Singapore Expats Forum

They have done it again! 8 more people shot dead in the US

Discuss about the latest news & interesting topics, real life experience or other out of topic discussions with locals & expatriates in Singapore.

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 34258
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Sun, 09 Dec 2007 10:53 pm

Exactly! :wink:

User avatar
Wind In My Hair
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2306
Joined: Tue, 19 Jul 2005

Postby Wind In My Hair » Sun, 09 Dec 2007 11:20 pm

I fired my first shot about two years ago, of course in the US. I was terrified that I'd do something wrong and kill someone, even though it was at a range and I had an experienced teacher. So it's true that people with little experience of guns have a morbid fear of them. It doesn't help that guns make the news when they kill people, rather than when they kill chickens and geese.

Having said that, I would object strongly to gun ownership being made legal in Singapore. I just think that since we're used to being without, no need to invite trouble.

Which brings me to the 'clean slate' argument - the US being what it is today, many people hold tight to gun ownership as a right, especially for self-defence. But if you had a choice to build the entire USA from scratch, what kind of country would you want? If people weren't used to guns already, would you decide that there are other ways to nab poultry?

User avatar
Strong Eagle
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10405
Joined: Sat, 10 Jul 2004
Location: Off The Red Dot
Contact:

Postby Strong Eagle » Sun, 09 Dec 2007 11:33 pm

Wind In My Hair wrote:I fired my first shot about two years ago, of course in the US. I was terrified that I'd do something wrong and kill someone, even though it was at a range and I had an experienced teacher. So it's true that people with little experience of guns have a morbid fear of them. It doesn't help that guns make the news when they kill people, rather than when they kill chickens and geese.

Having said that, I would object strongly to gun ownership being made legal in Singapore. I just think that since we're used to being without, no need to invite trouble.

Which brings me to the 'clean slate' argument - the US being what it is today, many people hold tight to gun ownership as a right, especially for self-defence. But if you had a choice to build the entire USA from scratch, what kind of country would you want? If people weren't used to guns already, would you decide that there are other ways to nab poultry?


And if a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his little ass each time he jumped. Fact is, there is a pool of 100 million guns in the US. Gun control forces law abiding citizens to walk around unarmed, the same cannot be said for the criminal element.

At the bottom of all of it though, is that any other right you may presume to have is based upon the single, absolute, and necessary right of self defense. property rights mean nothing if your property can be taken from you. Civil rights mean nothing if they can be taken from you. Your only choice is to defend yourself.

So, while I enjoy a gun free Singapore, let it also be said that it is something of a convenience. What's missing in this equation is what the general citizenry would or could do, were the benevolent and forward thinking government in Singapore to become corrupted. How could it be stopped?

In the US, there will probably never be an armed confrontation as a means of change of government, and at the same time, the very fact that the citizenry is armed means that arbitrary police actions don't happen.

User avatar
Wind In My Hair
Manager
Manager
Posts: 2306
Joined: Tue, 19 Jul 2005

Postby Wind In My Hair » Sun, 09 Dec 2007 11:58 pm

Strong Eagle wrote:So, while I enjoy a gun free Singapore, let it also be said that it is something of a convenience. What's missing in this equation is what the general citizenry would or could do, were the benevolent and forward thinking government in Singapore to become corrupted. How could it be stopped?

I guess I'm more a fan of Gandhi than I am of Rambo. Aung San Suu Kyi and Nelson Mandela also rank among my heroes. There are other ways than violence. I'm not saying what's right for the US, given the way things are there today. I can only say what I would wish for my own country and my own life.

fefe
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue, 29 Nov 2005

Postby fefe » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 9:34 am

for one, i am not a US citizen and i am not eligible to vote there. so, if the people of the US feel that the right to bear arms for people of 18 yrs and above is important for self-defense, hunting and what have you.. then so be it. after all, it is a democratic country. most of the people including myself really couldn't care less. the fact that i decide to spend some precious time to participate in the discussion, is probably because i feel sorry for the innocent dead and their families.

but to the rest of the world, we have 8 less americans to deal with every now and then. i am not sure, maybe to the iraqis this is good news. to mr osama, this is darn good news.

to extend the previous discussion, since people die of choking, does it mean we should ban eating too?

User avatar
rt160177
Member
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu, 18 Jan 2007
Location: Singapore

Postby rt160177 » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 10:47 am

sundaymorningstaple wrote:
sprite wrote:
more deaths by firearms in the US than all other industrial countries combined


Guess we should ban the automobile as well, lots more deaths than by firearms and no psychological profiling needed there either. Also, quite a few murders by vehicle per year as well! Driving cars into rivers with children on board. Being run down in the driveway by a spouse deliberately, or for that matter being forced off the road. Road Rage. More deaths by four-wheeled weapons than by guns.

No I didn't misunderstand you. I'm all for more gun control and making it harder to obtain one. But I do not agree on the banning of guns outright be it handguns, rifles or shotguns. However I do draw the line at fully automatic weapons like AK-45's Armalite 15's, machine pistols etc. The selling of those that have been modified to no longer fully automatic should also be banned as it's too each to convert them back to fully automatic. There is absolutely no reason for any member of the public to have a fully automatic weapon (unless they are a licensed and controlled collector).

The overwhelming majority of gun problems in the US is not from legally obtained weapons anyway. (although I hate to admit it, most crimes of passion are from legal weapons - usually a handgun in a drawer in the table beside the bed. :(

Unfortunately, this is a no win discussion as those for and against will argue till both are blue in the face and nobody will be converted. I grew up respecting guns and still do. I am a responsible user and would never use one in anger (my self-defense was not a result of anger). But I'm not everyone else especially those who have never owned or even handled a weapon so therefore are afraid of them.

Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Be it with a gun, knife, car, brick or baseball bat. People were killing each other before gunpowder was even invented.


I believe that there are as much guns per person in Canada as there in the USA but less gun crime, therefore it is people (a very small minority) not guns that are the root cause like SMS said. That said, if guns were harder to come by then I believe there would be less gun related crime and I have no idea why the government allow the sale of any automatic weapons or 0.5 cal rifles.

Out of interest SMS how far would you go with gun control? Would you agree to have your hand guns stored at a shooting range?

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 34258
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:18 am

rt160177 wrote:Out of interest SMS how far would you go with gun control? Would you agree to have your hand guns stored at a shooting range?


Why? I use them on the farm when working to kill vermin like skunk, groundhog, cottonmouths etc. I don't sling a rifle over my shoulder. I generally don't even holster one and why should I go to a shooting range when I own 220 acres of land? Doesn't make a lot of sense does it. So I guess the answer is no. Course I guess I could keep a loaded shotgun leaning against the wall beside my bed couldn't I? If one lived in a city then I might agree but again, that defeats the purpose of our right to defend ourselves in the case of intruders doesn't it. You can actually own a gun here in Singapore as well but it HAS to be kept at a rifle/shooting range (How else do the Singapore trap shooters get their experience).

User avatar
rt160177
Member
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu, 18 Jan 2007
Location: Singapore

Postby rt160177 » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:53 am

Was just curious as that is the law in the uk. You can own a shotgun, rifle or hand gun but the hand gun has to be kept at the shooting range. Each type of gun has it's own licance as well and you have to jusfify why you need to own a gun.

You mentioned in a previous post that you are all for strictor gun control, so what would you propose?

User avatar
sundaymorningstaple
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 34258
Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004
Location: Still Fishing!
Contact:

Postby sundaymorningstaple » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 1:03 pm

rt160177 wrote:Was just curious as that is the law in the uk. You can own a shotgun, rifle or hand gun but the hand gun has to be kept at the shooting range. Each type of gun has it's own licance as well and you have to jusfify why you need to own a gun.

You mentioned in a previous post that you are all for strictor gun control, so what would you propose?


First of all, I would get rid of the ability to purchase those types of weapons mentioned in the same earlier post. I see no reason for the purchase of any fully automatic weapon or a modified fully automatic weapon as the conversions can always be reversed.

I might consider disallowing those with police record consisting of violent crimes, drug crimes or robbery/burglary/assult offenses as these are all crimes committed with unstable or altered minds. Not someone I'd like to freely give a weapon to.

I would definitely make the waiting period longer in order to complete a purchase (anywhere from 2 weeks to a month might be good). Most of the over the top fruitloop types will have simmered down by then (or they would have bought a saturday night special or stolen one) As I said, anybody that wants a gun can get one, legally or otherwise. Psychological profiling might be a good idea but the leap from sane to insane is sometimes a very fine line so there is not really a sure way to make that one work unless it's a spur of the moment rash decision and then the longer waiting period may sort out that problem.

Nothing is going to stop the loser from going out in a copycat style if they have set their minds to it. It just as easily could have been a Timothy McVey style truck full of fertilizer.

:shit:

User avatar
ksl
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6005
Joined: Mon, 19 Jul 2004
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Postby ksl » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 1:18 pm

Wind In My Hair wrote:
Strong Eagle wrote:So, while I enjoy a gun free Singapore, let it also be said that it is something of a convenience. What's missing in this equation is what the general citizenry would or could do, were the benevolent and forward thinking government in Singapore to become corrupted. How could it be stopped?

I guess I'm more a fan of Gandhi than I am of Rambo. Aung San Suu Kyi and Nelson Mandela also rank among my heroes. There are other ways than violence. I'm not saying what's right for the US, given the way things are there today. I can only say what I would wish for my own country and my own life.


My hero's also, along with peace and tranquility, although we must not be naive, to think, that having this peaceful philosophy, makes us safe from the evils of our opposite, headbangers, it is a ruthless world, and any relentlessness in safety, will have a price to pay!

Aung San Suu Kyi and Nelson Mandela are examples of what can happen, and even though they become released and are honoured, their lives have been taken away by the evils of their time.
SMS wrote:Psychological profiling might be a good idea but the leap from sane to insane is sometimes a very fine line so there is not really a sure way to make that one work unless it's a spur of the moment rash decision and then the longer waiting period may sort out that problem
Very true indeed, the line is very thin, and the mind is unpredictable when we are dealing with Neanderthal chemistry.....survival instincts we all have, and use in individual ways!

Occassionally I am dumbfounded, when a person is sentenced to prison for protecting his family and home....one doesn't have to even think how wrong it is, to break into someone elses property!

I would use the minimum of force to protect my family and property, which could result in death of either one of us! So the line seems pretty clear to me, although the UK law, would jail you, and give the prisoner enough compensation, to live the good life :???: In the anti social areas, it is a normal reaction for lynching to take place, if police do not act. One can only tolerate lawlessness only for so long! One reason why I had to leave my own home, in UK, was that I knew, my home was not getting the protection from anti social behaviour, the next step in my mind was to kill, the people responsible, after repeated window smashing.

I'm just lucky that I never carried out my thoughts..but it was a very costly experience, watching my home depreciate over 15 years of local authority policies, and policing priorites!

Bitterness I have for the UK, no doubt, but since I made the choice to put two fingers up at the system, and look after my own life, the bitterness rescinds with time, to indifference, my family are all that matter and we can adapt anywhere!

In Northern Ireland, they still deal, with criminals in a harsh and brutal way, of beatings and knee capings, the product of over 30 years of war, where the criminals take advantage of the situation, and the blame is shared on warring fractions.

What is kind of surreal, is that many people around the world have to live on the brink of these societies, and yet never see or feel, what is going on, in their own backyard, because they are not effected by it!

Plavt
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4289
Joined: Wed, 18 May 2005
Location: United Kingdom

Postby Plavt » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 3:52 pm

rt160177 wrote:Was just curious as that is the law in the uk. You can own a shotgun, rifle or hand gun but the hand gun has to be kept at the shooting range. Each type of gun has it's own licance as well and you have to jusfify why you need to own a gun.



Incorrect, you can own a shot-gun or air gun but hand guns are banned except for use by the police or military.

sprite
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 223
Joined: Wed, 08 Aug 2007

Postby sprite » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 3:59 pm

rt160177 wrote:I believe that there are as much guns per person in Canada as there in the USA but less gun crime, therefore it is people (a very small minority) not guns that are the root cause like SMS said.


I said the same thing, just not with the good ol' farm boy twang. Whatever the reasoning, too many guns are falling into the hands of the wrong people in the US.

Plavt
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4289
Joined: Wed, 18 May 2005
Location: United Kingdom

Postby Plavt » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 4:05 pm

sprite wrote: Whatever the reasoning, too many guns are falling into the hands of the wrong people in the US.


This is the problem in any country. In Britain and other countries owning a gun by legal means is quite difficult but criminals don't get them by legal means therefore outright bans do not and cannot work.

Seems to me whenever there is concern about an issue, such as terrorism, falsely claiming benefit, keeping a dangerous dog etc. stricter laws largely penalize the innocent. :(

User avatar
ksl
Governor
Governor
Posts: 6005
Joined: Mon, 19 Jul 2004
Location: Singapore
Contact:

Postby ksl » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 4:29 pm

Plavt wrote:
rt160177 wrote:Was just curious as that is the law in the uk. You can own a shotgun, rifle or hand gun but the hand gun has to be kept at the shooting range. Each type of gun has it's own licance as well and you have to jusfify why you need to own a gun.



Incorrect, you can own a shot-gun or air gun but hand guns are banned except for use by the police or military.


I think you maybe wrong there Plavt, because they do have competition shooting, although I'm not positive on the laws in UK any longer. The Bisley shooting contest, is also for pistol, but there are restrictions on gun powder and muzzle velocity, you can purchase pistols on the second link

It is always the case, that the innocent law abiding citizens get banned! It still doesn't stop the criminal element...I believe that most politicians are just plain ignorant of the facts, along with the people that are screaming ban guns, normally victims of gun crimes.

Our UK laws are a pathetic reflection of the people who where voted in to represent the people....all they really care about is scoring points, publicity from the majority! Its a f g disgraceful political agenda, politicains have, the majority are ignorant self egoistic idiots with no common sense, creating a mass of bureaucratic red tape, and the wasting of public funds on political point collecting, the UK is very badly managed in many departments, with incompetent power hungry ideologists, that can't see the light of day, because of their theoretic backgrounds.

It is a well known fact these days in the work place, government, and also in the military, that promotion is based on theoretic education qualifications and service length, rather than the ability to do the job.

Its a bloody circus, and i have seen some of my comrades, that have also made Regimental Sgt Majors, to qualify for pension pay outs, based on education and length of service rather than ability, the police force is even worse, and I get that from serving policeman, ex forces, with experience.

So there is no doubt in my mind, that big mistakes are being made, in all departments, probably because of the European laws, employment laws, and human right laws, but the biggest offenders are the politicians, who use the gun laws for scoring points, one needs to follow the chain of events, and the process, of being appointed in high positions of authority to see where the weaknesses are!

The damage is already showing in the management of the Country, its all political misused power in the UK, because once voted in, it's not at all easy to get them out, before their term of office is finished, and alot of damage can be done in one term! Although I know it seems a little off topic, it is all related to commonsense V's political point scoring, and we can see who is winning! It shouldn't be allowed to even be entertained in the politcal arena...guns are a human right to be carried by law abiding citizens...otherwise, they should stop the manufacturing altogether!

I am adamant about my freedoms, to fish, shoot, survive and live from the land, in my own primative manner, if I do so wish, my choice not a governments! You can make laws, and I can break them at my own risk, like every other criminal does...or one can use commonsense to prevail.

We know courts do not use commonsense!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPuxztCl_aQ

http://www.guntrader.co.uk/GunsForSale/

My wife keeps telling me, about crossing the road on red, I say there are no cars for god sake! Have you ever worked out, how much time one can spend stood at traffic lights, over a lifetime? To force the issue is wrong, I'm over 18,

I take it as a warning that there is a danger. But there is also a danger crossing on green! I would prefer to cross, when there are no cars!
Last edited by ksl on Mon, 10 Dec 2007 5:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
rt160177
Member
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu, 18 Jan 2007
Location: Singapore

Postby rt160177 » Mon, 10 Dec 2007 4:53 pm

Plavt wrote:
rt160177 wrote:Was just curious as that is the law in the uk. You can own a shotgun, rifle or hand gun but the hand gun has to be kept at the shooting range. Each type of gun has it's own licance as well and you have to jusfify why you need to own a gun.



Incorrect, you can own a shot-gun or air gun but hand guns are banned except for use by the police or military.


My mistake, I forgot hand guns were banned after Dunblane.

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


  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests