Miscellaneous Board
User: Remember me

Re: Have guns, will travel

Posted by Jigsaw on .
Well, I'm from Canada. We play the same games and watch a lot of the same TV shows and movies. But we don't have the epidemic of shootings the US has. You're right, we do have guns. The difference is how you get them and what they're used for. You can legally possess a shotgun or hunting rifle only if you take a training course, pass the exam and get your firearms acquisition license (FAC). From there you can take another course and exam, which allows you to buy restricted guns such as handguns. Assault weapons are illegal. Guns are only used for sport, and must be stored properly when not in use (trigger locks, gun safes). Another difference is our history. When we wanted independence from Britain in 1867, we merely asked for it. The US fought for it, and the fighting mentality seems to have stuck around.

In reply to: Have guns, will travel posted by Vimm on .
Another year, another gun slaying in the US. Nothing new there, right? Body count's up to 26 this time and people are finally kinda-sorta willing to talk about it.

Many people have an emotional attachment to their guns, and I respect that. I don't understand it, but I respect it. It occurs to me though that the US is not the only country in the world (despite what some may think) and it's hardly the only developed country with guns. So it begs the question, how have other countries tackled this problem?

And these countries aren't hard to find. Just look at places like Japan, Australia, the UK, Switzerland, even our neighbor Canada. They all have guns and lose under two hundred people per year to bullet wounds. And in the US? Thirty thousand. THOUSAND.

So why such an enormous gap? Clearly this problem is solvable and countries have used a variety of methods to prevent gun fatalities. It's not emotion or speculation, it's a fact. Isn't anyone curious how?

Re: Have guns, will travel varanhost --
Re: Have guns, will travel Vimm --