Forgive me , I'm English .

"Teapot massacre" just doesn't have the same ring to it. Probably never a box office hit.

Actually Levina , we had our own serial killer here in the 70's , Peter Sutcliffe AKA The Yorkshire Ripper. His modus operandi was with a hammer , then disenboweling his Female victims . He struck fear into the West Yorkshire community at the time.
He was eventually apprehended and convicted of multiple murders , of which he is serving a whole life tariff.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #18882574
We don't fear guns per se. But we do fear how they can be used and with good reason, as the non-stop stream of mass shootings in the USA proves.

That's flawed logic. Darts and cars, a hammer, a teapot, yes, anything can be used to kill other people. There will always be crazy people and tragic accidents happen too sometimes. Difference is that none of those items were designed to kill. Guns are. It's their very raison d'être. That's why they're so good at it. I mean, I never heard of a mass murder with darts or with a hammer.

You obviously don't like firearms, I respect that. OTOH, a lot of people do like firearms. I'm going to ask you to respect that.
Something for you to read while you're relaxing, and respecting other people rights.
https://www.investors.​com …etting-the-data-straight/
This article tells how statistics have been skewed in the past.

Causes of death are relative, and often certain causes of death are manipulated more than others to drive an agenda that, when properly compared, tend to deflate that agenda. Here in the US, gun control is a big issue and often the media, government and advocacy groups tend to appeal to the emotional side of their particular issues while minimizing certain facts. For example, people are more emotionally affected by gun violence than they are over heart disease simply because of its violent nature. However, statistically, heart disease is a far more deadlier predator than any gun crazy wacko on a shooting spree. Yet, for some reason, people are not up in arms about the state of our national health and the underfunded research or manipulative nature of drug companies who would rather keep people sick than find a cure.

For a real perspective on gun violence that leads to death all you have to do is look at this report from 2017.

The police & "Gun Free Zones" will protect us, right? Well, probably not. It's not their job.

The Supreme Court (DeShaney v. Winnebago County Dept. of Social Services, 1989) ruled that you have no right to state protection.
Two other Supreme Court decisions have held that the police exist for the benefit of the community and not for individuals. If they're too busy or don't have backup, you're on your own. All governments, throughout history, adhere to the same policy denying that the responsibility goes along with the power entrusted to them. It's known as "sovereign immunity".
Basically, if your luck runs out their job is to draw chalk lines around the corpses and interview survivors. Lucky us!

In the 12/20/18 in the Detroit Free Press...
Headline: Judge: Police, schools had no duty to protect Fla. shooting victims
A lawyer representing 15 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High students says he is “exploring all of our options” after a federal judge ruled that police and school officials had no legal duty to protect students during a Valentine’s Day rampage at the Parkland, Florida, school that left 17 people dead. The suit filed by lawyer Kristoffer Budhram claimed the school district and county either have a policy of allowing “killers to walk through a school killing people without being stopped” or failed to adequately train employees to respond. But Judge Beth Bloom dismissed the suit in a ruling filed last week, saying that “for such a duty to exist on the part of defendants, plaintiffs would have to be considered to be in custody.

"Gun Free Zones" are as effective as prohibition was in the past & the war on drugs is now. The only person that you can rely on to protect you is yourself.

-Duck- wrote in post #18882606
Causes of death are relative, and often certain causes of death are manipulated more than others to drive an agenda that, when properly compared, tend to deflate that agenda. Here in the US, gun control is a big issue and often the media, government and advocacy groups tend to appeal to the emotional side of their particular issues while minimizing certain facts. For example, people are more emotionally affected by gun violence than they are over heart disease simply because of its violent nature. However, statistically, heart disease is a far more deadlier predator than any gun crazy wacko on a shooting spree. Yet, for some reason, people are not up in arms about the state of our national health and the underfunded research or manipulative nature of drug companies who would rather keep people sick than find a cure.

For a real perspective on gun violence that leads to death all you have to do is look at this report from 2017.

Hosted photo: posted by -Duck- in
./showthread.php?p=188​82606&i=i83488621
forum: People

But heart disease doesn't kill 58 people within a 10 minute period at a music festival.

cctvfitter wrote in post #18882602
Actually Levina , we had our own serial killer here in the 70's , Peter Sutcliffe AKA The Yorkshire Ripper.

I heard of him. But as I said there will always be crazy people doing unspeakable things, no matter what.

Ballen Photo wrote in post #18882603
You obviously don't like firearms, I respect that. OTOH, a lot of people do like firearms. I'm going to ask you to respect that.
Something for you to read while you're relaxing, and respecting other people rights.
https://www.investors.​com …etting-the-data-straight/
This article tells how statistics have been skewed in the past.

Fair enough. But I do want to say that I have no problem with people liking a gun for target practice, sport shooting etc. There are people in my country who do that and they are allowed to own a gun. But the rules are strict. People have to be a member of a gun club for at least a year before they can apply for a permit. Then they are evaluated. Are they mentally stable? How's their home situation. Do they have a steady job. Once people do get a permit they are revisited and reviewed every year to see if anything changed.

My problem is that in the USA people can own guns regardless. Even trying to make the rules more strict to weed out those that should not be allowed to own guns is not negotiable. My problem is that every Tom, Dick and Harry can buy a gun, as a result of which too many innocent people have died. My problem is that yes, I can understand sport shooters, I can understand people in the Midwest wanting a defence against coyotes, rattlesnakes and what have you on their lands, but I do not understand somebody in New York city having (semi-) automatic rifles. I mean, to me there is a difference.

So yes, I do respect your love of firearms. But I very much question the US's second amendment. I know that for a lot of Americans this is like swearing in a church, but it is an amendment, right. It's not written in stone.

PhotosGuy wrote in post #18882615
The only person that you can rely on to protect you is yourself.

I think it's really sad that you live in a society where this is so.

As to maybe having an agenda. I don't. I'm not an American so I have no stake in it either way. It's just my opinion.

This thread went south fast.
Thread closed.