Wednesday, October 4, 2017

Some Hustling, Bustling, and Rustling ... about Guns ... in Ireland

The 2nd Amendment isn't part of the program today since I'm quite sure you already know what's in it and I'm equally sure you're fed-up to your last hair follicle with people explaining it to you.

Today we have some joker asking why Iceland can get it right with guns while America cannot.  I'm not looking to incite angry reactions since I don't know yet that Iceland is any better at it.



According to the research organisation Gun Policy, the estimated total of civilian-owned guns in Iceland is about 90,000.

That’s 90,000 guns for 330,000 people. Roughly a third, so chances are if you are in a room with ten Icelanders, about two or three of them are gun owners. In the United States, by contrast, there are far more guns per household but the rate of gun ownership is just a little above one third, so similar to Iceland.

In spite of this high rate of civilian gun ownership, Iceland still has one of the lowest crime rates in the world.

Reykjavik Grapevine:  90,000 Guns But No Gun-Related Crimes

That's most impressive but it doesn't tell me how they do it.  The radical disparity is obvious but the comparison doesn't give me much without seeing a basis for it.  That Icelanders are just nicer than Americans won't do it for me more than a millisecond or so.


Here you go:

“We do not know exactly why gun crime is so low,” said Jónas Hafsteinsson, who works in the Icelandic Police’s gun licensing department. “Maybe because it is hard to get a licence?”

In order to get a gun and a hunting licence, Icelanders have to do paperwork for the police, the magistrate, and even the Environment Agency of Iceland.

- RG

The comparison is bloody rubbish, mates.  That's not at all the way America does it so any comparison has no value.  Licensing, I believe, is the way all of the Euro nations do it so there isn't even anything new in it.

The Rockhouse favors licensing to ensure gun owners have the competence and sensibility to handle the responsibility of owning such a weapon.  Banning things does no good when people will just find an alternative or design and build a new variety.  They're highly inventive that way.

We're really not looking for gun control so much as we want to see gunner self-control, something which is typically absent in those perpetrating heinous shooter crimes.  We further believe the only way we will get that is by licensing so it takes more than a drivers license and a pretty smile to buy a gun.

Repeating, I'm not interested in any argument on the matter since this is my position and people have many.  If this has provoked anger in some way then I apologize; it was not my purpose.

Zen Yogi:  we just have to cull the lunatics

It's true, mate, since the others just get off on owning guns but have no purpose to shoot you or anyone else.


We don't need a long and boring speech since gunners know it as well that their reputations would stand a whole lot better if the psychos were not making everyone look terrible with their vicious crimes.  Likely all agree the psychos shouldn't have guns and there are different thoughts for how to achieve it when most discussion goes up in flames before it ever gets that far.

That's for y'all to figure out since I won't be able to play in this round but the Hope at the Rockhouse is you will figure it out when ultimately both teams want the same thing, to stop the crazies from doing insanely vicious crimes with guns.

You will do it too since almost everyone is fed up to the gill pipes with the fact the problem continues.

Zen Yogi:  what's a gill pipe?

No idea, mate, but being filled up that far has got to suck.  People will do it only this time it's not so much they have to do it but rather they want to do it.

Zen Yogi:  to cull the lunatics?

That's right, Yogi ... cull the lunatics.

Zen Yogi:  do you mean to kill them in this culling?

Negatory on that, Yogi, but ferchrissakes don't let them have guns.

No comments: