Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="cymraes_y_cwm" data-source="post: 3260057" data-attributes="member: 111342">Man arrested for 2x4 labeled &quot;High Powered Rifle&quot;Jesus....utterly inane...I&#039;m sure more people die of simple old age why not mention that too?But you can&#039;t ban old age, disease or vehicles can you?But you can (if you&#039;re willing as a country) ban guns.And so the deaths caused by disease and old age and vehicles would still happen but the deaths caused by guns would not (or at least a lot of them wouldn&#039;t happen).I don&#039;t see why that is not so plainly simple to see?!?This is precisely the attitude from Americans that I just don&#039;t get.I don&#039;t even know what the point being made is when people compare guns to other things?More people die of disease than guns so might as well just keeps guns around?Are we only meant to tackle the thing that causes the most amount of deaths in turn?There&#039;s something in the news at the moment where suicides have been reduced in the UK by limiting the amount of paracetamol in a packet and putting them in blister packs.When it became harder to use paracetamol to kill yourself (even something as sillly as getting them out of the packet) the people that might have used that method didn&#039;t go off an find something else (jumping, train, hanging etc). They just didn&#039;t kill themselves.That little break in the thought process was enough to break the cycle and prevent a large percentage of suicides of that type.I see no reason why restricting access to guns wouldn&#039;t work in a similar way in restricting gun suicides.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="cymraes_y_cwm, post: 3260057, member: 111342"] [b]Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"[/b] Jesus....utterly inane...I'm sure more people die of simple old age why not mention that too? But you can't ban old age, disease or vehicles can you? But you can (if you're willing as a country) ban guns. And so the deaths caused by disease and old age and vehicles would still happen but the deaths caused by guns would not (or at least a lot of them wouldn't happen). I don't see why that is not so plainly simple to see?!? This is precisely the attitude from Americans that I just don't get. I don't even know what the point being made is when people compare guns to other things? More people die of disease than guns so might as well just keeps guns around? Are we only meant to tackle the thing that causes the most amount of deaths in turn? There's something in the news at the moment where suicides have been reduced in the UK by limiting the amount of paracetamol in a packet and putting them in blister packs. When it became harder to use paracetamol to kill yourself (even something as sillly as getting them out of the packet) the people that might have used that method didn't go off an find something else (jumping, train, hanging etc). They just didn't kill themselves. That little break in the thought process was enough to break the cycle and prevent a large percentage of suicides of that type. I see no reason why restricting access to guns wouldn't work in a similar way in restricting gun suicides. [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Loading…