Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

ShumaGorath wrote:

It's easiest to kill with explosives or gas, really. Both of which have historical precedent (guy fawkes for example).

Fawkes and his co-conspirators didn't actually kill anyone....

Albatross wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

It's easiest to kill with explosives or gas, really. Both of which have historical precedent (guy fawkes for example).

Fawkes and his co-conspirators didn't actually kill anyone....

I think his point was that it was more the attempt rather than results.

Mentally, I would imagine it is harder to gut someone on a sword than shoot them a couple of steps away, even if the result isn't a fatality.

The perp was a member of a shooting club, which explains how he got the weapons and ammo. He had previous trouble with the police in regards to his possession of firearms in the past, but wasn't prosecuted.

He left a farewell note in his car, at the house of his mother and a note in his car claiming he planted three bombs in other shopping centres. These have proven to be false alarms.

It's in Dutch, but has a picture of the perp: http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/3722/Schietpartij-Alphen-a-d-Rijn/article/detail/577773/2011/04/10/Verslagenheid-na-bloedbad.dhtml

BrookM wrote:The perp was a member of a shooting club, which explains how he got the weapons and ammo. He had previous trouble with the police in regards to his possession of firearms in the past, but wasn't prosecuted.

So hopefully we can all agree that the 'gun control' laws in this case didn't actually stop the crime from being committed. Maybe we need more laws

biccat wrote:

BrookM wrote:The perp was a member of a shooting club, which explains how he got the weapons and ammo. He had previous trouble with the police in regards to his possession of firearms in the past, but wasn't prosecuted.

So hopefully we can all agree that the 'gun control' laws in this case didn't actually stop the crime from being committed. Maybe we need more laws

Please note that this happened in the Netherlands, a country already heavily regulating the possession of personal firearms.

BrookM wrote:

biccat wrote:

BrookM wrote:The perp was a member of a shooting club, which explains how he got the weapons and ammo. He had previous trouble with the police in regards to his possession of firearms in the past, but wasn't prosecuted.

So hopefully we can all agree that the 'gun control' laws in this case didn't actually stop the crime from being committed. Maybe we need more laws

Please note that this happened in the Netherlands, a country already heavily regulating the possession of personal firearms.

I see my post wasn't entirely clear.

Gun laws aren't an absolute protection against someone going crazy with a firearm. Usually in the US, when someone does something illegal, the first step proposed is to make more things illegal.

biccat wrote:

BrookM wrote:

biccat wrote:

BrookM wrote:The perp was a member of a shooting club, which explains how he got the weapons and ammo. He had previous trouble with the police in regards to his possession of firearms in the past, but wasn't prosecuted.

So hopefully we can all agree that the 'gun control' laws in this case didn't actually stop the crime from being committed. Maybe we need more laws

Please note that this happened in the Netherlands, a country already heavily regulating the possession of personal firearms.

I see my post wasn't entirely clear.

Gun laws aren't an absolute protection against someone going crazy with a firearm. Usually in the US, when someone does something illegal, the first step proposed is to make more things illegal.

I doubt they can tack on even more laws around here, it is already so heavily regulated that firearm possession is a real rarity around here. I'm sure the big wigs will toss up a few extra ideas, maybe an extra mental check every few years, but in all honesty I doubt they can tack anything extra on to the already massive pile of laws surrounding firearm possession.

BrookM wrote:The perp was a member of a shooting club, which explains how he got the weapons and ammo. He had previous trouble with the police in regards to his possession of firearms in the past, but wasn't prosecuted.

He left a farewell note in his car, at the house of his mother and a note in his car claiming he planted three bombs in other shopping centres. These have proven to be false alarms.

It's in Dutch, but has a picture of the perp: http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/3722/Schietpartij-Alphen-a-d-Rijn/article/detail/577773/2011/04/10/Verslagenheid-na-bloedbad.dhtml

Ah, I remember something similar to this happend in Germany a couple of years ago too. The news stories are still fairly vague as to what he actually had. Automatic weapon to me = submachine gun (or anything that allows fully automatic fire with one trigger pull). I'm sure there will be more details.

Terrible tragedy either way.

biccat wrote:

BrookM wrote:

biccat wrote:

BrookM wrote:The perp was a member of a shooting club, which explains how he got the weapons and ammo. He had previous trouble with the police in regards to his possession of firearms in the past, but wasn't prosecuted.

So hopefully we can all agree that the 'gun control' laws in this case didn't actually stop the crime from being committed. Maybe we need more laws

Please note that this happened in the Netherlands, a country already heavily regulating the possession of personal firearms.

I see my post wasn't entirely clear.

Gun laws aren't an absolute protection against someone going crazy with a firearm. Usually in the US, when someone does something illegal, the first step proposed is to make more things illegal.

In this case (and the Dunblane Massacre) the gun owners had been in trouble over their legal possession of weapons, and arguably ought to have lost their licences before they got to the point of massacring people.

Such an option does not exist in the USA, broadly speaking.

Kilkrazy wrote:

biccat wrote:

BrookM wrote:

biccat wrote:

BrookM wrote:The perp was a member of a shooting club, which explains how he got the weapons and ammo. He had previous trouble with the police in regards to his possession of firearms in the past, but wasn't prosecuted.

So hopefully we can all agree that the 'gun control' laws in this case didn't actually stop the crime from being committed. Maybe we need more laws

Please note that this happened in the Netherlands, a country already heavily regulating the possession of personal firearms.

I see my post wasn't entirely clear.

Gun laws aren't an absolute protection against someone going crazy with a firearm. Usually in the US, when someone does something illegal, the first step proposed is to make more things illegal.

In this case (and the Dunblane Massacre) the gun owners had been in trouble over their legal possession of weapons, and arguably ought to have lost their licences before they got to the point of massacring people.

Such an option does not exist in the USA, broadly speaking.

Nope, If you have a criminal record or any metal deficiencies, you cannot legally own firearms. The only way that the criminals or metally unstable get any weapons here is if they buy them illegally or the bureaucracy hasn't caught up to them yet (in the case of VA Tech and Jared Loughner).

Cho was ordered to do a voluntary psych eval, had he done it, he would have been rejected for his metal instability. The law has since changed in VA, if you have any tendencies towards metal instability, you now have mandatory psych evaluations.

Loughner, who was picked up multiple times by the Pima County Sherrif's offcie for disturbances at school, never had an eval done on him by that same office. He never entered the ATF's database as a loony and was perfectly legal to buy his pistol. What's very odd is that Arizona is one of the more onerous states regarding metal health, if you exhibit any tenedencies, the police can come in and scoop you up to be evaulated.

Where I live, we used to have to get a permit from the Sherrif's office and have a one week waiting period in order to buy a handgun, this expired two years ago and crime rates have receded a little.

Then it is the same in the USA as the UK or Holland.

Perhaps the USA has a much lower rate of criminal activity and mental health problems.

Kilkrazy wrote:Then it is the same in the USA as the UK or Holland.

Perhaps the USA has a much lower rate of criminal activity and mental health problems.

You alluded to a license for gun ownership. Is that a national thing or is it regional in the UK? Every state in the US has different stances regarding ownership.

Stormrider wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Then it is the same in the USA as the UK or Holland.

Perhaps the USA has a much lower rate of criminal activity and mental health problems.

You alluded to a license for gun ownership. Is that a national thing or is it regional in the UK? Every state in the US has different stances regarding ownership.

And then there's the ever popular loophole of the 'Gun Show'.

Kanluwen wrote:
And then there's the ever popular loophole of the 'Gun Show'.

That's controlled by the need to ask for tickets from muscular men in cut-off t-shirts.

Stormrider wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Then it is the same in the USA as the UK or Holland.

Perhaps the USA has a much lower rate of criminal activity and mental health problems.

You alluded to a license for gun ownership. Is that a national thing or is it regional in the UK? Every state in the US has different stances regarding ownership.

National. You have to get a firearms licence to buy a gun legally.

That's what I figured KK, just trying to be sure.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Khornholio wrote:Condolences to the families of the dead. A lot of people worldwide always think this is an American phenomenon (not me.jus' sayin'), but it's some kind of mental breakdown phenomenon.

It's not a phenomenon at all. These things have happened for as long as there have been people. It's a tragedy every time regardless.

But you cant deny it happens at a much higher rate in America then in most other countries, at leat one that keep records of such things.

ColdFire wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Khornholio wrote:Condolences to the families of the dead. A lot of people worldwide always think this is an American phenomenon (not me.jus' sayin'), but it's some kind of mental breakdown phenomenon.

It's not a phenomenon at all. These things have happened for as long as there have been people. It's a tragedy every time regardless.

But you cant deny it happens at a much higher rate in America then in most other countries, at leat one that keep records of such things.

Part of the price we pay in America for being better at everything than anyone else, is that we're also better at bad stuff

ColdFire wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Khornholio wrote:Condolences to the families of the dead. A lot of people worldwide always think this is an American phenomenon (not me.jus' sayin'), but it's some kind of mental breakdown phenomenon.

It's not a phenomenon at all. These things have happened for as long as there have been people. It's a tragedy every time regardless.

But you cant deny it happens at a much higher rate in America then in most other countries, at leat one that keep records of such things.

Is that why our violent crime rate is significantly lower then virtually every country in africa, south america, the middle east and most of asia? Glad to see this kind of nationalist bs is alive and well in the world.

Bromsy wrote:

ColdFire wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Khornholio wrote:Condolences to the families of the dead. A lot of people worldwide always think this is an American phenomenon (not me.jus' sayin'), but it's some kind of mental breakdown phenomenon.

It's not a phenomenon at all. These things have happened for as long as there have been people. It's a tragedy every time regardless.

But you cant deny it happens at a much higher rate in America then in most other countries, at leat one that keep records of such things.

Part of the price we pay in America for being better at everything than anyone else, is that we're also better at bad stuff

I'm not just serious, I'm Double Serious.

dogma wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
And then there's the ever popular loophole of the 'Gun Show'.

That's controlled by the need to ask for tickets from muscular men in cut-off t-shirts.

If only society would take notice.

Safety comes from cut-off t-shirts!

Aren't they looking at a way to seal up that loophole though?

Kanluwen wrote:And then there's the ever popular loophole of the 'Gun Show'.

You mean the "loophole" where gun sellers need to conduct criminal background checks on anyone they sell a gun to, even if it's at a gun show?

Kanluwen wrote:

dogma wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
And then there's the ever popular loophole of the 'Gun Show'.

That's controlled by the need to ask for tickets from muscular men in cut-off t-shirts.

If only society would take notice.

Safety comes from cut-off t-shirts!

Aren't they looking at a way to seal up that loophole though?

Private transactions aren't illegal if both parties are in good standing. That's one place the federal government needs to butt out.

Also, you can legally buy any weapon that was made prior to 1898, it's considered an antique and isn't subject to any federal laws or the filling out of paperwork.

biccat wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And then there's the ever popular loophole of the 'Gun Show'.

You mean the "loophole" where gun sellers need to conduct criminal background checks on anyone they sell a gun to, even if it's at a gun show?

No, I mean the "loophole" where gun sellers at shows are selling guns without criminal background checks.

Kanluwen wrote:

biccat wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And then there's the ever popular loophole of the 'Gun Show'.

You mean the "loophole" where gun sellers need to conduct criminal background checks on anyone they sell a gun to, even if it's at a gun show?

No, I mean the "loophole" where gun sellers at shows are selling guns without criminal background checks.

So they're selling the guns illegally?

Could you please explain how another law would help this situation?

biccat wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

biccat wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And then there's the ever popular loophole of the 'Gun Show'.

You mean the "loophole" where gun sellers need to conduct criminal background checks on anyone they sell a gun to, even if it's at a gun show?

No, I mean the "loophole" where gun sellers at shows are selling guns without criminal background checks.

So they're selling the guns illegally?

Could you please explain how another law would help this situation?

Who says you need a law?

It simply needs better oversight and enforcement of the existing laws.

If only we had some kind of Bureau.

That would be responsible for things like Alcohol, Tobacco, and maybe Firearms.

*sigh* Oh well. My dream can live on in another, I think.

Kanluwen wrote:Who says you need a law?

It simply needs better oversight and enforcement of the existing laws.

If only we had some kind of Bureau.

That would be responsible for things like Alcohol, Tobacco, and maybe Firearms.

*sigh* Oh well. My dream can live on in another, I think.

So when you say "gun show loophole," you really mean "people are breaking the law."

I agree that people acquire guns illegally. But they generally don't acquire guns illegally from a gun show.

biccat wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Who says you need a law?

It simply needs better oversight and enforcement of the existing laws.

If only we had some kind of Bureau.

That would be responsible for things like Alcohol, Tobacco, and maybe Firearms.

*sigh* Oh well. My dream can live on in another, I think.

So when you say "gun show loophole," you really mean "people are breaking the law."

No, when I say "gun show loophole" I mean that "gun shows are a loophole in the system, which requires vendors to essentially police themselves and act on the honor system when it comes to criminal record checks".

Are there vendors who abide by the system in place? Sure.

But there's also individuals who do not--which leads to..."the gun show loophole".

I agree that people acquire guns illegally. But they generally don't acquire guns illegally from a gun show.

Prove it. The ATF and LAPD have said otherwise in many circumstances, as has the DEA.

Kan, if you are an FFL dealer, you must do a background check on anyone buying from you, (unless said weapon is an antique or the buyer has a C&R License) no exceptions.

The people who sell guns without a check are doing so via private transactions. Which aren't illegal or subject to federal jurisdiction. It's not a loophole.