The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

I was rather bemused by the suicide issue too. The Gun Control Network has quoted the argument in the context of this country too on more than one occasion. As one who worked on the railways for several decades, I know to my cost how many depressed people decide to use a train to end it all. In the days of large institutions for the mentally ill, this was a constant source of disruption where such were located close to main railway lines. Also, the on-track suicide rate rose dramatically each year at all locations in the period between the clocks changing from BST to GMT and peaked in the run-up to Christmas.

The obvious answer on the basis of numpty logic is obvious - not only ban guns, but railways and trains too (or run them at 5mph tops so they can stop short of the suicidally inclined), short winter days, and Christmas too.

What really p*** me off in this sort of junk logic is the lack of evidence and proper research. ie (1) Sucides involve guns in some cases. (2) guns therefore cause suicides = (3) ban guns and there won't be sucides. The Americans have done a lot of serious research into various forms of violence involving lethal force (you can understand why!) and come to the conclusion that the availability of 'weapons' is not an issue. A major study into domestic strife that led to murder or serious injury some years back - and not carried out by the NRA anybody involved in the so-called 'gun lobby' - came to the conclusion that the availability of firearms in the average US home played NO part in the levels of assaults. The study said that for one person to murder a spouse, partner or relative in the home, the aggressor had to be in such an over the top mental condition that all normal feelings and rationality were at least temporarily dispensed with and the key factor in weapon choice was PROXIMITY. For instance, people ignored pistols kept in a bedroom when a fight in the kitchen got out of hand and grabbed a knife, axe, hammer or whatever else was nearest.

A lot of this shallow woolly thinking from the antis comes from TV and Hollywood with all their crap simulated on-screen shootings. People who don't think it through believe it's somehow 'easier' to kill your nearest and dearest with a gun than a knife or a hammer, so if you haven't got one to hand, well you'll go off into the garden or loo and sulk. The research says it takes a huge if temporary personality change for the average person to seriously hurt never mind kill anybody else (or themselves for that matter), and they are WAY over the edge when they do it.

Sim G wrote:

Robin128 wrote:That is a terrifying thought...never ever thought it let alone threaten...Good God!

It is, however, I am already planning to tell whatever grunting, non eye contact, long haired slob that my daughter for whom some outlandish idea finds pond life attractive, that I do have guns....... and a shovel....... and access to 385 acres........

And she's not 2 yet!

From........
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 13880.html

Quote........
A gun ban was strongly opposed by the populist, right-wing Swiss People's Party, which organised a referendum last year banning minaret building at mosques. Shooting club owners had complained that the law would have destroyed many of the country's 3,000 gun clubs, which function as key social centres in hundreds of villages.

Another gun control movement by bored middle-class housewives with nothing better to do with their time but to whinge and complain about something they know next to nothing about, what a surprise(!) :roll:

Another gun control movement by bored middle-class housewives with nothing better to do with their time but to whinge and complain about something they know next to nothing about, what a surprise(!)

Delete "NEXT"! They believe their own lies!