Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tucson and Aurora … yet nothing on gun control - Page 11

Kestrel · 26th November 2012, 07:18 AM

Originally Posted by BStrong

I'm skeptical of self reporting of firearms possession, and different studies have come up with different figures:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/se...hest-1993.aspx

The one year bump in 2012 poll results is rather odd. But it may give us a clue why Gallup predicted that Romney would sweep into office this year.

Kestrel · 26th November 2012, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

What Swiss gun numbers and crime level show is just how much the USA has got it wrong in its attitude to guns.

One key difference is the response when you ask Swiss residents why they own guns. The top reasons are being in the Army followed by hunting and sport. Only a few respond that they own firearms for protection. In the US, personal protection is second only to hunting as a reason for owning firearms.

Giz · 26th November 2012, 08:25 AM

Originally Posted by Nessie

Football deaths in the UK, Ibrox, Bradford, Hillsborough have all resulted in major reconstructions of football grounds to make them safer. That is the same reaction to the firearms massacres at Hungerford and Dumblane.

So football and firearms where it goes horribly wrong results in action to reduce deaths.

No, a similar reaction would have been to largely ban football stadiums.

Nessie · 26th November 2012, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by Giz

No, a similar reaction would have been to largely ban football stadiums.

No a similar reaction would be to ban certain designs of steps (Ibrox), wooden stands (Bradford) and fencing round pitches (Hillsborough). Just as Hungerford resulted in the ban of multiple shot weapons and Dumblane handguns.

So the whole of football and the whole of shooting were not banned, just the bits that went horribly wrong and both sports continue to this day.

26th November 2012, 10:04 AM	#404
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,783	Originally Posted by Giz No, a similar reaction would have been to largely ban football stadiums. No a similar reaction would be to ban certain designs of steps (Ibrox), wooden stands (Bradford) and fencing round pitches (Hillsborough). Just as Hungerford resulted in the ban of multiple shot weapons and Dumblane handguns. So the whole of football and the whole of shooting were not banned, just the bits that went horribly wrong and both sports continue to this day.
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

26th November 2012, 07:18 AM	#401
Kestrel Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: DM79 Posts: 4,203	Originally Posted by BStrong I'm skeptical of self reporting of firearms possession, and different studies have come up with different figures: http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/se...hest-1993.aspx The one year bump in 2012 poll results is rather odd. But it may give us a clue why Gallup predicted that Romney would sweep into office this year.

26th November 2012, 07:23 AM	#402
Kestrel Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: DM79 Posts: 4,203	Originally Posted by Nessie What Swiss gun numbers and crime level show is just how much the USA has got it wrong in its attitude to guns. One key difference is the response when you ask Swiss residents why they own guns. The top reasons are being in the Army followed by hunting and sport. Only a few respond that they own firearms for protection. In the US, personal protection is second only to hunting as a reason for owning firearms.

26th November 2012, 08:25 AM	#403
Giz Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: UK/US Posts: 3,420	Originally Posted by Nessie Football deaths in the UK, Ibrox, Bradford, Hillsborough have all resulted in major reconstructions of football grounds to make them safer. That is the same reaction to the firearms massacres at Hungerford and Dumblane. So football and firearms where it goes horribly wrong results in action to reduce deaths. No, a similar reaction would have been to largely ban football stadiums.