[Wheatfield]

Listen up....and I'm only going to tell you this once!



But...don't blame senseless killings on guns..For a USA without guns would be far worse than the few killings by nut bags we have every so often. You must take the good with the bad when it comes to guns.

For if you want a USA that is devoid of guns...then this is what you will have...

Thank God you aren't going to say that twice. It's actually scarey, from the standpoint of your next door neighbor that the only think keeping your country to turning into an evil dictatorship run by the likes of Hitler, Castro, Qaddafi, Stalin, Amin, Tse-tung, Pol Pot or Jong-il is guns.
I had always thought that it was human decency and the democratic process that stopped monsters like that from gaining power, and that Americans just didn't harbour that sort of evil in their midst.
It isn't lost on me though that all of your examples are very much examples of very strong right wing politics.

[dankoBanana]

It isn't lost on me though that all of your examples are very much examples of very strong right wing politics.

I find that very amusing

[Phil1]

We have an awful lot of very bad people here, the jails are full, rampant drug problems with laws, laws and more laws. Unfortunatly those that have the inclination don't follow laws. If you could magically eliminate all civilian guns here, in very short order the people you don't want to have guns will have all they want. Just like drugs, illegal immigration and all the rest. As you may be aware Detroit has strong gun laws and has an insane murder rate. Legislate away.........

When the legislation does not work, then what?

[dankoBanana]

When the legislation does not work, then what?

making a law is step 1. enforcing it is step 2.

[seacapt]

I agree it is illogical to blame guns for violence, but also I think there is a question of whether humans are mature enough to be handed weapons that can kill a bunch of people in a few seconds. That concern may be especially relevant to ignorant Americans who elect/follow the likes of Wayne LaPierre as head of the NRA:



Add to American ignorance and immaturity the fact that illegal gun sales are responsible for most gun violence, and that the NRA does everything in its power to thwart efforts that could eliminate illegal gun sales, and we have an issue that is a lot more complicated than the "right to bear arms."

Les , you've used the term "illegal gun sales" many times in several threads today. What exactly is your definition of this term and how do you think more legislation will prevent it?

[Frogfish]

Again, we are focusing on the weapon and not the criminal. Any weapon in the hands of a nut, criminal or radical is deadly, be it a rifle, hand gun, car, truck or what ever. I think we need to look at this whole thing without prejudice and deal with the basic cause of this incident, the person and their mental disabilities.

I think what people need to focus on is the accessibility to powerful guns and the average citizen's need for them. This isn't just a USA-centric debate but their rather more liberal laws re. gun ownership and the type of weapons the average citizen may legally acquire is relevant. Trying to deflect by quoting drugs, drunken driving issues etc. is pointless and just that, deflection or avoidance of the problem. Address each issue independently.

[ihasa]

We have an awful lot of very bad people here, the jails are full, rampant drug problems with laws, laws and more laws. Unfortunatly those that have the inclination don't follow laws. If you could magically eliminate all civilian guns here, in very short order the people you don't want to have guns will have all they want. Just like drugs, illegal immigration and all the rest. As you may be aware Detroit has strong gun laws and has an insane murder rate. Legislate away.........

When the legislation does not work, then what?

I'm not going to comment on whether the ease with which a 24 year old man obtained AK47s and a huge ammo dump contributed to the scale of this tragedy. It does strike me as shocking that such weapons are available so casually, but on the other hand, these mass shooters are special 'forward planning' kinds of people who will obtain a weapon and a way of inflicting maximum destruction somehow no matter how strict the gun laws are.

But it does annoy me in these discussions when deprived urban areas are cited as examples of gun laws not working, usually accompanied by statistics from predominantly rural states with lax or no gun laws where the murder rate is far lower. You never hear about New York, with stringent gun control laws and relatively good crime statistics. Not to suggest that the stringent gun laws are the only or even main factor in reducing crime overall - that would be as silly as suggesting that lax gun laws directly reduce crime.

I think shootings like this one are outside the 'gun control debate' and although I am pro gun control, I think that the knee jerk response is probably missing the point. I think we should be focussing on why the shooter did what he did, rather than the tools he employed. I just wrote some waffle on this, but I have deleted it and will just say that a common thread with a lot of these shootings seems to be an interaction with our society / culture, and psychologically weak individuals.

---

Last edited by ihasa; 07-21-2012 at 01:22 AM.

[wildman]

I think we should be focussing on why the shooter did what he did, rather than the tools he employed.

I think it's at least fair to ask, given exactly the same situation, but with the weapon limited to, say, a kitchen knife how much difference would this have made to the final outcome if any?

[pickles]

Apparently you don't have your eyes open very wide. Liberals (at least in Canada) have ensured that there are education programs and continual blasting of advertising relating to the perils of drinking and driving, doing drugs and driving, texting and driving, etc.
Not that it seems to do much good, but at least we try.
We certainly don't actively promote shoot to kill laws, and in fact in Canada, the Liberals were the ones who attempted to put a national gun registry in place (which was, admittedly a vastly overpriced boondoggle).
But at least they tried. The Conservatives are dismantling it now.

For myself, I used to think there was, in some way, some sort of correlation between the startlingly high number of gun related crimes in the USA and the very lax purchasing laws and easy to get carry permits.
However, the gun lobby has convinced me that there is absolutely no correlation between the USA being the gun crime capital of the world and the number of guns, or the attitude towards guns or how many guns are carried by people in public, or how many guns are just left around people's houses loaded and with the safeties off.
I'm also convinced that American's are no more violent than any other nationality in the world, and that the huge numbers of your people who are killed by firearms every years are completely coincidental to the firearm themselves, or to any external force.
I have come to believe that it is pure coincidence that countries that have strict gun laws have lower rates of gun crime, that Liberal democracies tend to have overall lower crime rates in general and gun crimes in particular, and that it is absolutely impossible to make any connection between guns and crimes committed with guns, or to draw any conclusions about crime rates in the USA compared to crime rates everywhere else and pin down American society as being more violent.

AAHHH..my friend....how are you?
Here in Aus, we have VERY strict gun laws....so strict in fact, that it is almost impossible to own one. If you were caught on the street with a pistol....it'd be pretty hard for you not to end up in the can.
I myself believe that it is everyone's right to carry a gun....if ya want to.....but let me tell you....I'm in the minority...big time.....and I suppose with events happening that are the subject of this thread, then it'd be hard to say that there shouldn't be more control over guns.....
One final point....all this guy needs is a bullet in the back of his head.
Cheers, Pickles.

[Jodokast96]

I think it's at least fair to ask, given exactly the same situation, but with the weapon limited to, say, a kitchen knife how much difference would this have made to the final outcome if any?

I think he answered it well earlier in his post.

these mass shooters are special 'forward planning' kinds of people who will obtain a weapon and a way of inflicting maximum destruction somehow no matter how strict the gun laws are.

[bossa]

We have an awful lot of very bad people here, the jails are full, rampant drug problems with laws, laws and more laws. Unfortunatly those that have the inclination don't follow laws. If you could magically eliminate all civilian guns here, in very short order the people you don't want to have guns will have all they want. Just like drugs, illegal immigration and all the rest. As you may be aware Detroit has strong gun laws and has an insane murder rate. Legislate away.........

When the legislation does not work, then what?

Isn't it the job of Law Enforcement Agencies to enforce the law? These days, The USA appears to be a lynch mob and that can't possibly cure things. If your society is broken then you need to fix it in a civilized way or it will never be fixed at all. Everything we do has a cost, expecially things that are hard to do, and guns don't make it easier, they just make it a war.

[Tom S.]

Do you hunt with assault weapons ? You gun lovers are so bent out of shape you think we are going to take all you guns away if we reinstate the assault weapons ban . You are like little 5 year old boys crying for your assault weapons so you could get your cookies like John Wayne.

First off, the deffinition of assualt weapons is a bit vague, but I'm guessing you are talking about rifles that are semi automatic and have large capacity magazines. Yes, many people do use them for hunting. My first time deer hunting, I used a M1 carbine. Not because it was the best deer hunting gun available, but because it was cheep ($15 through a NRA government surplus sale), and it was sized right for a youngster like myself. As someone else pointed out, many use modern military rifles for hunting today, and I would point out for similar reason: they are inexpensive.

I guess your a bad shot if you need 20 rounds to put down a deer.

If you can name one state that allows hunting with a 20 round magazine, I would love to hear it. I'm not aware of any that allow more than 5 rounds, but maybe you know something I don't.

Were did I say he purchased them off the internet ? The bottom line is anyone like him could buy an AR15 like he did ?
[

No, not everyone like him can buy a AR15. For instance, you can't. That's right, living in New Jersey means you are restricted from owning certain weapons. BTW: how are your state's restrictive gun laws working out for you? Has it elminated crime there?

[jogiba]

First off, the deffinition of assualt weapons is a bit vague, but I'm guessing you are talking about rifles that are semi automatic and have large capacity magazines. Yes, many people do use them for hunting. My first time deer hunting, I used a M1 carbine. Not because it was the best deer hunting gun available, but because it was cheep ($15 through a NRA government surplus sale), and it was sized right for a youngster like myself. As someone else pointed out, many use modern military rifles for hunting today, and I would point out for similar reason: they are inexpensive.




If you can name one state that allows hunting with a 20 round magazine, I would love to hear it. I'm not aware of any that allow more than 5 rounds, but maybe you know something I don't.




No, not everyone like him can buy a AR15. For instance, you can't. That's right, living in New Jersey means you are restricted from owning certain weapons. BTW: how are your state's restrictive gun laws working out for you? Has it elminated crime there?

Wow, another gun lover who wants to make it possible for brain dead idiots to legally buy AR15's with 100 round magazine to kill a large amount people by remote control in the shortest amount of time because they are the biggest weenies on the planet.

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Renegade right-winger Ted Nugent recently went on a vicious onstage rant in which he threatened the lives of Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Decked out in full-on camouflage hunting gear, Nugent wielded two machine guns while raging, "Obama, he's a piece of shit. I told him to suck on my machine gun. Hey Hillary," he continued. "You might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch." Nugent summed up his eloquent speech by screaming "freedom!"

Read more: Ted Nugent Threatens to Kill Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton During Vicious Onstage Rant | Music News | Rolling Stone

[Parallax]

he is a registered Democrat

It's a lie! Probably made up by Palin or Bachmann. Everybody knows that the only gun owners in this country are registered Republicans, south of the Mason-Dixon line, who don't have more than 3 teeth, less than 4 dogs under the porch, or own a shirt with sleeves.

[jogiba]

You Tube

You Tube