Paul1404,
As I said in earlier posts, just wait till you grow up & youll see things different !

Paul,

Battle casualties fell after the widespread use of the machine gun' that's why there are fewer firearm casualties in WWII than in WWI.

Many battles pre-MG had far more dead and less wounded than WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_by_casualties

"Please note, unlike me, Issy is not willing to explain how his master plan of 'GUNS FOR SELF DEFENCE' would work. Everyone with a loaded gun 24/7 Dodge City revisited, that's it."

I have no master plan for self defence and challenge you to shew where I have ever said that everyone should be armed; one reference will be enough.

We still await your master plan and that of the Greens for the effective disarming of criminals.
Surely disarming the criminal should come before disarming the law abiding?

"Once again Issy I have blasted you out of your foxhole on the gun issue!"

Ha! Ha!

Issy I am flabbergasted you would say //Battle casualties fell after the widespread use of the machine gun' that's why there are fewer firearm casualties in WWII than in WWI.//

What a load of rubbish! I have made a reasonable study of WWI, it is of particular interest to me.

The machine gun was most effective in WWI, and was extensively deployed by both sides, known as the Vickers gun by the British and French, it was in service before WWI, up until the 1960's. The German equivalent was the MG 08, both based on the successful Maxim gun of the late 19th century.

First and foremost the reason for the extremely high causality rate in WWI was poor/outdated military tactics. Compounding the poor tactics was the problem of disease and badly ineffective causality treatment, men died from relatively minor wounds due to slow or non existent attention.

Those killed by direct fire, including bombardment, on the Western Front no less than one third were the result of machine gun fire. On the first day of the 1916 Battle of the Somme, the British Army sustained a causality rate of over 57,000, with 19,000 killed, most due to German machine gun fire as they tried to walk across no mans land with the objective of taking the German trenches. For the British a total military failure.

Dear mhaze,

Damn your comprehension has fallen off a cliff of late. The 'Civilian' police officers at Fort Hood were at work, on duty, and uniformed.

And to be saying off duty police officers were not police officers is just inane. Their skills, training and experience make them completely different to some ordinary citizen who has spent an hour or two if that at a range and are not somehow lost because they are out of uniform.

It is serving police officers who have been involved in incidents you are trying to portray as intervention by members of the public. It is both dishonest and deluded.

Time to stop.

Paul,

I said,

"Battle casualties fell after the widespread use of the machine gun that's why there are fewer firearm casualties in WWII than in WWI"

Thank you for proving my point.

The lessons of WWI were not lost on the soldiers of WWII.

I always get a grin out of watching the usual suspects try excusing the insanity that mass murder in America is
They must have had fun as kids with those cap guns blasting even mum and dad
However mass murder is not something we want here thankfully the big boys on both sides of politics know that