Charlie Hebdo Massacre illustrates...

[Goshin]

... the futility of trying to combat terrorism with gun control laws.


France's gun laws:

In France, to buy a firearm, a hunting licence or a shooting sport license is necessary. All semi-automatic rifles with a capacity greater than 3 rounds, all handguns and all rifles chambered in 'military' calibres, including bolt action, require permits. ... France also sets limits on the number of cartridges that can be kept at home (1000 rounds per gun).The total number of firearms owned by an individual is also subject to limits (not possible to have more than 12 authorizations/permits on B1, B2 and B4 type firearms).[SUP][83][/SUP] As of September, 2013, France has a capacity limit of 20 rounds for handguns;[SUP][84][/SUP] one needs a permit for category one[SUP][clarification needed][/SUP] semi-automatics that have a capacity greater than 3 rounds. Fully automatic firearms are illegal for civilian ownership.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation#France


In the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the attackers used weapons capable of full auto fire, illegal in France...

The weapons used in the attack were supplied via the Brussels underworld. According to the Belgian press, a criminal sold Amedy Coulibaly the rocket-propelled grenade launcher and Kalashnikov assault rifles that the Kouachi brothers used

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting



In fact, it is possible that French gun control laws may have had an unintended consequence of increasing the innocent body count, by disarming the victims...

Cartoonist Stéphane "Charb" Charbonnier, murdered in the attack on the magazine, had been the editor-in-chief of Charlie Hebdo since 2009.[SUP][17][/SUP] T.... Being a sport shooter, Charb applied for permit to be able to carry a firearm for self-defence. The application, however, went unanswered.[SUP][21][/SUP]

France has relatively strict gun control laws and relatively few guns in civilian hands, and is surrounded by European nations which typically have similarly restrictive laws (or more so). Automatic rifles are forbidden from civilian ownership... but were used in the attack. An RPG was also found among the terrorists' weapons, which would be extremely illegal to possess in France. The linked article below says they obtained their weapons from a Slovakian arms dealer.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...Paris-attacks-traced-to-shop-in-Slovakia.html




Instituting European-style gun control in the US would be a very difficult process, politically. In addition to legislative resistance, there would be court challenges on the basis of the Second Amendment, etc. Even if implemented, the fact that there are already over 300 million guns in private hands, a cultural belief in the right to same, and a cultural tradition of rebellion and defying restrictions on citizen's rights would make it a very different prospect from Europe.... likely, a rather ineffective effort that would only disarm the very law-abiding.


But setting all that aside... Strict gun control did not stop the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Nor did it stop the mass murder in Norway which took 69 lives and wounded 110. Nor did it stop a large number of other mass shootings in Europe. The following linked site compares US mass shootings and European mass shootings between 2009 and 2015, showing that in fact Europe had far more dead and wounded in mass shootings than the US during that period.

http://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/co...m-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/




This, despite strict gun control in almost all European nations, demonstrates that the answer to mass shootings in general and terrorist attacks in particular is NOT found in gun control.

 

[PeteEU]

And yet in the US, where there are sooo many guns, there has been more mass shootings than days in the year so far... Funny how the gun laws dont lower the amount of attacks eh?? Funny how we never hear about how a "good guy with a gun" stopped one of these mass shootings from happening... but hey!

 

[Beaudreaux]

And yet in the US, where there are sooo many guns, there has been more mass shootings than days in the year so far... Funny how the gun laws dont lower the amount of attacks eh?? Funny how we never hear about how a "good guy with a gun" stopped one of these mass shootings from happening... but hey!

Just in case you didn't know, the links in the OP work - you may want to do a little research prior to making inaccurate statements about a right that you don't even have, but seem to wish that we did not as well.

 

[countryboy]

And yet in the US, where there are sooo many guns, there has been more mass shootings than days in the year so far... Funny how the gun laws dont lower the amount of attacks eh?? Funny how we never hear about how a "good guy with a gun" stopped one of these mass shootings from happening... but hey!

Yeah, it is odd that the msm never covers these things. I guess that means it never happens. :roll:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/

 

[Goshin]

And yet in the US, where there are sooo many guns, there has been more mass shootings than days in the year so far... Funny how the gun laws dont lower the amount of attacks eh?? Funny how we never hear about how a "good guy with a gun" stopped one of these mass shootings from happening... but hey!

You didn't read the part about Europe having more casualties from mass shootings 2009-2015 than the US?


Nor did you read the last time I posted this....


12 Times Mass Shootings Were Stopped by Good Guys With Guns

 

[beerftw]

... the futility of trying to combat terrorism with gun control laws.


France's gun laws:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation#France


In the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the attackers used weapons capable of full auto fire, illegal in France...




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting



In fact, it is possible that French gun control laws may have had an unintended consequence of increasing the innocent body count, by disarming the victims...





France has relatively strict gun control laws and relatively few guns in civilian hands, and is surrounded by European nations which typically have similarly restrictive laws (or more so). Automatic rifles are forbidden from civilian ownership... but were used in the attack. An RPG was also found among the terrorists' weapons, which would be extremely illegal to possess in France. The linked article below says they obtained their weapons from a Slovakian arms dealer.

Charlie Hebdo shootings: Automatic rifles used in Paris attacks traced to shop in Slovakia - Telegraph




Instituting European-style gun control in the US would be a very difficult process, politically. In addition to legislative resistance, there would be court challenges on the basis of the Second Amendment, etc. Even if implemented, the fact that there are already over 300 million guns in private hands, a cultural belief in the right to same, and a cultural tradition of rebellion and defying restrictions on citizen's rights would make it a very different prospect from Europe.... likely, a rather ineffective effort that would only disarm the very law-abiding.


But setting all that aside... Strict gun control did not stop the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Nor did it stop the mass murder in Norway which took 69 lives and wounded 110. Nor did it stop a large number of other mass shootings in Europe. The following linked site compares US mass shootings and European mass shootings between 2009 and 2015, showing that in fact Europe had far more dead and wounded in mass shootings than the US during that period.

UPDATED: Comparing Death Rates from Mass Public Shootings and Mass Public Violence in the US and Europe - Crime Prevention Research CenterCrime Prevention Research Center




This, despite strict gun control in almost all European nations, demonstrates that the answer to mass shootings in general and terrorist attacks in particular is NOT found in gun control.

The norway attack is still to this day listed as the deadliest mass shooting, in a country with extremely strict gun laws. But it was more than that, the first attack was a bombing which killed 8 and injured about 200 people, the shooting was the second attack, which killed 69 and wounded 110.

Oh and the rifle used in the norway attack,


Yep a mini 14, no black stock, no pistol grip,
. I guess the deadliest shooting weapon is not as ban worthy as an ar, you know because it is not scary and black.

 

[joG]

And yet in the US, where there are sooo many guns, there has been more mass shootings than days in the year so far... Funny how the gun laws dont lower the amount of attacks eh?? Funny how we never hear about how a "good guy with a gun" stopped one of these mass shootings from happening... but hey!

Which only goes to dhow that you have never given your pet gripe even 10 minutes. But, I guess the Europeans have a lot they want to have the other miss. I understand. It is thin camouflage so try not to overdue it. People might notice.

 

[Goshin]

Chirp chirp.... mighty quiet in here, even though I see several gun control proponents have looked at the thread... too much fact, logic and reason perhaps.

 

[beerftw]

Chirp chirp.... mighty quiet in here, even though I see several gun control proponents have looked at the thread... too much fact, logic and reason perhaps.

I think it is because a large amount of your opposition believes this image

 

[PeteEU]

You didn't read the part about Europe having more casualties from mass shootings 2009-2015 than the US?

It is utter bull****. The statistics are massively manipulated to put the US in a better light. Take Norway, being at the top of the "death rate" statistics per million people... I mean come on, that is manipulation of the worst kind. Normal statistics would be per 100k people, not million. And of course Norways would be nr 1, considering that Brevik did his deed in those years and Norway only has 5 million people vs the US 315 million. It is statistical manipulation on a grand scale. And why only 2009-2015? Very convenient years, where we have had several terrorist attacks in Europe and else where. Why not before 2009? Oh I know, because that would alter the view that the "facts" were designed to make. Take Norway.. before Brevik when was the last mass shooting? Never.. so hence if you used a 20 or 30 year time span, then suddenly Norway would tumble down the statistics but the US would shoot up (no pun intended) because of its poor history on gun violence.

The more I read, the more problematic the "evidence" gets. Listing mass shootings where bombs were used as well as evidence, and worse. Trying to deflect away from the frequency of mass shootings in the the US vs else where... while promoting a myth that everywhere else is worse than the US. It is a right wing propaganda machine not based on facts, but based on manipulating facts to suit their political agenda.

12 Times Mass Shootings Were Stopped by Good Guys With Guns

12 times.. /clap considering there has been over 100 mass shootings just this year in the US.. over 1 per day. So spare me the right wing NRA bull**** propaganda.

 

[Goshin]

It is utter bull****. The statistics are massively manipulated to put the US in a better light. Take Norway, being at the top of the "death rate" statistics per million people... I mean come on, that is manipulation of the worst kind. Normal statistics would be per 100k people, not million. And of course Norways would be nr 1, considering that Brevik did his deed in those years and Norway only has 5 million people vs the US 315 million. It is statistical manipulation on a grand scale. And why only 2009-2015? Very convenient years, where we have had several terrorist attacks in Europe and else where. Why not before 2009? Oh I know, because that would alter the view that the "facts" were designed to make. Take Norway.. before Brevik when was the last mass shooting? Never.. so hence if you used a 20 or 30 year time span, then suddenly Norway would tumble down the statistics but the US would shoot up (no pun intended) because of its poor history on gun violence.

The more I read, the more problematic the "evidence" gets. Listing mass shootings where bombs were used as well as evidence, and worse. Trying to deflect away from the frequency of mass shootings in the the US vs else where... while promoting a myth that everywhere else is worse than the US. It is a right wing propaganda machine not based on facts, but based on manipulating facts to suit their political agenda.



12 times.. /clap considering there has been over 100 mass shootings just this year in the US.. over 1 per day. So spare me the right wing NRA bull**** propaganda.

The point is that it happens in Europe a lot more often than Europeans like to admit, despite strict gun control.


And if some died by bomb or knife or whatever... so what? Dead is dead, blown up isn't any nicer than shot down.


People who want to focus on gun violence only rather than violence in general are revealing their myopic agenda.

 

[TurtleDude]

The point is that it happens in Europe a lot more often than Europeans like to admit, despite strict gun control.


And if some died by bomb or knife or whatever... so what? Dead is dead, blown up isn't any nicer than shot down.


People who want to focus on gun violence only rather than violence in general are revealing their myopic agenda.

you know why this is?

its because stopping violence is not a main or even minor motivation of the anti gun left in this country or those like minded anti self defense types in europe. Its all about control and power. In the USA its mainly about the politics of gun owners and a hard on the Left has had for the NRA ever since the NRA stood up and called BS on the Democrat party's phony attempt to claim that it was tough on crime since it advocates gun control

 

[PeteEU]

The point is that it happens in Europe a lot more often than Europeans like to admit, despite strict gun control.

And if some died by bomb or knife or whatever... so what? Dead is dead, blown up isn't any nicer than shot down.

People who want to focus on gun violence only rather than violence in general are revealing their myopic agenda.

Wow, moving the goal posts a bit there? This started out about gun violence and mass shootings, and now it includes "bomb or knife or whatever"?

 

[OpportunityCost]

It is utter bull****. The statistics are massively manipulated to put the US in a better light. Take Norway, being at the top of the "death rate" statistics per million people... I mean come on, that is manipulation of the worst kind. Normal statistics would be per 100k people, not million. And of course Norways would be nr 1, considering that Brevik did his deed in those years and Norway only has 5 million people vs the US 315 million. It is statistical manipulation on a grand scale. And why only 2009-2015? Very convenient years, where we have had several terrorist attacks in Europe and else where. Why not before 2009? Oh I know, because that would alter the view that the "facts" were designed to make. Take Norway.. before Brevik when was the last mass shooting? Never.. so hence if you used a 20 or 30 year time span, then suddenly Norway would tumble down the statistics but the US would shoot up (no pun intended) because of its poor history on gun violence.

The more I read, the more problematic the "evidence" gets. Listing mass shootings where bombs were used as well as evidence, and worse. Trying to deflect away from the frequency of mass shootings in the the US vs else where... while promoting a myth that everywhere else is worse than the US. It is a right wing propaganda machine not based on facts, but based on manipulating facts to suit their political agenda.



12 times.. /clap considering there has been over 100 mass shootings just this year in the US.. over 1 per day. So spare me the right wing NRA bull**** propaganda.

How about we use accurate criteria. Just for giggles.

Mass shootings in America: The big picture in charts and graphs - CNN.com

Now, let's consider the several ways the government uses the term. Federal statutes define a "mass killing" as an incident resulting in three or more deaths. The commonly accepted definition -- the one the FBI used up to 2013 -- is a shooting that killed four or more people. Then there's Congressional reports, which sometimes exclude gang-related or domestic incidents and focus on "gunmen who select victims indiscriminately." Use that, and the total tally dwindles to single digits.

 

[HonestJoe]

... the futility of trying to combat terrorism with gun control laws.

Is your argument essentially that if we can demonstrate that a law has been circumvented in one case, the entire legal principle behind that law is an unconditional failure and all laws in that field a pointless waste of time?

This, despite strict gun control in almost all European nations, demonstrates that the answer to mass shootings in general and terrorist attacks in particular is NOT found in gun control.

The number of mass shootings and shootings in general are significantly lower in Europe compared to the US. Do you not accept that gun laws could possibly be at least one of the factors in that?

 

[BretJ]

... the futility of trying to combat terrorism with gun control laws.


France's gun laws:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation#France


In the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the attackers used weapons capable of full auto fire, illegal in France...




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting



In fact, it is possible that French gun control laws may have had an unintended consequence of increasing the innocent body count, by disarming the victims...





France has relatively strict gun control laws and relatively few guns in civilian hands, and is surrounded by European nations which typically have similarly restrictive laws (or more so). Automatic rifles are forbidden from civilian ownership... but were used in the attack. An RPG was also found among the terrorists' weapons, which would be extremely illegal to possess in France. The linked article below says they obtained their weapons from a Slovakian arms dealer.

Charlie Hebdo shootings: Automatic rifles used in Paris attacks traced to shop in Slovakia - Telegraph




Instituting European-style gun control in the US would be a very difficult process, politically. In addition to legislative resistance, there would be court challenges on the basis of the Second Amendment, etc. Even if implemented, the fact that there are already over 300 million guns in private hands, a cultural belief in the right to same, and a cultural tradition of rebellion and defying restrictions on citizen's rights would make it a very different prospect from Europe.... likely, a rather ineffective effort that would only disarm the very law-abiding.


But setting all that aside... Strict gun control did not stop the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Nor did it stop the mass murder in Norway which took 69 lives and wounded 110. Nor did it stop a large number of other mass shootings in Europe. The following linked site compares US mass shootings and European mass shootings between 2009 and 2015, showing that in fact Europe had far more dead and wounded in mass shootings than the US during that period.

UPDATED: Comparing Death Rates from Mass Public Shootings and Mass Public Violence in the US and Europe - Crime Prevention Research CenterCrime Prevention Research Center




This, despite strict gun control in almost all European nations, demonstrates that the answer to mass shootings in general and terrorist attacks in particular is NOT found in gun control.

The gorilla in the room is the fact that your typical European is not responsible or trustworthy enough to own a firearm. A fact that is reinforced by their governments. More Americans own firearms responsibly, without ever harming anyone, than the entire population of many Eu countries

 

[blaxshep]

Do you not accept that gun laws could possibly be at least one of the factors in that?

No I don't.

 

[HonestJoe]

No I don't.

Seriously? You're stating that it is impossible for the vast differences in gun laws between Europe and the US to have any influence on the significantly difference in the scale and nature of gun crime in the two regions?

 

[blaxshep]

Seriously? You're stating that it is impossible for the vast differences in gun laws between Europe and the US to have any influence on the significantly difference in the scale and nature of gun crime in the two regions?

Seriously

European Criminals and Terrorists Have 67 Million Guns to Choose From Despite Strict Gun Control

 

[HonestJoe]

Seriously

European Criminals and Terrorists Have 67 Million Guns to Choose From Despite Strict Gun Control

And America has all the legally held guns and the illegal black market. Most gun crime there is committed with legally bought guns though, either by the legal owners or stolen directly from them.

I'm still not saying European style gun controls are a magical solution or suggesting the US makes any changes in that direction. I'm only saying that the statement that it's not even possible our gun laws have any influence on the massive difference in relative gun crime rates is ridiculous. If you're incapable of even accepting that as a possibility, there's no point in you pretending you're interested in any kind of real debate on the subject.

 

[blaxshep]

And America has all the legally held guns and the illegal black market. Most gun crime there is committed with legally bought guns though, either by the legal owners or stolen directly from them.

I'm still not saying European style gun controls are a magical solution or suggesting the US makes any changes in that direction. I'm only saying that the statement that it's not even possible our gun laws have any influence on the massive difference in relative gun crime rates is ridiculous. If you're incapable of even accepting that as a possibility, there's no point in you pretending you're interested in any kind of real debate on the subject.

So to you 67 million guns to choose from rather than 300 million guns to choose from is the deciding factor in the amount of gun crimes being committed?

 

[jet57]

... the futility of trying to combat terrorism with gun control laws.


France's gun laws:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation#France


In the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the attackers used weapons capable of full auto fire, illegal in France...




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting



In fact, it is possible that French gun control laws may have had an unintended consequence of increasing the innocent body count, by disarming the victims...





France has relatively strict gun control laws and relatively few guns in civilian hands, and is surrounded by European nations which typically have similarly restrictive laws (or more so). Automatic rifles are forbidden from civilian ownership... but were used in the attack. An RPG was also found among the terrorists' weapons, which would be extremely illegal to possess in France. The linked article below says they obtained their weapons from a Slovakian arms dealer.

Charlie Hebdo shootings: Automatic rifles used in Paris attacks traced to shop in Slovakia - Telegraph




Instituting European-style gun control in the US would be a very difficult process, politically. In addition to legislative resistance, there would be court challenges on the basis of the Second Amendment, etc. Even if implemented, the fact that there are already over 300 million guns in private hands, a cultural belief in the right to same, and a cultural tradition of rebellion and defying restrictions on citizen's rights would make it a very different prospect from Europe.... likely, a rather ineffective effort that would only disarm the very law-abiding.


But setting all that aside... Strict gun control did not stop the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Nor did it stop the mass murder in Norway which took 69 lives and wounded 110. Nor did it stop a large number of other mass shootings in Europe. The following linked site compares US mass shootings and European mass shootings between 2009 and 2015, showing that in fact Europe had far more dead and wounded in mass shootings than the US during that period.

UPDATED: Comparing Death Rates from Mass Public Shootings and Mass Public Violence in the US and Europe - Crime Prevention Research CenterCrime Prevention Research Center




This, despite strict gun control in almost all European nations, demonstrates that the answer to mass shootings in general and terrorist attacks in particular is NOT found in gun control.

When was the last time a French movie theater or grammar school was wiped out by a guy with an AR?

 

[Goshin]

Wow, moving the goal posts a bit there? This started out about gun violence and mass shootings, and now it includes "bomb or knife or whatever"?

Why not? Dead is dead. You won't be any deader shot by an AR than blown up or stabbed.

 

[Goshin]

When was the last time a French movie theater or grammar school was wiped out by a guy with an AR?

Straw man argument. Charlie Hebdo was a mass shooting inspired by terrorism, location irrelevant.

 

[blaxshep]

When was the last time a mass murder occurred in a location where people were known to be armed?