BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
BIMMERPOST Universal Forums Off-Topic Discussions Board Politics/Religion Workplace violence poll - would you rather

View Poll Results: Which would you rather have at your place of work
All weapons are banned - no one has any 30 29.70%
Private security unarmed - non lethal only 4 3.96%
Private security armed - firearms 20 19.80%
weapons allowed by all employees (cannot say who gets them or does not get them) 11 10.89%
weapons allowed by employees with certification class 36 35.64%
Voters: 101. You may not vote on this poll

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-05-2016, 12:40 AM   #155
bbbbmw
Major General
2387
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Trump on Twitter:

"Hillary said that guns don't keep you safe. If she really believes that she should demand that her heavily armed bodyguards quickly disarm!"

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonal...55884547973121
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 0
      01-07-2016, 10:02 AM   #156
Dalko43
Captain
168
Rep
894
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony20009 View Post
None of the answers you offered are what I'd choose. BTW, do options one and three not already exist in workplaces around the country?



Source: Year of the data: 2013 All the best.
Why are you talking about gun deaths (which includes suicides, accidents in addition to murders) when the OP's question was about gun violence?

The gun death statistics are often quoted by those who directly, or indirectly, want to put gun ownership in a bad light. But the reality is that such statistics are covering a number of issues, not just gun violence. The #1 reason why gun deaths are high in areas where gun ownership is high is because of suicides...the implication behind these supposedly neutral articles put out by Mother Jones (which is not neutral in the least bit) and others is that if we take away or reduce gun ownership, we would also greatly reduce suicides.

If that is the agenda, then we should go ask Japan, South Korea and others why they have suicide rates that are twice as high as our own despite their very strict gun control measures.

Washington Post article covering suicide rates per 100k people:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...iciderate.html

Suicides can and probably will happen, regardless of whether or not guns are available. So any discussion on gun deaths needs to be framed within that context; there is no proof that gun ownership will have an affect on whether a person decides to commit suicide, though it may affect how he/she does it, which IMO is a moot point.

The issue that is much more relevant to the OP's topic is gun violence (murders/assault against others). And when you take gun deaths out of the conversation and focus purely on gun violence the narrative changes drastically.

As opposed to the annual 30k gun deaths that some people prefer to use for their campaigns and opining, the US has had consistently less than 9k annual gun murders over the past few years:
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc..._2010-2014.xls

And when you break down those murders by state, you realize that the trends highlighted by Mother Jones also change.
Murder #'s by state:https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc...ables/table-20
Murder Rates by state:https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/uc..._2012-2013.xls

Certain states which are noted as having high gun ownership and high gun deaths, have some of the lowest gun murder #'s and rates in the country. Short of that, I don't see any real correlation being demonstrated in these stats. There are some places with very strict gun control (California and DC for example) which still have a lot of gun murders and very high rates. And there are some states with less strict gun laws (like Texas and Missouri) which also have a lot gun murders.


But I'm sure tony20009 already knew all this and was simply testing the good people on this forum to see if they would catch his omissions...

Last edited by Dalko43; 01-07-2016 at 11:13 AM..
Appreciate 2
      01-09-2016, 07:22 PM   #157
M3Post
Supreme Allied Commander DDE
M3Post's Avatar
United_States
442
Rep
460
Posts

Drives: Red '08 E92 M3 - DCT
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Next Door To BMW Plant

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 BMW X5  [0.00]
2008 BMW M3  [0.00]
If guns kill people, and not people kill people, then why aren't folks clamoring to take away cars? After all when using the Fed logic it can't be drunk drivers who kill people with cars, it must be the car that kills people and not the driver. Just as in, it's not the shooter but the gun that kills people.

Cars kill way more people each year than guns do, so why is there no narrative to remove the cars? Ah yes, because if the cars were banned for killing people then no one could go to work and the taxes paid to the treasury would be much, much less so there would be less of our money and wealth to redistribute to other countries as free handouts via the UN. It's all a big scam folks.

The gun control narrative is full of holes. Come on, someone, anyone, Bueller.. tell me why there is no narrative to ban cars due to DUIs? Yes, that's right it's the operator of the machine and not the machine itself that does the killing.. If not, then we should have prisons for guns.
__________________
'08 E92 M3 DCT Melbourne Red/Bamboo Beige Leather/EDC/HARROP Supercharger/SSP Spec-R clutch discs/Quaife LSD/3:45 Final Drive by Diffs Online/M3 World HFC X-Pipe/Pipercross Air Filter/LUX H8 180/NGK Racing Iridium R2556B-9/BPM Sport Stage II/BPM Sport DCT/PFC Z-Rated Pads/ECS Brass Guide Brake Caliper Bushings/Alex Shop Solid Sub-frame Bushings/ Motul 600/Tint/APEX SM-10 18X11 ET44 + 12mm Spacers/APEX 75mm Stud Kit/
Appreciate 0
      01-15-2016, 07:22 PM   #158
xdnbc
Enlisted Member
7
Rep
39
Posts

Drives: 2016 328xi Touring
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Vancouver

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Killramos View Post
Yea I'm Canadian, there is no such statement in my constitution. It's more a statement of my belief's and ideology. I live in a country where people die afraid in their beds every year because the police can't be everywhere and they aren't legally allowed to prepare adequately to defend themselves. And even if they do legally defend themselves they get to spend the next 3 years dragged through the courts on trumped up political charges.

I own lots of guns though, handguns, shotguns, hunting rifles, big scary military guns. Somehow I have managed not to murder anyone yet.
I too am a Canadian and own a rifle [which I registered when I had to and still need that card to buy ammo]. However, I don't know anyone who is afraid of being killed in their sleep by gun toting criminals. Even the people I know with guns, use it for target practice or hunting- NOBODY says they need their gun to protect themselves [except from bears,maybe].
And, I doubt that having a gun would really help most people defend themselves from murderous situations. My guess is most people get murdered by people they know, just like most people who get raped are attacked by people they know.

Ironically, around Greater Vancouver, the people who usually get shot are low level drug dealers, 18-30 yrs, who knock each other off on a fairly regular basis. It is their culture that creates this environment.

And lastly, we have been discussing perception of risk here in BC because people often are afraid of low probability threats while ignoring higher ones. Example: 20 years ago 80% of students walked to school. Today, 80% are driven to school by their parents because they fear: 1, kidnapping by a pervert 2. kids getting hit by a car. The greatest causes of death for 5-9 year olds were: Cancer 35%, Car crashes in their parents car and other unintentional injuries 17%, Congenital abnormalities 17%. Kidnapping is way down the list and 83% of them are by parents or relatives. My guess is that despite having over 300 million guns in the USA, very few people have used them to protect themselves from lethal attack- any statistics on this [please help Dalko]?

Last edited by xdnbc; 01-15-2016 at 07:41 PM..
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2016, 12:37 AM   #159
bbbbmw
Major General
2387
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Remember the Tsarnaev brothers running loose through the Boston area? I got the robo-calls from the local police that night, warning all residents to stay indoors, because there were armed criminals being pursued by local police. If I lived in gun-ban Cambridge (where they were caught), what would I use to defend my family? A wooden spoon? Thankfully the one was killed, and the other sought shelter in a boat - not in someone's living room. The outcome could have been wholly different, and the populace is technically defenseless.

How anyone could make an argument against being armed is beyond me.
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2016, 05:33 AM   #160
....,,,,..,,..
General
No_Country
6649
Rep
20,672
Posts

Drives: xxxx
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: xxxx

iTrader: (0)

Lol I read the title and thought it may have been similar to a UK thread we had on work place violence.

As in is it okay to give someone a kicking / thumping at work.

However, it just proves what a fucked up society you have where guns are actually required to protect people at work, either from work colleagues or people walking in off the street.

Some of the arguments / points used have been exceptionally stupid to even scary.

Such as shooting people to wound in hand, arm, leg etc, total bollox, you only ever aim for centre body mass, yeah head shots for those that double tap for a living.

Weapons in gyms are not their due to sensible gun safety rules, not PC over zealousness, walking around a military camp, yes you can keep is weapon with you all the time, even in the mess as you are in control of it, either personally or gun rack / arms locker and you keep the ammo with you.

The gym, you can't have bunch sweating people in shorts n T shirts and weapons, it's a pain finding a place to put your water and towel never mind weapon and ammo. Lol.

So anyhow yes a totally fucked up land of the free where you need to keep a firearm on you or at hand 24/7.

I quite like going to work and the most can expect is someone bitching and moaning and not trying to shoot anyone.
Appreciate 0
      01-18-2016, 11:12 AM   #161
Dalko43
Captain
168
Rep
894
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdnbc View Post
And, I doubt that having a gun would really help most people defend themselves from murderous situations. My guess is most people get murdered by people they know, just like most people who get raped are attacked by people they know.

Ironically, around Greater Vancouver, the people who usually get shot are low level drug dealers, 18-30 yrs, who knock each other off on a fairly regular basis. It is their culture that creates this environment.

And lastly, we have been discussing perception of risk here in BC because people often are afraid of low probability threats while ignoring higher ones. Example: 20 years ago 80% of students walked to school. Today, 80% are driven to school by their parents because they fear: 1, kidnapping by a pervert 2. kids getting hit by a car. The greatest causes of death for 5-9 year olds were: Cancer 35%, Car crashes in their parents car and other unintentional injuries 17%, Congenital abnormalities 17%. Kidnapping is way down the list and 83% of them are by parents or relatives. My guess is that despite having over 300 million guns in the USA, very few people have used them to protect themselves from lethal attack- any statistics on this [please help Dalko]?
There are two different issues at play here:

What people are entitled to have and what people want; sometimes they overlap, but not always.

The 2nd Amendment was not written into the Constitution because of peoples' wants and hobbies. It was written in to serve as a guarantee of individual freedom and protection from tyranny. People like to forget, that back during the Revolutionary Era, every able-bodied man was considered a part of the militia, and when there was a threat (foreign invasion, civil conflict, insurrection, ect.) it was that every-day citizen who was expected to be armed. Being armed is not just a choice, but a right.

Now as for whether or not a firearm would help or hurt in most situations, that's something that everyone will have their own opinion on. My opinion is that any would-be aggressor, whether he/she knows the victim or not, is a lot less likely to try something if that victim has a weapon....it's very simple: people don't want to get shot.

I don't have any statistics on how often gun-owners use their weapons in self defense. I'm sure there are some out there, but the issue is that such data would likely only cover a small portion of all the incidents that have potentially happened.

Using a firearm in self-defense could entail:
- shooting (killing/injuring) someone who is trying to hurt you, which is very likely to be recorded.
- shooting at someone who tries to hurt you, but missing and the perp runs off, not sure if someone would always report that.
-brandishing a firearm when someone threatens your life or well-being; very likely that many of these incidents are not reported.
- simply the perception that someone might be armed, could dissuade would-be attackers from targeting someone; how do you even record those statistics?

So I highly doubt that is an all-encompassing study which documents all of these self-defense encounters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
So anyhow yes a totally fucked up land of the free where you need to keep a firearm on you or at hand 24/7.

I quite like going to work and the most can expect is someone bitching and moaning and not trying to shoot anyone.
It's not really that fucked up. Many people simply have grown up and learned to live with guns; that doesn't prevent them from having decent and safe lives. The overwhelming majority of lives that are getting fucked up by gun violence are those that are near or involved in criminal activity (drug trafficking, gang violence, robbery, assault, ect.). If you stay away from those activities, generally-speaking, you should be relatively safe.

And that's something that affects everyone and every country. Even the supposedly "enlightened" countries like Britain, France, ect. still have tremendous crime problems, and in some cases rates that comparable or worse than America's. In 2008, Britain had an epidemic of stabbing incidents to the point where someone was getting attacked or threatened every 4 minutes:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...r-minutes.html

I'm sure most people in Britain felt relatively safe, as a lot of those crimes were likely happening areas with high crime. I don't really know how those crime trends are nowadays, but I do recall certain activist groups that were actually campaigning to ban certain types of knives (protectionist mentality at its worst).

Anyways, my main point is that crime is the common denominator for all countries. It exists everywhere, and your proximity to it is what likely determines your feeling of security and safety, not your proximity to guns. A gun, by itself, will just sit there and do nothing. It takes someone with a criminal motive to actually turn it into a dangerous weapon.
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 1
      01-18-2016, 11:40 AM   #162
....,,,,..,,..
General
No_Country
6649
Rep
20,672
Posts

Drives: xxxx
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: xxxx

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
There are two different issues at play here:

What people are entitled to have and what people want; sometimes they overlap, but not always.

The 2nd Amendment was not written into the Constitution because of peoples' wants and hobbies. It was written in to serve as a guarantee of individual freedom and protection from tyranny. People like to forget, that back during the Revolutionary Era, every able-bodied man was considered a part of the militia, and when there was a threat (foreign invasion, civil conflict, insurrection, ect.) it was that every-day citizen who was expected to be armed. Being armed is not just a choice, but a right.

Now as for whether or not a firearm would help or hurt in most situations, that's something that everyone will have their own opinion on. My opinion is that any would-be aggressor, whether he/she knows the victim or not, is a lot less likely to try something if that victim has a weapon....it's very simple: people don't want to get shot.

I don't have any statistics on how often gun-owners use their weapons in self defense. I'm sure there are some out there, but the issue is that such data would likely only cover a small portion of all the incidents that have potentially happened.

Using a firearm in self-defense could entail:
- shooting (killing/injuring) someone who is trying to hurt you, which is very likely to be recorded.
- shooting at someone who tries to hurt you, but missing and the perp runs off, not sure if someone would always report that.
-brandishing a firearm when someone threatens your life or well-being; very likely that many of these incidents are not reported.
- simply the perception that someone might be armed, could dissuade would-be attackers from targeting someone; how do you even record those statistics?

So I highly doubt that is an all-encompassing study which documents all of these self-defense encounters.



It's not really that fucked up. Many people simply have grown up and learned to live with guns; that doesn't prevent them from having decent and safe lives. The overwhelming majority of lives that are getting fucked up by gun violence are those that are near or involved in criminal activity (drug trafficking, gang violence, robbery, assault, ect.). If you stay away from those activities, generally-speaking, you should be relatively safe.

And that's something that affects everyone and every country. Even the supposedly "enlightened" countries like Britain, France, ect. still have tremendous crime problems, and in some cases rates that comparable or worse than America's. In 2008, Britain had an epidemic of stabbing incidents to the point where someone was getting attacked or threatened every 4 minutes:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...r-minutes.html

I'm sure most people in Britain felt relatively safe, as a lot of those crimes were likely happening areas with high crime. I don't really know how those crime trends are nowadays, but I do recall certain activist groups that were actually campaigning to ban certain types of knives (protectionist mentality at its worst).

Anyways, my main point is that crime is the common denominator for all countries. It exists everywhere, and your proximity to it is what likely determines your feeling of security and safety, not your proximity to guns. A gun, by itself, will just sit there and do nothing. It takes someone with a criminal motive to actually turn it into a dangerous weapon.

The way crime is recorded always screws up the stats.

It is already illegal to carry a knife not connected with work or hobby.

Again it's only certain elements of society that fuck things up for others (world over).

However while yes a gun will sit deaf dumb and happy, it's not purely a criminal motive it relies on.

One the key factors that makes any firearm (or weapon) dangerous is lack of respect.

That effects everyone from untrained to fully qualified.
Appreciate 0
      01-18-2016, 12:34 PM   #163
Dalko43
Captain
168
Rep
894
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
The way crime is recorded always screws up the stats.
The stats are what the stats are...it's up to the reader to make the appropriate observations based off of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
It is already illegal to carry a knife not connected with work or hobby.
Hmmm...sounds like a similar dilemma to what we have here in America. It's illegal to use a firearm to rob, coerce, or harm someone (outside of self-defense). It's also illegal carry concealed firearms without the proper permitting. It's illegal to even own a firearm if you have committed certain crimes in the past.

Yet a lot of people do all of the above, regardless of the law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
Again it's only certain elements of society that fuck things up for others (world over).
Well I'm glad you acknowledge that, but then why do you think American society is fucked up for allowing lawful citizens to carry firearms? If the criminals are the ones fucking things up, then why should we micromanage the people who are responsible in their firearm ownership and carrying?

I assume you were referring to America, if not, my apologies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
However while yes a gun will sit deaf dumb and happy, it's not purely a criminal motive it relies on.

One the key factors that makes any firearm (or weapon) dangerous is lack of respect.

That effects everyone from untrained to fully qualified.
Absolutely right. A firearm most certainly demands respect and requires responsibility on the user's part. And so do cars, high-powered lasers, knives, computers, baseball bats, the list goes on.....

Any number of tools, including firearms, can be dangerous if misused, whether it be from intentional criminal action or simple negligence. There is nothing uniquely dangerous about firearms in that regard....there are a lot things that are dangerous in the wrong hands.
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 0
      01-18-2016, 05:00 PM   #164
....,,,,..,,..
General
No_Country
6649
Rep
20,672
Posts

Drives: xxxx
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: xxxx

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
Hmmm...sounds like a similar dilemma to what we have here in America. It's illegal to use a firearm to rob, coerce, or harm someone (outside of self-defense). It's also illegal carry concealed firearms without the proper permitting. It's illegal to even own a firearm if you have committed certain crimes in the past.

Yet a lot of people do all of the above, regardless of the law.



Well I'm glad you acknowledge that, but then why do you think American society is fucked up for allowing lawful citizens to carry firearms? If the criminals are the ones fucking things up, then why should we micromanage the people who are responsible in their firearm ownership and carrying?

I assume you were referring to America, if not, my apologies .
because no one appears to notice just how crazy it is that people have to arm themselves at work.

Yeah we may have a bit of a knife issue, it is however pretty much under 25's in specific cities - London, Manchester, Birmingham, if you removed those from the equation it's neglible.

However even in those cities, people are not tooled up at work, we don't have lots of nutters attacking people in the work place with knives. I think about 5 in last 10 years and then was down to stalker type thing.

Never said anything against people carrying, it the fact that they actually NEED to at work.

In some cities, areas within cities, at home etc I can see the need for it.

However to not feel safe at work is mental and scary that people actually don't realise it's mental to be scared at work and need to be armed.

So it's not the fact people are armed, it's the total bollox of having to be armed among work colleagues, that one of them may go bat shit or some random person from the street may.
Appreciate 0
      01-18-2016, 05:21 PM   #165
Kidscollege$
First Lieutenant
Kidscollege$'s Avatar
337
Rep
396
Posts

Drives: 2015 MW M4
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: NE

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2016 Toyota  [0.00]
2016 Lexus RX350  [0.00]
2015 BMW/M4  [0.00]
How about the option, no one says anything about anything and the people that want to protect themselves do so without advertising it and the employer does not implement any rule either way?
Appreciate 0
      01-18-2016, 05:31 PM   #166
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Unless the business has a policy against them, anyone in Florida can have a gun in their office. No permit. I know MANY people who do this. It's the way it should be. There should be a law that if guns are banned in a specific area, the banner, government or private party, is required to have armed protection provided or they can be sued if something happens and they don't. This includes schools, playgrounds, movie theatres etc.
Appreciate 0
      01-18-2016, 11:49 PM   #167
bbbbmw
Major General
2387
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
So it's not the fact people are armed, it's the total bollox of having to be armed among work colleagues, that one of them may go bat shit or some random person from the street may.
You mean like this?:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...icalised-kenya

Or this?:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/canadian...-war-memorial/
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 0
      01-19-2016, 01:43 AM   #168
....,,,,..,,..
General
No_Country
6649
Rep
20,672
Posts

Drives: xxxx
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: xxxx

iTrader: (0)


Luckily very much one off incidents.

Pick another 5 for the UK actually occurring in the same year or even 5 years.

Yes they may (quite likely) happen again, however no one (not in a gang etc) feels the need to carry anything to protect themselves during the day, as pretty much everywhere is actually safe.

However, the stats from over there....

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/201...-2000-and-2013


https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/office-...de-fight-video


Over here the police release videos reminding people to lock doors at night or safe driving videos.
Appreciate 0
      01-19-2016, 08:54 AM   #169
Dalko43
Captain
168
Rep
894
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
Yeah we may have a bit of a knife issue, it is however pretty much under 25's in specific cities - London, Manchester, Birmingham, if you removed those from the equation it's neglible.
Yeah, and if you removed gang and drug-related violent crimes, gun violence in America would be reduced significantly, almost to the point of being statistically negligible. We can play the selective editing game all day long to try and bolster our respective positions, or we can acknowledge the numbers for what they are and draw the appropriate conclusions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
However even in those cities, people are not tooled up at work, we don't have lots of nutters attacking people in the work place with knives. I think about 5 in last 10 years and then was down to stalker type thing.

Never said anything against people carrying, it the fact that they actually NEED to at work.

In some cities, areas within cities, at home etc I can see the need for it.

However to not feel safe at work is mental and scary that people actually don't realise it's mental to be scared at work and need to be armed.

So it's not the fact people are armed, it's the total bollox of having to be armed among work colleagues, that one of them may go bat shit or some random person from the street may.
There is nothing wrong with carrying at work. It doesn't mean that a person is amped up or paranoid about a colleague going nuts. I have a first aid kit in my car; that doesn't mean I am constantly worried that someone is going to die in my presence. Some people simply choose to have a means of self-defense on them as much as possible. And given the recent terrorist attacks that have taken place around the world (San Bernardino, Paris, Islamabad, Turkey, ect.) as well as the recent shooting sprees in America, such self-defense measures perfectly logical in many peoples' minds.

If you personally don't agree with such measures, that's good for you. Just don't marginalize others simply because they have a different opinion from you.
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 0
      01-19-2016, 08:59 AM   #170
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Exactly. Nobody will protect you but you. Cops are solve your murder after the fact so they don't murder again people. Cops I talk to here say they wish everybody carried.
Appreciate 0
      01-19-2016, 11:10 PM   #171
bbbbmw
Major General
2387
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
Luckily very much one off incidents.

Pick another 5 for the UK actually occurring in the same year or even 5 years.

Jan 18,2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...-times-7197030

Jan 17, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...h-open-7195812

Jan 5, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...ng-bmw-7122722

Jan 6, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...t-over-7128244

Jan 7, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-after-7131588

Jan 15, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-house-7183093

Jan 15, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...s-flee-7185786

Did you mean so far this month, or should I go back into 2015?
------------------------------
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...apital-5172325

"The number of offences involving firearms has been falling year-on-year since its peak in 2003/04 when 24,094 offences were recorded. The latest figure of 7,714 offences represents a fall of more than two-thirds (68%) since then."
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 0
      01-20-2016, 01:20 AM   #172
....,,,,..,,..
General
No_Country
6649
Rep
20,672
Posts

Drives: xxxx
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: xxxx

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbbbmw View Post
Jan 18,2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...-times-7197030

Dialled 911 = USA ours is 999.


Jan 17, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...h-open-7195812

Fair enough.


Jan 5, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...ng-bmw-7122722

2013 not recent.


Jan 6, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...t-over-7128244

Jan 7, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-after-7131588

Jan 15, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...-house-7183093

Jan 15, 2016:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...s-flee-7185786

Did you mean so far this month, or should I go back into 2015?
------------------------------
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...apital-5172325

"The number of offences involving firearms has been falling year-on-year since its peak in 2003/04 when 24,094 offences were recorded. The latest figure of 7,714 offences represents a fall of more than two-thirds (68%) since then."
Manchester and Liverpool and we also likely had a few others.

But no one feels that unsafe to actually demand being able to have a weapon at work etc...
Appreciate 0
      01-20-2016, 10:07 AM   #173
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Brigand, you live in England. It's different from here. England banned firearms from private ownership years ago. As a result it's much more difficult to get one.

In the US we rebelled against England. We made firearms a right protected by our Constitution. This was so our citizens could protect themselves vs enemies or animals, hunt, repel invaders, and overthrow a government out of control providing a check on government.

1 There are now more guns in the US in private hands than there are citizens.
2 Getting a gun by anyone criminal or not, legally or not, is exceedingly easy.
3 Adding laws or restrictions only restrict access to guns by law abiding citizens. Criminals or crazies can't get them legally anyway so it has no affect on them
4 By restricting the guns to law abiding citizens you make them helpless easy targets for criminals
5 by allowing citizens to carry, you screen out the criminals and increase the percentage of good guys with guns. This decreases gun violence as criminals no longer have an advantage so they will often opt not to carry a gun to lower potential jail time if caught, will think twice about robbing etc because they may be shot by their intended victums, and victums can often fight back minimizing the damage the criminal does.
6 sane gun owners just don't fly off the handle and shoot people. Between 2 and 4 million crimes a year are foiled or prevented by the legal use of a handgun. I've done this 3 times personally.
7 insane people will always be able to get guns. Without someone sane present with a gun their crimes are often large in scope. They also go to "gun free" zones to do these crimes as they know they'll be free to commit them without resistance and able to take their time. This is why I say of a location is designated a gun free zone, it should be mandatory that armed protection is provided.
8 cops agree and love carry permits and private ownership as they know there is nothing they can do to prevent or stop a violent crime I'm progress. They can only solve or arrest the person after so they don't do future damage. But you're still dead without a gun.
9 the vast majority of gun crime is by repeat offenders. There should be mandatory sentences for repeat gun criminals. This would lower gun crime dramatically, not restricting law abiding people from owning themy and protecting themselves.
Appreciate 1
      01-22-2016, 11:01 AM   #174
MisterSkiMask
Banned
99
Rep
2,015
Posts

Drives: I Can not say
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: you must not know

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brigand View Post
Manchester and Liverpool and we also likely had a few others.

But no one feels that unsafe to actually demand being able to have a weapon at work etc...
Feelings and beliefs are funny things, neither require a shred of fact or a basis in reality. You simply need to be convinced, and then you can convince yourself.
Appreciate 0
      01-22-2016, 11:24 AM   #175
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterSkiMask View Post
Feelings and beliefs are funny things, neither require a shred of fact or a basis in reality. You simply need to be convinced, and then you can convince yourself.
Agreed. The old saying is a conservative is a liberal that's been mugged.
Appreciate 0
      01-22-2016, 01:27 PM   #176
M3Post
Supreme Allied Commander DDE
M3Post's Avatar
United_States
442
Rep
460
Posts

Drives: Red '08 E92 M3 - DCT
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Next Door To BMW Plant

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2015 BMW X5  [0.00]
2008 BMW M3  [0.00]
The U.K.s Dirty Little Secret (one of the many)
How Gun Control Made England The 'Most Violent Country In Europe'
http://www.breitbart.com/national-se...try-in-europe/

Gun control in Britain passed in stages, beginning just after World War I and continuing in a reactionary fashion with increasing strictness through the 1990s.
When the final stage arrived in 1997, and virtually all handguns were banned via the Firearms Act, the promise was a reduction in crime and greater safety for the British people. But the result was the emergence of Britain as the “most violent country in Europe.”

Britain began placing restrictions on gun ownership after World War I with the Firearms Act of 1920. The passage of this act was emotionally driven, based in part on the public’s war-weariness and in part on the fear that an increased number of guns–guns from the battle field–would increase crime.

The Firearms Act of 1920 did not ban guns. Rather, it required that citizens who wanted a gun had to first obtain a certificate from the government. We see this same stage taking place in various places in the United States now, where a person who wants a firearm has to get a Fire Owner Identification Card (Illinois) or has to be vetted by police (Massachusetts) or both.

Thirteen years after the passage of the Firearms Act, British Parliament passed the Firearms and Imitation Firearms Bill, making the possession of a replica gun or a real one equally punishable unless the owner of either could show the lawful purpose for which he had it. (Sounds like California?) This was followed by the Firearms Act of 1937, which author Frank Miniter says “extended restrictions to shotguns and granted chief constables the power to add conditions to individual private firearm certificates.”

In the U.S., police departments in Massachusetts play the role Britain’s chief constables played and have final say on who can or can’t own a firearm. On July 25, Breitbart News reported that that Massachusetts police were pressing for “sole discretion” on who could own a long gun; they already had such discretion over who could own a handgun. On August 1, they received the power they sought.

Britain continued to issue firearm certificates as World War II set in. But by the time the war was over, the gun control mindset had permeated society to a point where self-defense was no longer a valid reason to secure a certificate for gun ownership.

Guns were simply for sport or for hunting.

In 1987, Michael Ryan shot and killed sixteen people in Hungerford, including his mother. He wounded fourteen others, then killed himself. According to the Library of Congress, Ryan used “lawfully owned” rifles to carry out the attack. Nevertheless, his attack prompted the passage of more laws in the form of the Firearms Act of 1988. This act “banned the possession of high-powered self loading rifles” and “burst-firing weapons,” and imposed “stricter standards for ownership” to secure a government certificate to own a shotgun.

In 1996, Thomas Hamilton walked into an elementary school in Dunblane, Scotland, and shot and killed “sixteen small children…and their teacher in the gym before killing himself.” He brought two rifles and four handguns to carry out the attack. All six guns were legally owned: Hamilton had fully complied with gun control statutes.

The Firearm Act of 1997 was passed while emotions ran high. Gun control proponents push for an all-out ban on private gun ownership, in the much the same way that Senator Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)0%
reacted to the heinous crime at Sandy Hook Elementary by trying to ban approximately 150 different guns.

Yet the Firearm Act did not ban all guns, “but served to essentially prohibit the ownership of handguns in Britain” and to make the acquisition of certificate to possess a long gun an onerous and time-consuming one. Much the same as the onerous and time-consuming process now burdening law-abiding DC residents seeking a gun in the home for self-defense.

And what has been the outcome of passing more laws in Britain to remedy the fact that other laws were ignored or broken? It has not been good.

In 2009, twelve years after the Firearms Act of 1997 was passed, Daily Mail Online reported that Britain was “the most violent country in Europe.” They also reported that Britain’s home figures showed “the UK [had] a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and South Africa.”
Attached Images
  
__________________
'08 E92 M3 DCT Melbourne Red/Bamboo Beige Leather/EDC/HARROP Supercharger/SSP Spec-R clutch discs/Quaife LSD/3:45 Final Drive by Diffs Online/M3 World HFC X-Pipe/Pipercross Air Filter/LUX H8 180/NGK Racing Iridium R2556B-9/BPM Sport Stage II/BPM Sport DCT/PFC Z-Rated Pads/ECS Brass Guide Brake Caliper Bushings/Alex Shop Solid Sub-frame Bushings/ Motul 600/Tint/APEX SM-10 18X11 ET44 + 12mm Spacers/APEX 75mm Stud Kit/
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:32 AM.




bmw
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST