Australia is a weird case. I have discussed gun laws with them before and it was interesting. First, they are a highly urban population, only a very small percentage actually live in the bush. And there they are allowed to own rifles and shotguns. The urban people did not see much need for guns so most of them took the buyout. Gun violence is higher than expected however, drugs have become a bigger problem over there, and with the drugs come smuggled firearms. So once again, the criminals still have theirs.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
ramage wrote: FNP,
To clarify, you would ban all semi-automatic firearms including shotguns and pistols?
Yes.
Issues associated with loopholes, definitions, and exceptions make any other approach untenable from a law enforcement perspective or less effective in reducing the threat of mass shootings.
ramage wrote: Dr. Sher's Atlantic essay may tug at the strings of your heart, but it is woefully short on fact. It is the cartridge type, not the pistol or rifle that causes bodily injury. I would refer you to the following,
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022534705623087
"BALLISTICS FOR PHYSICIANS: MYTHS ABOUT WOUND BALLISTICS AND GUNSHOT INJURIES
Wound ballistics is a difficult subject. The behavior of all bullets is unpredictable but the specific effect of high velocity projectiles has been a particular source of confusion in the literature. This confusion has resulted in the likely incorrect conclusion that all high velocity wounds require massive débridement. We reviewed the entirety of the literature on this subject and concluded that high velocity weapons do not reliably create massive wounds, and judicious débridement and staged explorations may be the best treatment method for these patients.
Conclusions
For the majority of high velocity gunshot wounds, especially military rifles that generally fire a projectile that is meant to stay intact after impact, wound severity can be limited, even much less than that from a civilian rifle, shotgun or handgun. Judicious use of débridement during surgical exploration limits the extent of iatrogenic injury in the surgical care of these patients."
Unfortunately your link associated with the Matt Martin comment sends me back to the Atlantic Article of Dr. Sher. Thus I have no way to determine the authenticity of the comment.
Was the comment a response to the article? Was it trolling?
I can assure you that it's not trolling, as that would kind of be hard for me to do here. When posting multiple links to stories, the previous link gets automatically populated into the link box, I simply forgot to make sure it had copied the new one I thought I'd pasted in there, my apologies. It should be fixed now so you can read the 2nd article!
Thank you for this journal article. I wish I could read the rest so I could delve in m
If we're going to any money solving this complex problem, and we all agree it's a complex people problem and much of it has to do with the students' mental and behavioral health, don't these ideas make much more sense? See video and article below:
Video:
www.facebook.com/UTLAnow/videos/19561265...vL5-XWn05NIf5MBnNhaA
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
FPN,
In that you want to ban all semi-automatic firearms, does that include police, private security guards, waterfowl hunters, upland game hunters? Also how do you propose to take these weapons away from criminals, i.e. gangs in Chicago?
ramage wrote: FPN,
In that you want to ban all semi-automatic firearms, does that include police, private security guards, waterfowl hunters, upland game hunters? Also how do you propose to take these weapons away from criminals, i.e. gangs in Chicago?
Controlling semi-automatic firearms under the National Firearms Act of 1934 wouldn't "ban" them for those who can show they have a valid requirement for them.
I seem to get along OK with my O/U Zoli 12 ga when it comes to bird hunting. A bolt action sporterized 8mm Mauser has worked just fine for big game hunting. I haven't ever needed a semi auto long gun or hand gun for any kind of hunting, or trap, or skeet, or target shooting.
The NFA over time allowed law enforcement to get the full auto weapons off the gangster frequented streets of Chicago in the late 1930's. It took time but weapons like the Thompson Model 1921 ended up back in the hands of the military and law enforcement where it belonged. The NFA has worked pretty well to enable law enforcement to manage full automatic weapons and destructive devices. ATF reported 630,019 registered machine guns in the US in 2017 [not exactly banned] and of those over half million machine guns, only three registered weapons have been involved in the commission of a crime since the 1930's. No machine guns have been used in mass shootings. Something about the overall NFA control process works. It isn't air tight, but it works.
Including semi-automatic weapons in the provisions of the NFA isn't an overnight fix ... it took decades to get us in the jam we're in where sending your kids to school, attending public gatherings, going to church, or going to theaters is a concern. It won't fix the gun homicide and suicide problem but it will greatly reduce the probability of mass casualties in public shooting scenarios and give law enforcement a better edge when dealing with active shooter scenarios.
FNP,
From what you posted, a hunter must use the firearms that you prefer or none at all.
Well, onto the semi-automatic pistols, can I assume that you don't have one therefore no one else should possess a pistol?
If your link is supposed to be news, send me something from a news station, not an editorial station. Fox News is a joke, bought and paid for by the right wing. Thanks!
Carrie wrote: If your link is supposed to be news, send me something from a news station, not an editorial station. Fox News is a joke, bought and paid for by the right wing. Thanks!
Really. If you are referring to the comments of a bereaved father who's daughter was shot down in a preventable school shooting that I posted, then you are a heartless monster.
ramage wrote: FNP,
From what you posted, a hunter must use the firearms that you prefer or none at all.
Well, onto the semi-automatic pistols, can I assume that you don't have one therefore no one else should possess a pistol?
Ramage,
My point was that i do not believe there is any good reason for the civilian population at large to have semi-automatic firearms and that controlling them would significantly reduce the probability of mass shootings. It's not about my personal firearms preferences. If it was , I would say that at one time or another I have owned semi-automatic long guns, a M1911 .45 and a High Standard Supermatic Trophy .22 [which I still have but would gladly turn in if a law was passed including semi-automatic firearms under the NFA].
When posting multiple links to stories, the previous link gets automatically populated into the link box, I simply forgot to make sure it had copied the new one I thought I'd pasted in there, my apologies. It should be fixed now so you can read the 2nd article!
