@Paulos_the_fog We let people who do that rot in jail. That doesn't seem so "little" to me.
@LouisIngenthron @Paulos_the_fog
His point is that punishing people after the fact doesn't bring the kids back. That is to say, if we wanted kids to not be killed, rather than to punish people who kill kids despite the fact they know they will be punished, changes need to be made of some sort.
The question is, what changes are those?
Does this mean preventing certain people from purchasing guns? Does it mean forcing guns to have GPS in them that can alert schools or other premises that ban their presence of their approach/entry? Does it mean better security and police presence? Better designed schools with in-class security measures? An outright gun ban?
Personally, as someone who owns a firearm for self-defense, and is always incredibly careful when practicing, cleaning, and so-forth, I would prefer to keep my gun in the event some psycho decides to victimize me/my family. If they have a gun, and I don't I'm screwed. If we both have them, at least I have a chance, and if I'm the only one with one, it makes it much easier for me to control the situation and prevent harm.
If we could guarantee nobody had guns, that may be preferable; however, there are people who require them to defend their property from wild boars, coyotes, etc, and there are people who can fabricate them if they wanted to (e.g the GhostGun cnc project).
I think there is a solution here, but I don't think it's a simple one such as "banning" guns or "cracking down" even more on mass murderers (especially since consecutive life sentences are really worthless and don't actually increase the penalty if you think about it). The problem is that we refuse to think rationally about how to actually solve the problem and deal with it in an effective manner.
Violence and murders still happen even in places that ostensibly don't have guns, and guns still find their way into those countries anyway. Unless we can deal with motives, mental illness, and outright malice, we won't be able to stop the senseless violence against defenseless children regardless of banning guns (though it may make the types of mass causalities and targets on schools less prevalent).
In most western societies most people don't have a license to own firearms. In those countries that allow citizens to keep firearms in their homes, most require that the firearms are kept unloaded and locked in a secure gun-safe; with the ammunition locked separately in a different secure location. The idea that people would keep an accessible loaded weapon in their homes is absolutely alien to just about every civilized country on earth EXCEPT the USA.
Please try not to advance insane american nonsense in your argument.
Kindly refrain from describing me as 'silly', it just makes you sound arrogant and offensive which, I'm left in little doubt, is what you are!
In most of the the countries you cite - owning a firearm is a PRIVILEGE that has to be earned by passing often very challenging exams, by taking out insurance and by demonstrating to the authorities that you own a secure gun safe in which to store your weapon(s) and a further secure storage area in which to store ammunition separate from the unloaded weapons themselves.
The apparently commonplace habit of americans keeping loaded firearms lying about the house would get your license to hold a firearm revoked in most jurisdictions.
In most of the countries you mention, you will only get a license to own a firearm of the type for which you have established a requirement. So if you have a hunting license (rightly required in most jurisdictions), you will get a permit to own hunting rifles and shotguns - if you are a member of a target shooting club then you will get a permit to hold target shooting rifles or pistols (which will not include military style weapons like the AK47 or AR15 nor indeed most handguns). Getting a license to carry a handgun in public is impossible or extremely difficult in most jurisdictions!
Even countries like France where there is a long tradition of hunting and relative freedom of ownership of firearms, have begun slowly to place more and more restrictions on the ownership of firearms and their use. For example, when I lived there in the 1970s, there were no restrictions or formalities involved in the purchase and use of .22 long rifle calibre weapons or of shotguns - today you need a license for such weapons. As you may guess, larger calibres are even more tightly regulated.
I think you have missed the elephant in the room - on the map you put up, it shows the places where you can obtain a license or permit to own a firearm (very few countries indeed allow people other than police and the military to carry a loaded firearm in a public place unless you are hunting!) but what it doesn't show is how difficult or not it is to get your hands on such a license or permit. I happen to live in one of the countries you cite, Luxembourg. Here to get a permit for, for example, a hunting rifle, I would need to take an expensive official course in hunting and then pass an exam both theoretical and practical (the official courses and exams are only held in the Luxembourgish language). That's not quite the same as pop down to your local gunsmith and buy one, is it?
In Britain where I hail from, as a normal private citizen, owning a handgun is completely banned - FULL STOP! Getting a firearms permit to own a rifle is quite difficult - you have to have good reason - if it's for hunting you will be asked where you intend to hunt and may have to prove that you own the land or have the written permission of the landowner. If it's for target shooting you have to have joined a club and the Police WILL check!
When I was living in Thailand, I met an american in a bar and got into conversation with him. He had only just arrived in Thailand as a recent retiree and he asked me if he needed a permit to "open carry" or "concealed carry" in Thailand and if so where he could get one. I politely informed him that such permits are practically unobtainable in Thailand except on payment of a huge bribe and in any case would never be issued to anyone other than Thai citizens! Apparently, he left Thailand a few days later, citing that as his reason for leaving!
In all the countries I have lived in: the UK, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Thailand, I have never met anyone who would welcome a situation like there is in the USA; a country drowning in firearms and awash with mass-murder!
If the usa wants to go on killing 100s of children and 1000s of adults every year because of that nations inherent stupidity, that is not my problem - I will remind you how extremely foolish you look in the eyes of the rest of the world and leave to your funerals, thoughts and prayers!
@Paulos_the_fog @johnabs As for keeping firearms securely locked when not in use, I agree with you, as would most law-abiding gun owners who keep them locked in safes already.
The problem is that even if you make that rule a law, it's also the kind of thing that typically only gets enforced after-the-fact.
@Paulos_the_fog @johnabs Most Americans don't have a license to own firearms either.
If by "license" you mean "legal right", however, then you should know that the following countries allow legal private ownership of longarms, especially for hunting purposes: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland, Sweden, Ukraine, UK.
Which you might recognize as *pretty much all of them*.
Just look at this helpful map from Wikipedia. See how pretty much none of the "western societies" are red?
(Also, see how silly it was for you to limit your argument to western societies? You actually would have had a stronger argument by including the eastern ones too)