I haven't gone 'shooting' as such I had training in the UK whilst in 'cadets'.

I also practice archery in Canada not for hunting just at the range I personally believe in having the tools required for 'survival' (not that I'm a doomsday prepper or anything, basic survival skills are a must IMO).

I would not like to see guns banned or even regulated that much further than having mental health checks and re-licensing every year or two.

I just found your comparison between guns and cars extremely...
well I'll keep it civil.

I think gun-related sprees definitely get more press.

If you Google mass stabbings, there are so many, all over the world and also including the US.

There's also vehicular ones, a good example being this nut-job;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...s-13-more.html

Generally it is down to a person who has 'unravelled', so as others have said, better dealing of this would reduce, but would never eliminate these instances.

Could you please explain to me why the vast majority of the armies in the world currently use a calibre of round for their soldiers' primary weapon that is not intended to kill if all guns are "designed to kill"?

The gun is designed to kill. The bullet is designed to maim, which takes much more enemy resources to deal with.

Welcome back, btw.

Thank you.

I am aware of the philosophy but I think you have it the wrong way around. The effect of the bullet depends upon the bullet. Bullets that can be fired from the same weapon can be specifically designed to maim or to kill, without the weapon being modified in any way.

I doubt that any sane person would try to argue than a rifle used by a biathlon participant, or an Olympic target shooter, are designed to kill.

As I am sure you will appreciate, no one could seriously wish to kill anyone while wearing multi coloured spandex

I've said it before and you shouted me down - if you don't make an effort to understand the why of these shooting rampages there are going to be more and more of them. I've owned guns for over 45 years. I have bags of experience shooting from pellet guns to howitzers almost all my life and hunted almost all my life and I've read the same opinions from you or people like you (opinion-wise) on this forum before. It's like staring at an Escher staircase. What about the shootings that take place from cars? All you statisticians..... (If it takes a chicken and a half a day and a half to lay an egg and a half how long does it take a grasshopper with a wooden leg to kick the seeds out of a dill pickle?) I don't know if any of you should have guns, but that isn't my job. If you don't like guns don't have one; same argument as abortions. There are some semi-auto rifles that are sporting classics, nothing military about them, btw, other than that they are semi-auto. They usually have 5 rd magazines so the short mag or conversion kit sold for assault rifles isn't required. I would consider banning those over-reacting, like (feel free to correct me) Australia banning pump action shotguns because someone went nuts with one. Oswald used a cheap Carcano bolt action but he was a good shot, he could feasibly done it with a muzzle loader.

Forget about spandex-clad bisexuals, you asked a specific question: Why don't the world's armed forces use bullets designed to kill?

What is the answer if it's not to cause resource-expensive injury instead of death?

I really, really want to go drinking with you.

Cardiff hit and run rampage kills mother and injures 13 more

Doesn't sound very efficient does it. He should have been allowed a gun and done it properly.

Guys alone in the woods together shooting at things. Sounds gay.

Many firearms are designed purely for target shooting, it's not semantics. Saying they can be used to kill people is no different than saying you can stab someone to death with a kitchen knife.

And a flare gun is technically a firearm.

Derrick Bird owned guns for pest control, .22 rifle and a double-barrel shotgun. No-one ever seriously suggests that you could ban those for that purpose, yet look what he did in Cumbria.

The point that I was making is that other people make that comparison and it's stupid.

I'm not disagreeing with you that firearms aren't weapons, they are, but you clearly know nothing about target shooting. There are legions of Italian gunmakers making shotguns purely for shooting clays out of the sky and no-one in their right mind would use them for field shooting. The same is true of the pistols and rifles used in ISSF (including the Olympics).

Well your prejudices aside, target shooting is a very long-standing sport and is one of the original sports of the modern Olympics.

Have you been issued your pistol yet?

They went up. 54 in 1997/98, 97 in 2001/02. They've since gone down but crime has gone down around the world across the board in the last ten years.