Why can’t America ban automatic weapons?

[MaryPoppinsPenguins]

I don’t get it. I honestly don’t. After Sandy Hook that should have been enough... statistics speak for themselves.

Why? What don’t I get?

Why don't they just ban bullets? They wouldn't even have to amend the constitution.

No I don't think the guy in Florida could possibly be accused of "messing about".

Kursk I've lived in Reading and never came across any violence at any time. A nice quiet peaceful place.

All these are entirely UK legal guns. (And they aren't BB guns or air rifles either.)

How a gun looks doesn't define lethality or if it should be banned or not. Saying 'ban assualt rifles' or 'ban Ar-15's' isn't as straight forward as you may think, you have to know exactly what you are banning.

A self-fulfilling prophecy- that was the term I was looking for.

The arguments that the pro gun lobby bust out to shut down debate are mind blowing.

That it's in 'poor taste' to discuss gun control in the aftermath of a shooting. WTAF?!?! I can't think of anything that's in worse taste than failing to take preventative measures for the future.

And the endless, endless whataboutery. Well illustrated on this thread. Yes, other countries have crime. No other country bar the states has anything like the scale of mass school shootings.

I'm not sure it's worth arguing with them. The pro-gun lobby think that school shootings are a price worth paying for their 'right' to bear arms, refusing to take even the smallest steps to control ownership.

Most people outside the US simply cannot wrap their heads around this, but it's clearly a deeply entrenched national myth. I don't think I'll ever understand it.

I've also lived in Newcastle upon Tyne and North London, again, no violent crime. I'm 57 and never been burgled or robbed. Obviously one hears of the odd burgalry or mugging but not enough to induce a state of fear.

You can't buy real Kinder eggs (the ones that we have in Europe) in the US. Every year CBP issues warnings that anyone who tries to bring them in will be fined.

Ah Somerset, that hotbed of gangland crime

I feel this whole thread is in bad taste. Every time there is a shooting tragedy in my home country everyone and their mother wants to use it as an excuse to push their anti gun agenda

I don't think anyone is "anti gun", that is mislabeling people's genuine concern.
We are asking, when is it appropriate for an individual to own a gun? When do the risks to the public outweigh the benefits to that individual?
I'm sure you must recognise that some people shouldn't be allowed to own a gun, eg those with a history of violence, some severe mental illnesses, the right to own a gun is not absolute.
We are saying, are these regular shootings of children worth it for individuals to be able to buy guns easily?
Perhaps you think that is worth it, that is a strange perspective to us, coming from a country where we don't have these regular large scale murders of children, it just seems inconceivable that many Americans consider that a reasonable price to pay for being able to purchase weapons easily.

Of course their are circumstances where people buy guns in the UK. People who hunt animals for sport for example. You need to apply for a license, I think you need the approval of a doctor and a police officer, to me those are reasonable steps to protect the public from people who are at risk of violence.

If you live in rural America and are at risk of bear attacks please have a gun, nobody is saying there should be zero guns. But if you are an angry teenager living in an urban area why on earth do you need access to guns, does the risk to the public not outweigh the slight loss of freedom denying easy gun access to that individual would entail?

At my high school there was an angry teenage boy, he was temporarily suspended from school for poor behaviour (nothing that would trigger a criminal record) and never went back as parents blamed the school. Soon after he attacked one person, seriously injured them and was sent to prison, the victim recovered. I'm very very glad that he didn't have access to guns, he could have hurt many more people.

Monger - nor, in many states, fireworks for private use. Only large events with the appropriate licence can purchase fireworks

@Biggreygoose
Those weapons are only legal in the UK to licensed users and believe me, getting one of those licenses is difficult and is then constantly reviewed.

There is violent crime wherever you live but not on the mass scale that you see in the US of which the vast majority is gun crime. I had to live in the US for a period of time as my DDs father was stationed there with the military. We returned to the UK when she had to start school. Even then, 15 years ago, mass shootings in US schools were commonplace and certainly not a situation I'd put my own child in through choice.

Kursk
I have lived in the countryside (Somerset, The Fens, Co. durham) and the centre of cities in the uk (bristol, Newcastle) and visited some of the rougher areas of many towns and cities through work that certainly have some significant problems. I have never ever felt the need to carry a gun to 'keep me safe'
We had a break in to our property whilst we were at home (property damaged but nobody hurt, neighbours saw them, informed us, we called the police & shouted out that we had but stayed out of direct harm, scared them off, druggies looking for stuff to steal) - I think the whole thing would have ended in tragedy if we or our neighbours had guns, as it was we were shaken up, had some property damage, spent a morning talking to the police and reinforced our locks and lights, police caught them, they were prosecuted. Nobody was injured or killed.
I still don't feel the need for guns and actually am very happy that they don't play a part in our lives and that there are many many more options in this world than to shoot people to 'keep my family safe' - in the case above - moving family out of direct harms way and calling the police.

It has become part of the status quo and normal, in America, for children to be murdered, shot to death, en masse almost every week.

And American politicians have nothing to say about it. It’s not the right time to debate it or do anything about it at all. ‘There are no words’ because nobody wants to say the truth.

The truth that, in America, the right of the INDIVIDUAL to have a gun is MORE IMPORTANT than the a child’s right to LIFE. MORE IMPORTANT than the country’s own citizen’s lives.

That is mind boggling to me, I cannot understand it. And neither can the rest of the world quite frankly. WTF is WRONG with you???

There are two classes of gun ownership in the UK.

Section 2 firearms are shotguns with a barrel no shorter than 24" and if magazine fed capable of holding no more than 3 shots.

Section 1 is basically everything else with a few minor exceptions not really worth bothering about.

For a S1 liscence you need to demonstrate 'good reason' for owning one. So, hunting, pest control, target shooting etc. Self defense is not a good reason. You also need to demonstrate that you have somewhere to use them. The amount of ammunition you can hold is controlled and is agreed at the time of liscence application. Records are kept and police have to be informed of every transaction involving a firearm. (Sale, Transfer or loan). Ammunition has to be stored under a separate lock to your guns. The number and calibre of rifle are specified on your licence, so you can't just go out and buy 20.

Section 2 is a little less controlled. You don't have to give good reason, but the police will expect you to have a clear idea of what you want to use them for. Again, self defense isn't allowed. Once you have your ticket you can own as many as you like. Police still need to be informed of all transactions (unless a loan to another liscence holder is under 72 hours). The only limits on ammunition are to explosives storage regs. That's about 10,000 cartridges.

For both S1 and S2 you need to submit a form, be interviewed by the police and agree to let the police have access to your medical records. A marker is placed on your medical records so if there are problems in future your Dr can inform the police. The police will review the security of your guns to ensure they are secure and no one else other than the licence holder has access.

Sentencing guidelines for firearms offenses which includes breaking any of the above, specify a custodial sentence of a minimum 5 years

Both licenses last 5 years. At which point you go through all that again.

It's a few hoops, but not as difficult or restrictive as it sounds. Unsuprisingly UK gun owners tend to be very sober and responsible individuals. Any infraction, even if it never gets to court will probably end up with your ticket being revoked which you may or may not get back.

In the US my BiL gripes about a 3 day cooling period for a hand gun. Rifles and shotguns are over the counter items......

@hodge

I know. I have S1 and S2.

The truth that, in America, the right of the INDIVIDUAL to have a gun is MORE IMPORTANT than the a child’s right to LIFE. MORE IMPORTANT than the country’s own citizen’s lives.

There really isn't any getting round this and all the arguments and distractions in the world don't take away from it.

It's very hard for outsiders to process this, but then I don't understand the mentality of ISIS fighters either.

@Cavemum To be fair, have you ever been to Bridgwater?

My point was that they never address the problem. It’s always an isolated incident according to the NRA or Trump.

Sorry, Believeitornot, I should have made my opinion clearer. I agree with you.

It's bloody ridiculous that they claim, time after time, that the shooter was "mentally ill" and yet do nothing to stop similar things happening in future.

Crap pressed submit too soon.

They are only available to licenced users (bit tacicool for my tastes, but whatever), but people shouting for bans on certain things without really understanding whats they are asking doesn't help.

On a more serious note, I don't understand the self defence angle. A Kevlar vest is self defence, a gun is only a defence if the body of it stops a bullet. The aim of self defence is to get away, not to muck about shooting at people. I understand having a gun license due to wildlife etc, but just that, a regulated monitored firearm. Even the American police are gun-happy. For instance Philandro Castle would be alive if the police used a taser instead of a gun, why on earth not tase to disarm at close quarters? It's all completely mad.

The NRA is a very powerful body with ties to many politicians...

^ ^ money money money

@Nibledbydicks

I posted this earlier, but the NRA gave almost $6 million to Republican Congressional campaigns in 2016.

The NRA is a very powerful body with ties to many politicians...

But at the end of the day it is people who vote. Gun control in the USA is how it is because the majority of the population is OK with things the way they are. PP are correct - that's all there is to it at the end of the day.