according to this article http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...e-in-america-state-secrecy-means-no-one-knows   no one really knows how many guns there are.  It goes on to identify states where the levels of secrecy are such that even if research into gun statistics and outcomes were wanted and funded by some agency, it's legally impossible to access that information.  Some transparency there!  It also talks about the requirements to NOT hold onto the outcomes of back ground checks, three states having no permitting requirements, and one state having no requirement to even hold onto sales records which means if he chooses not to record it, there is no way to follow up to see if that dealers background checks are even done or who he's selling guns to.  

One private survey done by a university in Chicago estimates that there are 79 million guns in the US while other estimates suggest upwards of 270 to 310 million guns which means even going with your lower number, that means 2,370,000 to 9,300,000 stolen guns may be floating around and some of which are crossing our border.  It is not insignificant.  

I have never said that America needs to ban guns.  I admit to having mixed feelings on this issue and can see both sides (at least inasmuch as perhaps citizens need to have recourse if a government runs amok).  But when I read articles like that last one that basically blasts 'your' record keeping efforts, the agenda of secrecy and in some cases the outright obfuscation of any effort to even make your own people safe through national rules and regulations, I am concerned.  You want to bury your head in the sand on this, fine, but the criticisms and the concern will continue to come America's way on this issue.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 24, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> The child in the OP wasn't killed by the gun of a criminal.
> Does it hurt less if your child is killed by a criminal or by your own gun?



The mother in this case was foolish and careless.  How do all the careless mothers or fathers feel after they kill their babies by leaving them in a hot car to cook to death, in a bathtub to drown while they chat on the phone, to play near an open window in a 5 story apartment building, and the list goes on and on?

  It just doesn't excite people and linger in the headlines like when there's a firearm involved, then it's exaggerated to the max and used as a fear tactic to promote the agendas driven by the anti-gun public and politicians.....shameful!  These poor babies are dead for no good reason, regardless of cause.


----------



## BobF (Apr 24, 2016)

Debby said:


> One thing you are ignoring Bob, is that if there weren't guns in so many homes, when those homes are burglarized, there wouldn't be so many guns stolen and thus getting onto the street to be smuggled into Canada.  You're also ignoring the fact that our Justice system has referenced American studies that attest to the relative simplicity for American crooks and criminals (including juveniles who haven't learned to control their violent impulses) getting their hands on guns.
> 
> And while we've gotten away from the original post subject here a little, my point is and always will be that whatever 'you' do or don't do affects us (and many countries of the world) which in my books, gives us a bit of right to be concerned AND to express an opinion which you seem to either not realize or to ignore which seems to be (to me anyway), a rather arrogant attitude.



It is possible to have guns in Canada.   Even I could have a gun in Canada.   Once was offered a job in Canada and part of my equipment was a rifle.   A rifle for survival from natural wild animal problems and for getting food if alone in the north wilds.   This was part of the job.

There are also guns in Australia, and Mexico, and plenty in Europe, even in England, and the Arab countries have plenty.   You speak as if not one in the world has weapons available to the people legally or with the bad folks having them no matter what.

With good folks having registered their guns you consider that a bad thing.   Really a stretch to say the least.   When we have areas of our larger cities being so dangerous that people are told to stay away for their safety.   The ability to own a weapon is really important for neighbors to have.   I have been in some of those areas and was advised to not stop for any reason.   Was told to keep a large enough area between me and other cars to be able to maneuver and run if approached by not good looking folks at a stop light.   Those kinds of things can and do happen even in Canadian cities.   

I am not ignoring anything.   And you are exaggerating everything. Keep assuming that Canada has no problems among your own people about the guns and where they came from.   I believe that one of the folks caught coming from Canada had the idea of blowing up something.   He likely had weapons as well as bombs.

Problem with the US records keeping and sharing?    Just part of the US ways of having but not openly sharing personal information.   We are much looser now that in past years.   I think this all goes back to the earlier years where the persons information was considered to be quite private and not be shared, but between authorities with responsibility.   Nosy neighbors really don't count.   But the more the US is steered into the socialist type of government the more privacy we do lose.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 24, 2016)

SeaBreeze said:


> The mother in this case was foolish and careless.  How do all the careless mothers or fathers feel after they kill their babies by leaving them in a hot car to cook to death, in a bathtub to drown while they chat on the phone, to play near an open window in a 5 story apartment building, and the list goes on and on?
> 
> It just doesn't excite people and linger in the headlines like when there's a firearm involved, then it's exaggerated to the max and used as a fear tactic to promote the agendas driven by the anti-gun public and politicians.....shameful!  These poor babies are dead for no good reason, regardless of cause.



SeaBreeze, I can assure you that children and dogs left in locked cars over here make the headlines. There have been deaths and they are being taken very seriously. I can't remember the last time there was a headline about a child shooting anyone with a gun left lying about.


----------



## BobF (Apr 24, 2016)

For those that think their countries are so much better than the US, take a few moments to read this article.     For many, no guns means higher of other crimes against the people.   And for some cultures no guns is not a problem nor is keeping their lands clean as it is just a part of their culture.   To me, the US is becoming more trashy as the years roll on.   I also believe that the murder rate has dropped in recent years.   Look here for crime rates in US.

http://time.com/3577026/crime-rates-drop-1970s/

And here for the comparisons to other countries.

http://www.rebresearch.com/blog/crime-us-vs-uk/


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 24, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> SeaBreeze, I can assure you that children and dogs left in locked cars over here make the headlines. There have been deaths and they are being taken very seriously. I can't remember the last time there was a headline about a child shooting anyone with a gun left lying about.



That's my point, does it matter if there are deaths or doesn't it?  The children are gone no matter how the parents or guardians allowed it to happen.  End result is loss of precious life.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 24, 2016)

Of course it matters. It matters to the parents no matter what the circumstances but it also matters to the general population in so much as measures might be taken to ensure that preventable deaths are actually prevented, by changes to public policies and laws if that is what it takes.

It is for these reasons that we have anti smoking campaigns and laws restricting the sale of tobacco products. It is why we have road and water safety education for kids at school. It is why we have highway patrols and fixed cameras on intersections and outside schools where the speed limit is lowered during certain hours. For this reason we have provisional driving licences for inexperienced drivers which impose zero blood alcohol and lower speed limits. It is all about preventing as many deaths and injuries as is possible.

Some would say we live in a nanny state but these and other measures are not about coddling people nor about restricting freedom. They are about ensuring that the actions of some don't impact catastrophically on others.


----------



## Bonzo (Apr 25, 2016)

I'm sure some of you will tell me 
if I'm wrong I remember reading

that in some parts of America that
the sweet kinder egg is banned
because the toy inside can become
lodged in a child's throat 

yet it seems quite easy to buy 
a gun or get someone of age 
to get one for you America is
so used to having guns we 
have a couple of reality shows
in England from the USA where a 
couple of family run gunsmiths 
make guns for you to order
a man designed a lightweight pistol
to be made for his mum of 90 because
her old gun was to heavy or get the grand child her first gun
it's madness  it will never change over there sadly
there will be more deaths in years to come


----------



## oakapple (Apr 25, 2016)

Not going to get into the whole gun issue here, as deaths caused by inattentive parents can be by anything, a knife on a table, a saucepan of boiling soup, an open window, or the family dog.
BobF, you are certainly right about the President weighing in on the EU issue here being annoying.I think the government here perhaps asked him to do it though, as some of them are getting worried the vote will be for OUT.I will certainly be voting that way.


----------



## Debby (Apr 25, 2016)

SeaBreeze said:


> The mother in this case was foolish and careless.  How do all the careless mothers or fathers feel after they kill their babies by leaving them in a hot car to cook to death, in a bathtub to drown while they chat on the phone, to play near an open window in a 5 story apartment building, and the list goes on and on?
> 
> It just doesn't excite people and linger in the headlines like when there's a firearm involved, then it's exaggerated to the max and used as a fear tactic to promote the agendas driven by the anti-gun public and politicians.....shameful!  These poor babies are dead for no good reason, regardless of cause.




I think people get just as excited when a child is dead by any means Seabreeze.  I've read numerous headlines during the summer about children dying in hot cars, or if one falls out a high window or is abused to death.  I think we naturally expect people and particularly mothers to be doubly alert to the possibility of our/their babies being hurt.


----------



## Debby (Apr 25, 2016)

BobF said:


> For those that think their countries are so much better than the US, take a few moments to read this article.     For many, no guns means higher of other crimes against the people.   And for some cultures no guns is not a problem nor is keeping their lands clean as it is just a part of their culture.   To me, the US is becoming more trashy as the years roll on.   I also believe that the murder rate has dropped in recent years.   Look here for crime rates in US.
> 
> http://time.com/3577026/crime-rates-drop-1970s/
> 
> ...




Bob, has ANYBODY said 'my country is better'?  You keep saying that we're saying that but never once.  And besides, your statement, "the US is becoming more trashy as the years roll on", seems a little weird in the light of the context that you set up in your opening sentence.   Every country has problems that the people are trying to figure out how to deal with, but sticking your head in the sand and pretending it's all good 'ain't gonna fix nothing'.

Did you happen to read any of the links that I provided and if so, what do you have to say about the USA being the primary source of illegal weapons coming into Canada, or how about the American studies mentioned in our Justice Department site, that says that illegal weapons are ridiculously easy for your criminals and juveniles to get hold of?  Those are definitely issues that might get fixed if ALL of your states were required to maintain sales records and maintain ALL records of background checks.  And keep in mind, no one suggested that those records shouldn't be treated in the same way as personal medical records, i.e. PRIVATE.

And how many times have I said specifically that we have issues too and invited anyone here who wants to, to talk to us about them?  Your remark "Keep assuming that Canada has no problems among your own people about the guns and where they came from" is so totally bogus that I'm amazed!  You're letting your emotions get in the way of a sensible discussion.

America keeps records on absolutely everything (want to know where a cow going through a slaughter line was born?  That has to be recorded) except apparently who owns guns. Trying to minimize the failings of your 'gun' record keeping for the sake of your argument only weakens that argument.  Everyone does better when failings are acknowledged and then rectified.  I wasn't the one who wrote the article on how there is a climate of secrecy about gun ownership in the US, that was written by an American who apparently thinks it's ridiculous too.  If I recall, it was pointed out that you can find out who owns a car but you can't find out who owns guns which are designed for one purpose.  

The Dutch study is interesting but I believe that since 1999, those numbers have dropped.  Maybe look for articles that are a little more up to date.

Wikipedia has an interesting page on Canada’s crime rates  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Canada     and it also includes a section at the end of the page that looks at and compares the rates of violent crime, assaults, property crime, etc between the USA and Canada.  You might find that interesting and illuminating.


In the meantime, it is what it is eh Bob.  Have a good day.


----------



## BobF (Apr 25, 2016)

What a twisted and distorted post you just put up.   I have responded to your posts in the past but just not what you wanted to hear so I get chastised again.

You are on your own now in my opinion.   No country in this world needs to have self centered folks attacking them for any reason.   Take on your own country as there is plenty that could be fixed there.

Speaking of emotions, you are a good example of emotions leading your thinking.


----------



## BobF (Apr 25, 2016)

Debby said:


> Bob, has ANYBODY said 'my country is better'?  You keep saying that we're saying that but never once.  And besides, your statement, "the US is becoming more trashy as the years roll on", seems a little weird in the light of the context that you set up in your opening sentence.   Every country has problems that the people are trying to figure out how to deal with, but sticking your head in the sand and pretending it's all good 'ain't gonna fix nothing'.



My comments about more trashy is just that.   We once held on to the idea that trash was supposed to go into the trash containers at home or in the towns.   Now we see more and more of folks buying things to eat and then just tossing the wrappers out on the sidewalks and from cars the entire remainder's of a fast food meal.   They toss out the paper trays, napkins, wrappers, cups, and any contents left over into the streets.   So I say the US is trashier than it once was.

I have not ignored your posts at all.   You just refuse to read what I post and then let it go.   We have our gun system set up in the Constitution, as I keep pointing out, and nothing will happen until the masses agree that the Constitution needs to be changed.  I pointed out that both Democrats and Republicans are not interested in making such a change.   Till then, it is you who is wasting your time trying to get the US to change.   It may never happen.   

In about 7 months we get rid of one of our most dangerous Presidents we have had to live with.   In Obama's term he has added over $8 trillion more debt to our economy.    Little free money remains for spending on the needs of our government after paying back on that debt.   Whomever gets elected will have to do something to make that right or the US will go broke for real.   Obama did take over during a recession but his actions did nothing to completely end the recession at all.   Many folks were never able to regain their previous wage earning levels and many are still unemployed.   Our entire economy needs reworked and so should our tax laws as they allow many folks to hide their incomes in other places where taxes are less.


----------



## Debby (Apr 25, 2016)

BobF said:


> What a twisted and distorted post you just put up.   I have responded to your posts in the past but just not what you wanted to hear so I get chastised again.
> 
> You are on your own now in my opinion.   No country in this world needs to have self centered folks attacking them for any reason.   Take on your own country as there is plenty that could be fixed there.
> 
> Speaking of emotions, you are a good example of emotions leading your thinking.




You respond, yes you respond....but that's not to say that you always address the questions that I have thrown out there for consideration.  Like what do you have to say about the RCMP statement that the majority of illegal guns in Canada come from your side of the border?  What do you have to say about the American study referenced by our Justice Department that says that illegal weapons are simple to get for both criminals and juveniles in the USA? Why do you think it's acceptable that records are kept on everything (source of dead cows, who owns cars, obesity rates, homicide rates, how many acres are planted in soybeans........but not how many guns have been sold in the USA? Waiting, tic toc.......

And here's your opportunity to tell me what you think we should work on in Canada.  I'll listen and I'll respond directly instead of deflecting.  How about that?


----------



## BobF (Apr 25, 2016)

Debby said:


> You respond, yes you respond....but that's not to say that you always address the questions that I have thrown out there for consideration.  Like what do you have to say about the RCMP statement that the majority of illegal guns in Canada come from your side of the border?  What do you have to say about the American study referenced by our Justice Department that says that illegal weapons are simple to get for both criminals and juveniles in the USA?  Waiting, tic toc.......
> 
> And here's your opportunity to tell me what you think we should work on in Canada.  I'll listen and I'll respond directly instead of deflecting.  How about that?



I am not deflecting at all.   I am ignoring some rather dumb comments.   If Canada knows how all these guns come from and get to you then they should be directly telling the US so they can try to stop that.   Illegal guns are the ones not registered and that could be many thousands more than any one knows of.   They have never been registered or once were and have been stolen, lost, misplaced, and likely reported as such to the police.   That does not mean anyone in the US knows how they got to where they are.   How do the Canadian police find such data as what you published?   To me it has been just more of your endless stream of nonsense.   I have posted above that there is no hope for any changes to our Constitution so best find another subject to chase.   Guns are not a major problem for the US as I have also posted the guns mean nothing to the economic mess our current government put us into.


----------



## Debby (Apr 25, 2016)

Bob, Canada knows the guns are coming in and they're doing what they can to catch them and if you think they aren't talking to your border guards and Homeland Security and your Justice Department, etc., then you are naive.  But the point is that those illegal guns are being obtained EASILY by the criminal element in YOUR country (some stolen in B & E's, some purchased by the criminal element from dealers who have limited requirements to adhere to) and then are finding their way across the border.  MAYBE if those criminals couldn't get them so easily, there wouldn't be so many coming in.  Your record keeping and registration requirements apparently stink and that comes from studies done in YOUR country by your agencies.  

'Endless stream of nonsense'?  An RCMP website and our Justice Department website?   Seriously?  At least the sites I'm linking for information are providing more up to date info (as opposed to some vague Dr.'s blog that shows 18 year old stats).

One more time Bob, I NEVER said change your Constitution and ban guns!  NEVER.  So why don't you just stop banging that false 'gong'.  But it's obvious that your registration requirements have huge holes in them according to American studies and articles and you have a moral responsibility as a citizen of the world to take into consideration how YOUR actions affect others.  Just as Canada does because we are all citizens of one very small globe that is getting smaller by the day and more crowded.  


I'm done because there's no point.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 25, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> .
> 
> It is for these reasons that we have anti smoking campaigns and laws restricting the sale of tobacco products. It is why we have road and water safety education for kids at school. It is why we have highway patrols and fixed cameras on intersections and outside schools where the speed limit is lowered during certain hours. For this reason we have provisional driving licences for inexperienced drivers which impose zero blood alcohol and lower speed limits. It is all about preventing as many deaths and injuries as is possible.
> 
> Some would say we live in a nanny state but these and other measures are not about coddling people nor about restricting freedom. They are about ensuring that the actions of some don't impact catastrophically on others.



There are certain laws and restrictions necessary in a society, but excessive and endless regulations regarding every aspect of free choice and daily life is proof of a nanny state.  How about people being responsible for their own actions? 

 If I want to smoke or quit smoking, I decide those personal things on my own, I don't need an anti-smoking campaign to guide me like a mindless fool.  This reminds me of the NY politicians who wanted to make a law against selling soft drinks of a particular size.....ridiculous, IMO.  Agree to disagree here Warri, enough with the ongoing rules and regulations already, at least here in the USA, I really don't care about the lack of freedom that citizens are content with in Australia, that's their business.



oakapple said:


> Not going to get into the whole gun issue here, as deaths caused by inattentive parents can be by anything, a knife on a table, a saucepan of boiling soup, an open window, or the family dog.



Exactly Oakapple!


----------



## Cookie (Apr 25, 2016)

We had an anti-smoking workshop at one place I was working and it was very informative and I think these presentations which are often held in schools should be continue and are usually targeting young people.  IMO most people are in fact very big 'mindless fools' when it comes to what they do and what they buy.  If it is sanctioned by the government/or even not, they will do/buy it. What makes anyone think that the average person has the awareness and consciousness to actually think about what they are doing and what is going on?  Most people are so burned out from work and raising families that at the end of the day all they can do is eat their dinner, drink some beer and lie back and watch TV before passing out for the night.

I think we have to remember that things like cigarettes and big soft drink bottles and all the other things that can harm us (and I'm going to include the gun/weapons industry in this category) are out there because the industry wants them to be and is only interested in making money, not the well-being of the people. So I think its not so much about excessive regulation of the people, but they do have to be educated/informed, but more about stronger regulation of the industries.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 25, 2016)

I remember a program that was run in a girls junior high school some 30 years ago where the school counsellor ran a quit smoking program for the students. It was voluntary and entirely confidential, a bit like AA. The kids had begun to smoke and wanted to stop but needed help and support. This is just one element of a public health approach. Regulation of advertising and restrictions on smoking in public places since then have really made a difference. Smoking rates of young people are at historic lows. None of my six grandchildren has taken up tobacco and I am very grateful for this outcome.


----------



## Cookie (Apr 25, 2016)

So very true Warri, I am so happy that smoking is finally gone from the workplace, restaurants and public places with government regulation finally to the rescue.

Perhaps safety presentations and workshops to new gun owners might be something to think about.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 25, 2016)

Not likely to happen when doctors in some states have been forbidden by law to hand out gun safety literature to parents of newborns.


----------



## BobF (Apr 25, 2016)

Cookie said:


> So very true Warri, I am so happy that smoking is finally gone from the workplace, restaurants and public places with government regulation finally to the rescue.
> 
> Perhaps safety presentations and workshops to new gun owners might be something to think about.



That can and does happen in many towns around the country.   Not sure about the national registration rules as they may require such basic education, but maybe not.

In Colorado my son was told to join a gun safety class when he wanted to buy a gun.   When I was a kid there were not such types of concerns to be worried about.   Guns were way more obvious back then and not many folks was concerned.   

Hunting back then was close to many folks and hunting for food was pretty common.    Pheasants, rabbits, turkeys, ducks, deer, and other table grade items were common.   Not sure if many bother with hunted foods any more.   So much now is available right nearby in the grocery sections of our markets.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 27, 2016)

Another 2 year old shoots his mother in the back from the back seat of a car. It belonged to her boyfriend, a security guard. He left it in the car.
How's that for security, leaving a loaded gun without a safety catch on in a car that his girlfriend, a mother of three, will be driving?
Didn't he pay attention in gun safety classes?
This didn't have to happen.

http://www.morganton.com/news/us/ap...cle_b99db3f5-e4df-5b44-895f-df2e511537d9.html


----------



## BobF (Apr 27, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> Another 2 year old shoots his mother in the back from the back seat of a car. It belonged to her boyfriend, a security guard. He left it in the car.
> How's that for security, leaving a loaded gun without a safety catch on in a car that his girlfriend, a mother of three, will be driving?
> Didn't he pay attention in gun safety classes?
> This didn't have to happen.
> ...



Certainly this did not have to happen.   Neither did the kids walking into traffic have to happen.   Plenty are told at home, in schools, churches, where ever, that being stupid will cause problems.    But it happens anyway.    All this constant complaining will not end the way things are happening.

I have read some articles about the Australian gun taking rules and how many just did not follow the rules and have kept their weapons hidden at home.    What is the Australian government doing to eliminate those obvious criminal types that ignored the government rules?


----------



## Cookie (Apr 27, 2016)

If this was a fire caused by careless smoking or children killed by drunken driving people would be all over it, but because its about the sacred gun laws, defenses are way up. Objective observers just watch and snicker.


----------



## Ruthanne (Apr 27, 2016)

This is so sad.


----------



## Jackie22 (Apr 27, 2016)

Cookie said:


> If this was a fire caused by careless smoking or children killed by drunken driving people would be all over it, but because its about the sacred gun laws, defenses are way up. Objective observers just watch and snicker.



Exactly!


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 27, 2016)

It defies all logic.


----------



## BobF (Apr 27, 2016)

Cookie said:


> If this was a fire caused by careless smoking or children killed by drunken driving people would be all over it, but because its about the sacred gun laws, defenses are way up. Objective observers just watch and snicker.



Objective observers are doing just that.    It is the minority with wild ideas that are causing all this publicity about our Constitutional rights.   You won't find enough Democrats or Republicans willing to start tearing into our Constitution and changing things for personal reasons and no justifications.

The US once tried to fight drunken driving but it ended up in one of our worst times for many.    We now make drinks legal, just as we now have legal guns.   Break the law with guns or with drinking and you will be in court to find your punishment.


----------



## Jackie22 (Apr 27, 2016)

BobF said:


> Objective observers are doing just that.    It is the minority with wild ideas that are causing all this publicity about our Constitutional rights.   You won't find enough Democrats or Republicans willing to start tearing into our Constitution and changing things for personal reasons and no justifications.
> 
> The US once tried to fight drunken driving but it ended up in one of our worst times for many.    We now make drinks legal, just as we now have legal guns.   Break the law with guns or with drinking and you will be in court to find your punishment.



I think if you check a few surveys, you'll find that there is a majority in this country that want more gun control.


----------



## Cookie (Apr 27, 2016)

Some people use the words 'constitutional rights' in the same way some religious zealots quote the Bible to justify all manner of madness.


----------



## BobF (Apr 27, 2016)

Jackie22 said:


> I think if you check a few surveys, you'll find that there is a majority in this country that want more gun control.



No reason for me to check.  I am happy with the way things are these days.   Why don't you post such stats for all of us to see?   If there really are such stats.

There is no big gun elimination drive going that I am aware of.   Some of these recent posts are saying things but no proofs are presented.


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 27, 2016)

In the end, no proofs are enough if a person holds an impermeable opinion.


----------



## Jackie22 (Apr 27, 2016)

BobF said:


> No reason for me to check.  I am happy with the way things are these days.   Why don't you post such stats for all of us to see?   If there really are such stats.
> 
> There is no big gun elimination drive going that I am aware of.   Some of these recent posts are saying things but no proofs are presented.



ttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/roanoke-shooting-gun-poll_55e0ab28e4b0aec9f35329c0


http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...oll-more-americans-crave-stricter-gun-control 


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/03/12/185595/poll-americans-want-background.html#storylink=cpy


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-guns-idUSKCN0UQ2O220160113


----------



## BobF (Apr 27, 2016)

Jackie22 said:


> ttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/roanoke-shooting-gun-poll_55e0ab28e4b0aec9f35329c0
> 
> 
> http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...oll-more-americans-crave-stricter-gun-control
> ...



They are all of earlier years and as was reported in more than one the response for more gun controls was usually only for a short time after the incident and then faded away.

Exactly as should be expected after any well publicized tragedy.    Long term responses are the more true about what folks are really thinking, and that is not about constantly poking into the eyes of gun owners.

I really doubt if the current gun restrictions have been around long enough to have left a real trail of improvement or no improvement.   We do have guns around from many years of no control, about 200+ years, and that will take years of time for the new laws, 10 years or less, to really show good or bad effects.    And if these folks you published think that the majority want changes, I don't agree that to be true.   Any such message has failed to reach the levels of our Congress as they have refused to take further action, and that included the Democrat leader of the Senate, Harry Reid.


----------



## Debby (Apr 27, 2016)

The Reuters article:  January 2016   - 63% want stricter gun control laws

The Hill (Gallup Poll):  October 2015   - 55% in favour of tighter gun control, up 6% since 2014

McClatchy Poll:  March 2013   -  a mixture of questions  with a variety of results and support for gun ownership being strongest in the south, but 55% want assault weapons banned


So there you are, not 'earlier years' as some would have you believe and an amazing assumption being made about how long those opinions lasted ('only a short time after an incident').  Proof of that one is necessary or we can disregard it as fiction because that opinion is most definitely not stated in any of the three articles.  It should also be noted that there is no single set of rules and regulations on gun ownership, gun purchasing, back ground check information being obtained/saved or even sales records for that matter so any reference to 'current gun restrictions being in place long enough to tell if they are working' would have a sensible person asking, "which states rules are being discussed?".  (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...s-no-one-knows)

But as Shalimar once said so wisely, 'In the end, no proofs are enough if a person holds an impermeable opinion.'.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 27, 2016)

Gun massacres and accidental shootings by toddlers are two different things and require different solutions. It is only about a month or so since a similar instance of a toddler in the back seat of a car, no doubt in a mandatory child restraint, shot his mother with her own gun yet it has happened again and this time the mother is dead. How is the constitution relevant here?


----------



## BobF (Apr 27, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> Gun massacres and accidental shootings by toddlers are two different things and require different solutions. It is only about a month or so since a similar instance of a toddler in the back seat of a car, no doubt in a mandatory child restraint, shot his mother with her own gun yet it has happened again and this time the mother is dead. How is the constitution relevant here?



The Constitution is not relevant here.   It is another incident where the gun was mishandled by the registered owner.   Sad situation for sure.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 27, 2016)

I have just have my morning bath and I was thinking about this while relaxing in the hot water. I do some of my best thinking in my bath.

This is what came to me.

We all know how the US was mightily successful with the Apollo missions. It began with a desire to put men on the Moon and bring them back safely. The problem then becomes how do we do this?

I was taught that the successful outcome depended on top down problem solving where you take a big, seemingly impossible problem and break it down into smaller problems that you can solve.

eg How do we escape Earth's gravity? How do we keep the astronauts alive on  the way to the Moon and on its surface? How do we get them onto the Moon's Surface/ How do we get them off again?  and so on.

Each sub-problem needs to be further broken down until every detail is taken care of and the big problem becomes manageable. We all know how this was done by NASA and we know that it wasn't without some teething problems.

Suppose the same problem solving technique was applied to the issue of death by firearms. The objective would be to reduce this very big problem to a number of smaller problems, each of which could be analysed and worked on.

For example the sub problems could be accidental deaths, deliberate homicides, suicides and these could be further divided as follows

Accidental - hunting accidents, access by children, faulty equipment, etc  Deliberate - terrorism, criminal, domestic violence, mental health, massacres etc. Suicides - mental health, rational self euthanasia, murder-suicide, etc.

By following top down problem solving techniques it should be possible to find some measures that would be effective in reducing the death rate without violating the second amendment.

Then, if another problem occurs, such as a surge in deaths by knives, or poisoning or baseball bat, that problem could be addressed using similar analytical tools.

Just a thought. But if the US could put men on the Moon and bring them back alive..... ?


----------



## BobF (Apr 27, 2016)

Debby said:


> The Reuters article:  January 2016   - 63% want stricter gun control laws
> 
> The Hill (Gallup Poll):  October 2015   - 55% in favour of tighter gun control, up 6% since 2014
> 
> ...



Some more or your emotional and twisted postings.   You only read 3 links but 4 links were given.   Now the earlier years were my way of saying not this years ideas.   The items in 2013 were not of 2016.   And your observations of how the guns are registered will also toss many of the anti gun claims to the dogs as well.   No proofs one way means no proofs the other way as well.   

Your attempt at personal attack has failed.   See below and read carefully.   I don't like to tell lies nor do I like to accept them either.

Now for the 4th link, it is this: 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/roanoke-shooting-gun-poll_us_55e0ab28e4b0aec9f35329c0

*Many Americans Want Stricter Gun Laws. Will It Matter?*

*Despite the latest shooting, the political calculus for gun control remains grim.*


    08/28/2015 05:35 pm ET |  *Updated* Aug 28, 2015  


Ariel Edwards-Levy      Staff Reporter and Polling Director, The Huffington Post  

In the aftermath of a high-profile  shooting, three things tend to happen: A crop of newly bereaved  advocates renew the call for gun control legislation; support for such  laws spikes briefly, if at all; and little change is actually effected.


   Days after the fatal shooting of two journalists on live TV near Roanoke, Virginia, that pattern may be repeating.


 “There needs to be some action that  is taken out of an event like this — out of an event like Sandy Hook,  like Charleston, like Aurora, Colorado ... where these things just don’t  occur anymore,” Chris Hurst, the boyfriend of slain reporter Alison  Parker, told CNN on Thursday.Her father, Andy Parker, has vowed  to become an advocate for increased gun control, saying he hopes he can  prevent others from facing the same kind of loss he has.


In a HuffPost/YouGov poll conducted  since the Wednesday morning shooting, 55 percent of Americans say gun  control laws should be made stricter, 27 percent say they should remain  the same and 12 percent say they should be eased. The level of support  for gun control is as high as it’s been in HuffPost/YouGov polls since  the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting — which isn’t surprising, given that  many Americans were taking the survey with the latest tragedy fresh in  their minds, if not actively playing out on their televisions.
But that increase in support after the Newtown, Connecticut, massacre, proceeded to ebb away without bringing substantive changes in policy. Other recent shootings haven’t produced any notable change in opinion at all.








“I hope this time will be different for us,” Virginia Gov. Terry  McAuliffe (D), who’s advocated unsuccessfully for gun control, told The  New York Times. “It’s like the hamster on the hamster wheel — you just  go round and round, something happens, everybody comes out and says, ‘We  need more gun restrictions,’ and then it fades into the background.”


 The latest spike in support for such restrictions might not even be that much of a spike. The Economist/YouGov poll, which  has seen a slight uptick in support all year, found backing for gun  laws just 3 percentage points lower at the beginning of August than the  HuffPost/YouGov poll found it after the shooting. CBS News, which asks a similar question, has found support for stricter gun laws hovering between 47 and 54 percent for the past two years.

 There’s also little change in  responses to another question. In the latest HuffPost/YouGov poll,  Americans said by a margin of 46 percent to 36 percent that shootings  were more likely to be prevented by stricter gun control laws and  enforcement than by more private citizens carrying guns for protection.  Four HuffPost/YouGov surveys going back to 2012, taken both after  high-profile shootings and at other times, found the percentage favoring  stricter gun laws holding steady between 44 and 46 percent.


“The reaction has become sadly standardized,” Don Haider-Merkel, a professor at the University of Kansas, told The Washington Post this week, adding that “proposals to restrict access to firearms tend to fade quickly.”

(And more)

While 43 percent of Americans in the  HuffPost/YouGov survey say stricter gun control laws would reduce the  number of shootings in the U.S., another 47 percent believe they’d have  no effect or would actually make things worse.

(More)


----------



## richal123 (Apr 27, 2016)

Maybe we shall just say RIP...


----------



## Shalimar (Apr 27, 2016)

It is not necessary to turn honest disagreement into negative remarks about a person's character. A difference of opinion is in no way indicative of a personal attack. We should all be able to express ourselves courteously here without fear of recrimination. Pax.


----------



## Cookie (Apr 27, 2016)

Constitutional rights aside, I find it interesting that guns are needed for 'protection'.  Other countries' citizens don't seem to fear each other in this way.  Does this indicate a violent, blood thirsty population that enjoys killing, and is not to be trusted, that the very idea of changing or amending gun laws strikes terror and fury in the hearts of gun toters. Looks to me like hellish way to live.


----------



## Debby (Apr 28, 2016)

BobF said:


> Some more or your emotional and twisted postings.l,
> While 43 percent of Americans in the  HuffPost/YouGov survey say stricter gun control laws would reduce the  number of shootings in the U.S., another 47 percent believe they’d have  no effect or would actually make things worse.
> 
> (More)




You're right Bob, I didn't notice the Huffington Post article link, so apparently it is the general way of American citizens that they get all wound up in the immediate aftermath of a bloody massacre and then lose interest in improving safety.  Isn't that a sad situation?  But I think the other three (recent) links also point to a gradual growing desire of the public to see better registration and background check methods and a complete accounting of where those guns that are sold, are going as well as keeping access to them a little more difficult to prevent at least some criminals and all juveniles from getting hold of them.

I do apologize if I offended you, but seriously, you do seem to have little patience for the idea of making the general public safer (without taking your guns away or opening up your Constitution)


----------



## BobF (Apr 28, 2016)

Cookie said:


> Constitutional rights aside, I find it interesting that guns are needed for 'protection'.  Other countries' citizens don't seem to fear each other in this way.  Does this indicate a violent, blood thirsty population that enjoys killing, and is not to be trusted, that the very idea of changing or amending gun laws strikes terror and fury in the hearts of gun toters. Looks to me like hellish way to live.



Something not at all mentioned here is the criminal element that does not care about or abide by the laws of the US cities or nation.   I have posted such before on this forum but nobody seems to give the criminal element any consideration or the intended victims any reason for defensive ways.   

We have the drug gangs that do bother to have guns, most likely from sources not registered or tracked by the authorities.   But then the innocent one with registered guns, attempting to follow the laws get blamed again for something they did not do and again attacked for things they are not doing.

We have the plain old burglar just out trying to find money or material and using unregistered guns for his operations.   Walking into small stores or gas stations and demanding to have the cash register opened so he can take the money.    And again the innocent are again blamed for something the did not do and again attacked for things they did not do.

Angry persons just raging but with a gun in his hands.   This might be a registered gun to him or not.   If registered, of course the rage will take him to jail.   If not registered his actions will take him to jail.   All this registration does not help put him in jail but does help the courts to place the blame.

Not one bit of all this registration will help shut down the criminal elements that operate so openly in some of our cities.   So openly that I was advised by the police to be careful when driving around to be careful to be planning my escape when stopped by a traffic light or told to stay out of certain areas, or told not to go into certain city parks, all due to the violence being carried out by gangs that may have guns or may not have guns but do want to overcome others in 'their territory' for reasons untold.

Yes there are areas where it is best to stay home and never leave for your own safety.   Some folks also like to go into the wilderness for their free times and camp.   A gun then is considered to be good for protection from the natural enemies of the wild or the possibility of the dangerous individuals happening on to their camp and being a threat.

Late in the day or in the evening or night.   You hear noises in your house.   You find a burglar has entered and looking for items to take.   The presence of a gun will likely cause them to leave and take nothing.   Some states do acknowledge this event and do not punish the home protector for scaring the burglar or even shooting them in defense of their property.

Some comments from one with no guns but willing to see the reasons for those who want guns to help make life seem safer for them.   Far too many of the comment posted on this subject do not recognize the reasons for having a gun in the US.   It is legal and constitutional for all to do so.   The US has a government 'of the people' and until the people do say no more guns and the Congress acts, not much many folks can do.   

We are 'people' attempting to have our ways presented and followed and not just some political mess driven down on the people by some overbearing groups of political, rather than people, driven from those elitist folks.   But in recent years we are more and more being driven by the political bunch that more or less try to be the ones determining our paths, rather than allow the elected Congress bring forth the rules wanted by the people. 

We are not a blood thirsty population at all.   We do have plenty to think of and the right to take defensive ways in our own hands.   It is not the guns being the problems but it is the uncontrolled and drugged, thieves, mentally deranged, and so forth.    Not the majority at all being the problem.


----------



## Matrix (Apr 28, 2016)

I have seen too many gun related debates on this forum, it never ends well, especially when it happens between American and non-US members. I think partly because it's a culture in the US, and it's impossible to convince other people that their culture is wrong. 

It's kinda like the British royal family, I believe American members can come up with some good reasons to stop the royal family tradition, I'm glad no one ever tried to do it.


----------



## BobF (Apr 28, 2016)

Debby said:


> You're right Bob, I didn't notice the Huffington Post article link, so apparently it is the general way of American citizens that they get all wound up in the immediate aftermath of a bloody massacre and then lose interest in improving safety.  Isn't that a sad situation?  But I think the other three (recent) links also point to a gradual growing desire of the public to see better registration and background check methods and a complete accounting of where those guns that are sold, are going as well as keeping access to them a little more difficult to prevent at least some criminals and all juveniles from getting hold of them.
> 
> I do apologize if I offended you, but seriously, you do seem to have little patience for the idea of making the general public safer (without taking your guns away or opening up your Constitution)



If the biggest pushers of the 'no guns' rules were of US rather than the 'out of country' types it would be easier to take.   Make your comments and then move on.  Keeping to the front issue by repeating and repeating and repeating does nothing to fix any problem, real or imaginary.   

Why many folks change from enraged to less concerned is not some mysterious thing at all.   It is initial shock, partially created by the news folks and then the mellowing of time where folks get to see the bigger picture and less of the initial shock.   

Our total gun crimes items have been coming down over recent years but no one seems to notice this at all.   Until we get the proper folks in our government involved with the legal ways to change our gun laws, nothing will happen just because of the way the press handles things.

We do have reasons to have these guns in the population.   Canada has them, Australia has them, just nobody talking about the guns in the population except in the US.   Maybe we should also attack the Swiss as they have guns in the population as part of their growing up rituals.   But after passing these ages they still get to keep the guns in their homes and participate in the gun field days.   Far too much of this US anti gun nonsense going on for no reason at all.

Don't want a gun, simple, don't have one.   Same choice for all in the US.   One big problem with the registration thing is that it is for the guns that are sold by regular dealers.   Some folks with guns can just sell them to others and no registration is required.   There are reason for thousands of unregistered guns to be around.   Even registering ammo will not end the unregistered guns situation as many folks do make their own ammunition by reusing their own ammo.   

I guess we really need a cop in each persons life to make it work by some folks ideas.


----------



## Debby (Apr 28, 2016)

An interesting, brief history of the advent of gun control in Australia in Huffington Post this morning:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/20...form_n_9717980.html?utm_hp_ref=world&ir=World

A few points that make it interesting:

Australia's last mass murder happened in 1996 when a monster killed 35 people.  He had no history of mental illness or criminal involvement although that wouldn't have made a difference as there were no restrictions on the mentally ill or minors getting guns.

All automatic and semi-automatic weapons were banned, but if you could show a genuine need, you were allowed to own several other types of lower powered guns.

Gun licensing protocols were strengthened, gun safety courses were introduced and registration of all guns was required.  There was also a 28 day waiting period before you could purchase a gun after licensing  was approved.

At the time, gun enthusiasts were known to have threatened the PM to the point that in those initial days, he wore a protective vest under his jacket and other members of the government often were recipients of threatening phone calls.

The NRA has cited Australia's gun ban and claims that it has made no difference to gun homicides despite the fact that it has halved since the ban took place.  I think that a link in a comment a few back points to the low number of gun deaths in that country.

Many Australians feel that the ban has actually made Australia (feel like) a safer place.


----------



## Debby (Apr 28, 2016)

BobF said:


> If the biggest pushers of the 'no guns' rules were of US rather than the 'out of country' types it would be easier to take.   Make your comments and then move on.  Keeping to the front issue by repeating and repeating and repeating does nothing to fix any problem, real or imaginary.
> 
> Why many folks change from enraged to less concerned is not some mysterious thing at all.   It is initial shock, partially created by the news folks and then the mellowing of time where folks get to see the bigger picture and less of the initial shock.
> 
> ...




Bob, when the world continues to hear time after time, that another American has gone on a rampage and killed a bunch of innocent people, or another child finds it's mothers 'legal' gun, it is a case of Americans putting itself back into the news and is not the fault of any outsider.  If you don't want people in general to discuss then 'you' are going to have to change the stage.  Only 'you' can do that.  And when you do have 55%-63% of people in America wanting better gun control, but you don't listen to the majority, then obviously you don't take 'it' in any instance.  'Democracy?', well not always?

If your gun deaths stats were as low as Canada's or Australia's, and you had consistent registration and licensing requirements throughout the US, then the situation would be comparable.  But you don't and hence, America has placed itself in the spotlight.  Time to quit blaming the rest of the world for noting the ongoing horrors of mass murder in the US.  You even noted yourself, that there is 'a problem' with people selling guns to others with no registrations being required.  That isn't possible in Canada.  Gosh, we even have to get transport permits to take a gun to a gun shop to sell the thing back.  And yes, according to that article I found on how many guns there are in the US, the reason there are unregistered guns in the US goes directly to a patchwork of requirements vs. non-requirements entirely.

And since you wanted to bring Switzerland into the discussion, I found this in your own Library of Congress:  *Summary*

Switzerland has a comprehensive gun-control regime that is governed by federal law and implemented by the cantons.  This regime may be somewhat less restrictive than that of other European countries, yet since 2008 it has complied with European Union requirements.  The Swiss Weapons Act requires an acquisition license for handguns and a carrying license for the carrying of any permitted firearm for defensive purposes.  Exceptions exist for hunters.  Automatic weapons are banned.

A further examination of their laws:

*Current Gun-Control Law*


- Acquisition license required for handguns.  Fully automatic guns are banned.
- Applicant must be 18 years of age and never been placed under guardianship(in trouble with the law?) 
- Rifles and semiautomatic guns used by hunters exempted from licensing requirements.
- Licensing is valid for acquisition of one gun and is valid for six to nine months. (must be renewed annually?)
- If a private individual sells a gun to another private individual, he's required to ask the 'buyer' if he minds if the seller requests information from the authorities on him, and then not to sell it if the buyer declines.  The seller must also verify the buyers identification via official documentation.

From:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Swiss gun deaths per 100,000 - 3.08
Canadian gun deaths              - 1.97
Australian gun deaths             -  .93
United States gun deaths       -  10.54
(it should be noted that the above numbers do change when suicides by firearm are no longer factored in, but America  has the highest number of suicides per 100,000)



I've never suggested that you people need to ban guns outright have I?  Never.  But until your people decide to aim for greater safety for your population by tightening up your laws on guns, I'm going to continue expressing an opinion.  Freedom of speech right?


----------



## BobF (Apr 28, 2016)

Debby said:


> Bob, when the world continues to hear time after time, that another American has gone on a rampage and killed a bunch of innocent people, or another child finds it's mothers 'legal' gun, it is a case of Americans putting itself back into the news and is not the fault of any outsider.  If you don't want people in general to discuss then 'you' are going to have to change the stage.  Only 'you' can do that.  And when you do have 55%-63% of people in America wanting better gun control, but you don't listen to the majority, then obviously you don't take 'it' in any instance.  'Democracy?', well not always?
> 
> If your gun deaths stats were as low as Canada's or Australia's, and you had consistent registration and licensing requirements throughout the US, then the situation would be comparable.  But you don't and hence, America has placed itself in the spotlight.  Time to quit blaming the rest of the world for noting the ongoing horrors of mass murder in the US.  You even noted yourself, that there is 'a problem' with people selling guns to others with no registrations being required.  That isn't possible in Canada.  Gosh, we even have to get transport permits to take a gun to a gun shop to sell the thing back.  And yes, according to that article I found on how many guns there are in the US, the reason there are unregistered guns in the US goes directly to a patchwork of requirements vs. non-requirements entirely.
> 
> ...



You are continuing to repeat yourself and using pure BS for support.   All these so called public opinion surveys mean nothing as they can be taken in far left areas where the feelings are similar.   Only the feelings that make it to the Congress and get real attention mean any thing at all.  I only read the first part as I have told you your constant repetition of nonsense means nothing in the real US conversations.   Find something more interesting and start working on that.   This gun nonsense only makes sense to the minority that hate guns for any reason.   If this were a majority it would have made our Congress and even with Obama's pushing the Congress has failed to see it as worth while discussing.

Freedom of speech?    For insiders yes, for other country folks that is not the intent of our Constitution.   We also have rules and laws about other folks and their constant nonsense being acceptable or not.   Which ones I don't know and will not try to look up.   Some folks do get politely told to 'shut up or move on'.   Maybe that would be appropriate for the gun issues too.   If not US then maybe shut up or move on.   Certainly the constant nagging will not get our Congress to pay much attention as they have other more important things to work on.

Right now and after the next election the Congress is needing to worry about our $19 trillion and growing debt.   Our slowly declining gun deaths should be recognized and applauded.   The nagging is doing nothing of value and for no reason.   Suicide can and does happen in many ways and should not be considered as a result of guns for any suicide.

You did not respond to my posting that many guns in the US do not get registered as they are not exchanged by licensed dealers.   Many of our gun problems are from the criminals and not at all the gun owners.


----------



## BobF (Apr 28, 2016)

A long post for Debby.   But you do need some help in understanding how strong the Swiss are about their guns and how public they are about it.

Something about the Swiss that you have not recognized in your posting.   There may have been agreement with Europe on some things but the Swiss still have guns in their homes and are allowed to travel on public transportation with their weapons.   They did not give up the right to own and use weapons to please the Europeans.
 …...................
And since you wanted to bring Switzerland into the discussion, I found this in your own Library of Congress: *Summary*

Switzerland has a comprehensive gun-control regime that is governed by federal law and implemented by the cantons. This regime may be somewhat less restrictive than that of other European countries, yet since 2008 it has complied with European Union requirements. The Swiss Weapons Act requires an acquisition license for handguns and a carrying license for the carrying of any permitted firearm for defensive purposes. Exceptions exist for hunters. Automatic weapons are banned.
...........................

 Your comments dated in 2008 and the report below was put out in 2012.   It does not look like the Swiss gave up much, if any, when joining the European group.


http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/


*switzerland*

*The Swiss Difference: A Gun Culture That Works*

 The country had one mass shooting in 2001, but a resulting anti-gun referendum failed to pass. The Swiss will not give up the gun. Can their system work in the U.S.?
 By Helena Bachmann / Geneva Dec. 20, 2012  


 Even as the gun-control debate rises again in the U.S. in the aftermath of the horrific school shooting in Newtown, Conn., the gun-loving Swiss are not about to lay down their arms. Guns are ubiquitous in this neutral nation, with sharpshooting considered a fun and wholesome recreational activity for people of all ages.

 Even though Switzerland has not been involved in an armed conflict since a standoff between Catholics and Protestants in 1847, the Swiss are very serious not only about their right to own weapons but also to carry them around in public. Because of this general acceptance and even pride in gun ownership, nobody bats an eye at the sight of a civilian riding a bus, bike or motorcycle to the shooting range, with a rifle slung across the shoulder.

 “We will never change our attitude about the responsible use of weapons by law-abiding citizens,” says Hermann Suter, vice president of Pro-Tell, the country’s gun lobby, named after legendary apple shooter William Tell, who used a crossbow to target enemies long before firearms were invented.

 Switzerland trails behind only the U.S, Yemen and Serbia in the number of guns per capita; between 2.3 million and 4.5 million military and private firearms are estimated to be in circulation in a country of only 8 million people. Yet, despite the prevalence of guns, the violent-crime rate is low: government figures show about 0.5 gun homicides per 100,000 inhabitants in 2010. By comparison, the U.S rate in the same year was about 5 firearm killings per 100,000 people, according to a 2011 U.N. report.

 Unlike some other heavily armed nations, Switzerland’s gun ownership is deeply rooted in a sense of patriotic duty and national identity. Weapons are kept at home because of the long-held belief that enemies could invade tiny Switzerland quickly, so every soldier had to be able to fight his way to his regiment’s assembly point. (Switzerland was at risk of being invaded by Germany during World War II but was spared, historians say, because every Swiss man was armed and trained to shoot.)

 But the “gun in every closet” tradition was challenged in 2001, after a disgruntled citizen opened fire with his army rifle inside a regional parliament, killing 14 and injuring 14 others — the only mass shooting in Switzerland’s recent history. The subsequent opposition to widespread gun ownership spearheaded a push for stricter arms legislation. The government and pro-gun groups argued, however, that the country’s existing laws regulating the sale, ownership and licensing of private guns, which includes a ban on carrying concealed weapons, are stringent enough. The law allows citizens or legal residents over the age of 18, who have obtained a permit from the government and who have no criminal record or history of mental illness, to buy up to three weapons from an authorized dealer, with the exception of automatic firearms and selective fire weapons, which are banned. Semiautomatics, which have caused havoc in the U.S., can be legally purchased.

 The authorities made one concession, though: since 2008, all military — but not private — ammunition must be stored in central arsenals rather than in soldiers’ homes. The debate culminated in a nationwide referendum last year, when 56% of voters rejected the proposal initiated by *anti-gun organizations* to ban army rifles from homes altogether.

 Although guns are responsible for between 200 and 300 suicides each year in Switzerland, Pro-Tell’s Suter says these statistics have to be put in a wider perspective. He points out that the bullets used in suicides are only a tiny fraction of the 75 million rounds of ammunition that are fired each year in Switzerland during military and civilian target practice.

 One of the reasons the crime rate in Switzerland is low despite the prevalence of weapons — and also why the Swiss mentality can’t be transposed to the current American reality — is the culture of responsibility and safety that is anchored in society and passed from generation to generation. Kids as young as 12 belong to gun groups in their local communities, where they learn sharpshooting. The Swiss Shooting Sports Association runs about 3,000 clubs and has 150,000 members, including a youth section. Many members keep their guns and ammunition at home, while others choose to leave them at the club. And yet, despite such easy access to pistols and rifles, “no members have ever used their guns for criminal purposes,” says Max Flueckiger, the association’s spokesperson.

 “Social conditions are fundamental in deterring crime,” says Peter Squires, professor of criminology and public policy at the University of Brighton in Great Britain, who has studied gun violence in different countries and concluded that a “culture of support” rather than focus on individualism, can deter mass killings.

 “If people have a responsible, disciplined and organized introduction into an activity like shooting, there will be less risk of gun violence,” he tells TIME.

 That sense of social and civic responsibility is one of the reasons the Swiss have never allowed their guns to come under fire.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 28, 2016)

Yesterday was the 20th anniversary of the Port Arthur massacre, the last one that Australia has suffered. The memorial service was broadcast on national TV. Approximately 500 people travelled to this lovely place where the unimaginable happened. A disturbed young man, armed with a number of deadly weapons went about systematically shooting people as if he was a hunter or exterminator of people. He killed indiscriminately; men women, children, whole families were cut down. Thirty five dead and many more wounded. For a while it was the worst gun massacre in the whole world. Sadly the record was broken in Norway in 2011.

Twenty years after the event the suffering of the survivors and the bereaved is still palpable. The killer's name is never spoken of these days and the service was beautiful and moving. I saw a young school girl, who was not even born when it all happened, who was nevertheless fighting back tears because some family member had been lost. It is the same grief that people feel over their war dead except that there is no reason for the loss that they can find comfort in.

This is the event that caused Australians to accept national firearms laws. We had always had laws and regulations state by state but national laws have made us all safer.


----------



## Butterfly (Apr 29, 2016)

The incident of the child getting the gun out of mom's purse and killing with it doesn't have anything at all to do with gun registration, etc.  It has to do with people (the mom) not being responsible in handling/storing their weapons.  If you have children in your home, you should must assume that they will get into ANYTHING within their reach.  

Registered/unregistered or legal/illegal -- the reason that child died was because mom left something dangerous out where a child could get hold of it.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 29, 2016)

And when your children are playing in someone else's house?

http://www.parents.com/kids/teens/violence/is-there-a-gun-in-the-house/


----------



## Debby (Apr 29, 2016)

Yes Bob, the Swiss have their guns but the link I posted also says that they adhere to EU regulations.  It also indicates that they are very firm on following those regulations across the country (although administered by the cantons), unlike America which apparently has a patchwork of regulations and non-regulations and secrecy.  So comparing yourselves to the Swiss is kind of a non starter.

Maybe another difference between America and Switzerland is that the Swiss generally rank amongst the ‘happy countries’ whereas America seems to have a lot of anger and fear as a driving force for everything from politics to individuals.  Maybe that is why Switzerland doesn't have regular mass killings?  


Their gun related death rate is 3.08 compared to America’s 10.4.  Are you really sure you want to be highlighting this country as your defence because it only actually highlights the possibility of my observation about the anger levels in America.  They have lots of guns, but they don’t kill each other at nearly the levels you folks do, nor are their suicide rates as significant because suicide is also factored into the global death rates.  It should also be noted that Switzerland's death rate by guns are also almost double that of Canada and three times as high as Australia.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

I think the last paragraph in the article you linked is significant:


 a “culture of support” rather than focus on individualism, can deter mass killings. “If people have a responsible, disciplined and organized introduction into an activity like shooting, there will be less risk of gun violence,” he tells TIME.

That sense of social and civic responsibility is one of the reasons the Swiss have never allowed their guns to come under fire.

As I have reiterated over and over Bob, I am not suggesting that you folks ban guns, but the more reading I've done on the subject (and I have you to thank for that ) the more I've become aware of the situation concerning your regulations and licensing and I think that improving the rules around gun ownership would go a long way towards improving the statistics for gun deaths in the USA.  And I'll bet that improving the rules wouldn't necessitate touching your Constitution.  You'd still be allowed to have them, if you are a sane, intelligent, trained and socially responsible individual.  But if you're mentally ill, have had involvement with the police and criminal elements or are a juvenile, your society should make it as difficult as possible to get your hands on a tool that is designed to kill.

See, I'm not unreasonable at all.


----------



## Debby (Apr 29, 2016)

Butterfly said:


> The incident of the child getting the gun out of mom's purse and killing with it doesn't have anything at all to do with gun registration, etc.  It has to do with people (the mom) not being responsible in handling/storing their weapons.  If you have children in your home, you should must assume that they will get into ANYTHING within their reach.
> 
> Registered/unregistered or legal/illegal -- the reason that child died was because mom left something dangerous out where a child could get hold of it.




I totally agree and that is where this conversation started but Bob decided it needed to turn into a discussion on gun laws, etc.,  

When I was a new mom, I made a point of baby proofing my home to keep my kids safe but having a gun in a moms purse where toddlers are always curious to poke around in (cause goodies have a way of appearing from mommies purse!) doesn't even come close to making your home safe for small children.

And for a year or three, my husband owned a gun and when our grandchildren came over, it was always up on the top shelf of the storage closet, in a box, out of sight and the bullets were in a different place, and also out of sight.

Warrigal also made a good point about 'your child' going to someone else's place and how sure are you that they store their gun safely.
I wonder how many of America's gun deaths every year are kids who find parents guns and are 'playing' with it or showing off to their friends.  I know exactly how I'd feel if my child went to a friends house and was killed by their gun.  My heart would be torn between being broken and being so angry!!!!!


----------



## Debby (Apr 29, 2016)

BobF said:


> You are continuing to repeat yourself and using pure BS for support.   All these so called public opinion surveys mean nothing as they can be taken in far left areas where the feelings are similar.   Only the feelings that make it to the Congress and get real attention mean any thing at all.  I only read the first part as I have told you your constant repetition of nonsense means nothing in the real US conversations.   Find something more interesting and start working on that.   This gun nonsense only makes sense to the minority that hate guns for any reason.   If this were a majority it would have made our Congress and even with Obama's pushing the Congress has failed to see it as worth while discussing.
> 
> Freedom of speech?    For insiders yes, for other country folks that is not the intent of our Constitution.   We also have rules and laws about other folks and their constant nonsense being acceptable or not.   Which ones I don't know and will not try to look up.   Some folks do get politely told to 'shut up or move on'.   Maybe that would be appropriate for the gun issues too.   If not US then maybe shut up or move on.   Certainly the constant nagging will not get our Congress to pay much attention as they have other more important things to work on.
> 
> ...




Oh my gosh, I'm just speechless!  You are constantly whining about your politicians being bought and yet here you are using their lack of movement regarding tightening rules and regulations as support for your lack of consistent rules and regulations (that would potentially make your country safer)!  And I most certainly have responded to your mention of people selling their guns to whomever and not going through licensed dealers.  Considering the patchwork of rules and regulations and in some cases, secrecy ending in destruction of records, it's not hard to see how and why people can do this.  And I said that too, previously when we were having a discussion about the majority of illegal weapons that come into Canada, coming from you.  Remember?

I'd like to hear your reasoning for the huge difference in gun death numbers between the USA, Canada, Australia and now Switzerland.  Explain that.


----------



## Jackie22 (Apr 29, 2016)

[h=1]Obama to make 'smart guns' push[/h]President Barack Obama is opening a new front in the gun control debate, readying a big push for so-called smart gun technology — an initiative that the gun lobby and law enforcement rank and file is already mobilizing against. 

As early as Friday, Obama is set to formally release findings from the Defense, Justice and Homeland Security Departments on ways to spur the development of guns that can be fired only by their owner, according to industry and gun control sources. Senior Adviser Valerie Jarrett is slated to preview the announcement for stakeholders on Thursday afternoon. 

It’s an intensification of an effort kicked off in January, when Obama ordered federal agencies to explore such technology and report back, as part of his series of executive actions for “common sense” gun reforms. 

While the “smart gun” element of the actions drew little attention earlier this year, critics are gearing up to fight back against the possibility that such guns could be required for government firearms purchases. 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/obama-smart-gun-technology-222574


----------



## Debby (Apr 29, 2016)

'Smart' guns, that sounds like a good technology to put in place.  That's sort of like my husband has set up his iPhone where he opens it with his thumbprint.  The phone has to recognize him.


----------



## Jackie22 (Apr 29, 2016)

Yes, Debbie I agree, President Obama is at least trying....I'm sure it will go no where with current crop of 'no reforms' groups.


----------



## BobF (Apr 29, 2016)

Jackie22 said:


> Yes, Debbie I agree, President Obama is at least trying....I'm sure it will go no where with current crop of 'no reforms' groups.



Which also includes many democrats that insist on leaving the Constitution alone.   I mentioned the Democrat leader of the Senate that has not fully supported Obama on his gun rules stuff.

And Debby the difference between Canada and Australia and Swiss folks is simply the home cultures as that one person said.   The Swiss have guns and fairness trained into them from early in their lives.   The have no problems even with plenty of guns around, at home, in the public, guns and gun safety are part of their lives.   That will never happen in Canada and Australia as you folks consider guns to be dangerous no matter what.   

For the US, we have had guns since the early days with no great problems at all.    But in recent years guns have become a problem and just taking them away from the good folks is not going to make it a bit safer either.   I have pointed out that far too many bad folks are operating in the US and they do not care about what countries say about guns.    We should be full out at war against the drug pushers and general criminals that carry guns and will never bother to register one.    They just do not care what nonsense you post about registration as for them it is no good at all.   You say there are plenty of guns getting into Canada but not how they got there.   Likely not by honest folks with their registered guns so plenty of not so nice folks must also be working in Canada.   I mentioned one from Canada caught trying to do damage in the US, but you never acknowledge that, but it did happen.   Canada also has problems of many types and that apparently includes guns.   

Yes, I do agree with that Swiss writer that says if we have guns in the US society and make their usage and safety part of our culture.   Then we end up with an armed and safe public.    The US should never go into the unprotected status of some of our neighbors and friends that are actually in the gun sights of some very radical and dangerous groups in this world.


----------



## Debby (Apr 29, 2016)

Oh my Gosh!!!  Bob, do you listen to yourself?  You have had guns since your early days and NO PROBLEMS!!!  Seriously?   The USA has the worst stats on gun deaths of the four countries  being discussed.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 29, 2016)

Yesterday there was a shooting in the car park of a big shopping mall not very far from where I live. We were at a cinema overlooking the car park not long after it happened and we could see the police and the roped off area but did not know what had happened until we heard a news report on the radio after the movie was over.

It was a tit for tat shooting of a man who was a convicted killer and who was thought to have been involved in another recent shooting. I post this to demonstrate that Australia is not a paradise where no-one ever gets shot. We have criminal gangs too and they are the source of most of the illicit firearms that are smuggled into this country. Gun laws and firearms regulations do not free us from all gun deaths but they have reduced them. 



> *Bankstown shooting: Wanted crime figure shot dead in shopping centre car park*
> 
> Date                April 29, 2016 - 6:55PM
> 
> ...



I grew up in Bankstown and still live in the wider Bankstown area but I am not afraid for my personal safety. Middle Eastern and bikie crime gangs do not invade the homes of people like me. They do engage in gang wars and shoot each other from time to time and they keep the police very busy. Oddly enough, I've never heard of any of their little children getting their hands on a firearm and shooting themselves or other children. Paradoxically, it would seem that the criminals secure their firearms very carefully.


----------



## BobF (Apr 29, 2016)

Debby said:


> Oh my Gosh!!!  Bob, do you listen to yourself?  You have had guns since your early days and NO PROBLEMS!!!  Seriously?   The USA has the worst stats on gun deaths of the four countries  being discussed.



And just how long have stats been kept?    Not very long and likely only in the recent years since we have had computers to play with data.    But we are likely well down on the international list of gun deaths.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

The US at 10.54 on this chart is a lot better than the next several countries that go as high as 67+.

Why do you not give the US credit for having lowered its numbers in recent years?   Just a hateful one that loves dictator style governments.   Our government will not and can not change our laws without congressional agreement.   

For the last 7 years there has been little agreement on what is wrong and how to deal with it.   We do have much greater problems that need corrected or will find our country broke and unable to do anything.   Those are real concerns and much more important than worrying about folks wiling to register but no one is concerned about our criminal gangs that don't care one iota about the things you consider so important.

Stopping illegal immigrants from entering is a good start.   Jails and hard sentencing for those drug nuts and the gangs that support them with illegal drugs.   Same for the basic criminals that break into homes, stores, cars, and just take whatever they wish.   Those are the problems that make folks in the US want to have defenses at home or on them.   

I see no balance in the way you keep ignoring what I post and keep on wanting full gun control, even when the honest folks are not the problem you should be seeing.   Go after the criminals as they are much larger and violent groups compared to the number of kids being hurt.   If we start having guns in the house and gun clubs to teach usage and responsibility we may end up as controlled and gun safe as the Swiss are.   Your constant nagging will not do that for the US or anywhere else either.


----------



## Butterfly (Apr 29, 2016)

BobF said:


> Which also includes many democrats that insist on leaving the Constitution alone.   I mentioned the Democrat leader of the Senate that has not fully supported Obama on his gun rules stuff.
> 
> And Debby the difference between Canada and Australia and Swiss folks is simply the home cultures as that one person said.   The Swiss have guns and fairness trained into them from early in their lives.   The have no problems even with plenty of guns around, at home, in the public, guns and gun safety are part of their lives.   That will never happen in Canada and Australia as you folks consider guns to be dangerous no matter what.
> 
> ...




The present case (the boy and the gun in the purse) has absolutely nothing to do with gun rights or the Second Amendment.  It has to do with parental responsibility and NEVER leaving dangerous items where children can get to them.  You shouldn't leave a chainsaw within reach of a child, either.


----------



## BobF (May 3, 2016)

Warrigal said:


> Yesterday there was a shooting in the car park of a big shopping mall not very far from where I live. We were at a cinema overlooking the car park not long after it happened and we could see the police and the roped off area but did not know what had happened until we heard a news report on the radio after the movie was over.
> 
> It was a tit for tat shooting of a man who was a convicted killer and who was thought to have been involved in another recent shooting. I post this to demonstrate that Australia is not a paradise where no-one ever gets shot. *We have criminal gangs too and they are the source of most of the illicit firearms that are smuggled into this country.* Gun laws and firearms regulations do not free us from all gun deaths but they have reduced them.



Thanks for this comment as it answers  many of the comments another poster keep talking about.    The honest gun owners do get registered while many other, the criminal and unregistered ones, get their weapons any way they can and do not bother to get them registered.   They are the biggest one for all of us in the US to be worried about.   Drug runners being among them and we have many of them that work across our unprotected border along Mexico.    Guns are supplied by many countries in this world and how they manage to get into the US without being known is something I don't know.    Smuggled one way or the other for sure.

Here is an article about builders and importers of arms.    If not shipped directly then how?    Illegally I suppose.

Lots of text but follow down and you will find tables of builders and importers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry


----------

