Here we go again........

[Hauptman]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/santa-monica-s ... ml#Xk87hys

If you read the article, it gives the impression that after offing two alleged relatives, he went on a killing spree, the word "several" being used when it was apparently just two others who died. All very sad, but another example of the "meedja" desperately trying to demonise gun ownership.

Would psychological profiling before granting permission help?..........Probably not. With a population of 250 million, there's likely to be a lot of epsilon minus nutters out there who are completely off the radar.
I think this is borne out by the current bulk buying frenzy of arms and ammunition by the "citizens".

H/man

[phaedra1106]

Unfortunately legislation doesn't work, even here in the UK, after The Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 ban on semi-auto rifles the amount of firearms offences steadily rose to almost double over the next 4 years. Again, after the introduction of the hand gun ban (Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997) firearms offences (which had started falling) almost doubled over the next 2 years.

This of course shows how completely ineffective both of these pieces of legislation were, we already know the amount of legally held firearms (here in the UK) used in crimes is miniscule but that's never stopped a politician from trying to make themselves look good to joe public.

[IainWR]

Of course, one has to be really careful about crime statistics. If there are more laws about guns, more laws will get broken. If the police choose to go looking for offences, more offences will be found. How many of these offences were technical / administrative breaches of the Acts involving otherwise legal firearms? A better indicator would be the incidence of some of the more overtly criminal offences - possession of a firearm with intent, carrying in a public place without lawful authority, unlawful wounding, homicide. The last is statistically the most consistent as the reporting rate is close to 100% and the definition doesn't change on a whim. Fortunately, it's so rare as to be of limited statistical validity.

[Chuck]

nothing to do with any buying spree, just a nutjob who was known to be considering harming people being allowed to roam. I thought guns were more or less banned In California anyway- I know murder certainly is.

THE MEDIA AS USUAL WILL TALK OUT THEIR ASSES TO DEMONISE ANY GUN and hype this to the highest levels. IF IT HAPPENS NEAR A school it will be IN a school. Why do you think he ran there _ GUN FREE ZONE! Darn Caps lock.

[Blu]

Just a thought, we're "not" supposed to judge all Muslims by the acts of a few "crazies".
But the acts of a few American “crazies” is enough to judge all Americans who own guns! Just saying.

Blu

[Chuck]

clapclap clapclap clapclap :goodjob:

[froggy]

clapclap Blu !!

[Oddbod]

Just a thought, we're "not" supposed to judge all Muslims by the acts of a few "crazies".
But the acts of a few American “crazies” is enough to judge all Americans who own guns! Just saying.

Blu

That's why I spend my time surrounded by "gun nuts" on your side of the Pond - I feel much safer than over here.

[Chuck]

+1

[dave_303]

ITV Tonight (last nights) covered US gun culture and tried to horrify people yet again. Doing the usual scaremongering, everyone who owns a gun is a nutter stories.

Even had one family who lost their daughter, son and daughter were playing, son accidentally knocked over a loaded rifle, it went off and killed the little girl. The reporter claimed he was a good parent for not blaming the son, the stupid t*@t should be blaming himself for leaving a loaded rifle within reach of 2 young children