Quantcast

Gun Control

norbar

norbar

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause
Jun 7, 2007
11,368
1,606
Warsaw :/
TheTruth said:
I've only read the first page of this thread, and it seems that the consensus is the government is to blame; specifically Obama. Obama could not be blamed for this or any level of government in the US because this tragedy was unforeseen and could not have been prevented by any person or law, but his mother. Adam Lanza had mental issues that his mother struggled with and she did try to seek help. She had no idea her son was going commit such an act of terrorism. http://gawker.com/5968818/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother Newton,

"Oh, and Fvck Obama for being such a pvssy. Today is exactly the right day to start talking about this like adults." If you haven't noticed, our culture practices grieving and mourning over deaths. To disturb that period with belligerent argument and speak of guns would be rather rude to those mourning and grieving. I understand your reactionary statements, but your suggestions would only make the victims feel worse. Have sympathy.

However, the debate over gun control is not one for me to take part in. But I will say that it was Adam Lanza's mother who Adam obtained the guns from. Will we start asking everyone who wants to buy a gun if they have crazy kin? Also, guns serve no other purpose than to kill whether it be animals or humans. Putting restrictions on guns won't make them any less dangerous.

Really what this debate comes down to is the culture of fear in America. Everyone is constantly afraid something terrible is going to happen, which is why we are debating over how many laws we can get the government to implement to make us safe. Laws are made by humans and they can be broken by humans. Laws are a mental concept. Tragedies like this will continue to happen in America because we are so afraid of reoccurring tragedies and crazy people see this as an opportunity to really scare everyone. So what do we do? In my opinion, we just continue to live our lives.
Click to expand...
Obama or any government could not have prevented the specific tragedy but lowering the number of guns would lower the PROBABILITY of that event happening. The same way as wearing a seatbelt won't save everyone in every case of car crash but in increases the probability of survival.


Also the "let's live our lives" idea is silly. Something is wrong and instead of trying to prevent it or repair it you just sa we should go along and say "hey people shoot people, live with it" ? With that attitude we would still be in the stone age. I'm sure some peeps thought it was ok then and nothing should be changed.



profro said:
The current US population is 311,591,917. You get that many idiots living together and some unfortunate, bad things will happen. In my opinion, the ONLY way to stop violence like this is for someone to cap the killer before he kills 20+ unarmed, innocent people. Just think about how this story would be if he was stopped before victim 1, or 2, or 3, or 4, or so on. Don't you think every single family would have wished someone there could have stopped this? I would.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Solve the gun problem with more guns. If there will be more gun violence in schools we should have even more guns... More is always the solution to a problem
 
profro

profro

Turbo Monkey
Feb 25, 2002
5,617
314
Walden Ridge
Last edited:
Kevin

Kevin

Turbo Monkey
Sep 6, 2004
4,540
1,007
In Holland sticking my finger in a dike...
profro said:
The current US population is 311,591,917. You get that many idiots living together and some unfortunate, bad things will happen. In my opinion, the ONLY way to stop violence like this is for someone to cap the killer before he kills 20+ unarmed, innocent people. Just think about how this story would be if he was stopped before victim 1, or 2, or 3, or 4, or so on. Don't you think every single family would have wished someone there could have stopped this? I would.
Click to expand...
Yeah if only someone on the scene had a gun to shoot the killer...

**** you people are retarted...
 
kidwoo

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Aug 25, 2003
42,146
13,340
Squirtin ketchup n' mustard on charred flesh
profro said:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,43254,00.html
Click to expand...
Two trained dudes with zero guns tackle a guy who puts his gun down on his own accord? That applies how?


What happens in the mall in oregon a week ago when two or three or four people with firearms take justice into their own hands? They hear shots. They grab their pistols. Who do they subdue? Shoot the first guy they see with a pistol? Is that the guy who started the mess or someone else doing the exact same thing they are.......trying to put an end to it? Think this through. It's great the two guys in your examples could easily identify the perp but don't you remember the guy in arizona at the giffords shooting who ran outside with his pistol? He stayed hidden because he couldn't figure out what was going on. What if one of gifford's aides or someone else had a pistol drawn pointed at loughner?

One or two successes doesn't negate the very real probability of the other likely outcome. Public places turning into the OK corral is NOT a good idea.
 
Last edited:
profro

profro

Turbo Monkey
Feb 25, 2002
5,617
314
Walden Ridge
Beef Supreme

Beef Supreme

Turbo Monkey
Oct 29, 2010
1,434
73
Hiding from the stupid
Kevin said:
Yeah if only someone on the scene had a gun to shoot the killer...

**** you people are retarted...
Click to expand...
It really is the dumbest of all the pro gun arguments. 61 mass incidents and this mythical gun toting hero hasn't shown up yet. Of course, it did almost happen the time some guy nearly shot the person who had wrestled the gun away from the shooter.

Slate said:
But before we embrace Zamudio's brave intervention as proof of the value of being armed, let's hear the whole story. "I came out of that store, I clicked the safety off, and I was ready," he explained on Fox and Friends. "I had my hand on my gun. I had it in my jacket pocket here. And I came around the corner like this." Zamudio demonstrated how his shooting hand was wrapped around the weapon, poised to draw and fire. As he rounded the corner, he saw a man holding a gun. "And that's who I at first thought was the shooter," Zamudio recalled. "I told him to 'Drop it, drop it!' "

But the man with the gun wasn't the shooter. He had wrested the gun away from the shooter. "Had you shot that guy, it would have been a big, fat mess," the interviewer pointed out.

Zamudio agreed:

I was very lucky. Honestly, it was a matter of seconds. Two, maybe three seconds between when I came through the doorway and when I was laying on top of [the real shooter], holding him down. So, I mean, in that short amount of time I made a lot of really big decisions really fast. … I was really lucky.
Click to expand...
 
syadasti

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
More guns not only result in more murder, they also result in more suicides. Only the delusional would push for more access to guns:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/mythbusting-israel-and-switzerland-are-not-gun-toting-utopias/

EK: As I understand it, there’s a stronger link between guns and suicide than between guns and homicide. And one of the really interesting parts of your paper is your recounting of the Israeli military’s effort to cut suicides among soldiers by restricting access to guns.
JR: Yes, it’s very striking. In Israel, it used to be that all soldiers would take the guns home with them. Now they have to leave them on base. Over the years they’ve done this — it began, I think, in 2006 — there’s been a 60 percent decrease in suicide on weekends among IDS soldiers. And it did not correspond to an increase in weekday suicide. People think suicide is an impulse that exists and builds. This shows that doesn’t happen. The impulse to suicide is transitory. Someone with access to a gun at that moment may commit suicide, but if not, they may not.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
kidwoo

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Aug 25, 2003
42,146
13,340
Squirtin ketchup n' mustard on charred flesh
profro said:
You don't read too well?? Paragraph 12 I think...
Click to expand...
Guess not. My bad. The guy still put his damn gun down all by his own wittle self. Not real clear on how grabbing the gun changed the outcome in any way shape or form.


Still.........how many people do you want in a public place with guns drawn trying to figure out who to shoot?
 
Last edited:
S

SlapheadMofo

Monkey
Jul 29, 2003
412
0
Westminster MA
Too many morons with too much firepower.

"Why do you need a large capacity semi-automatic weapon?"
"Cuz I think they're cool" is the only honest answer.

People need to start acting like grown-ups and realize that there are more important things in life than playing with their toys. There's nothing any reasonable person could ever need a firearm for that can't be accomplished without giving any random meathead the ability to wipe out a few dozen people in a minutes if they happen to have a bad day or if some nut happens to make off with their toy.

Exactly how much penetrating power is needed to get through a sheet of paper? How many times to you have to plug a deer to drop it? Is a revolver or shotgun really not adequate for home defense?

And comparing 'assualt weapons' to cars is silly. Unless of course someone takes a car and mounts giant spikes, armor and explosive devices that go off on impact all over it. That way, if they do get in an accident, they can cause the most damage possible to everyone around them. And the government will be more likey to kidnap the guy in the Honda.
 
syadasti

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
stevew said:
was that the week of the fiscal cliff or benghazi?
Click to expand...
No, that was 30 years ago when Reagan let hundreds get massacred and nobody cared he did nothing (unlike the "cowardly" French)...

Or maybe you meant that time Powell lied in front of the world for Bush so we could kill over a hundred thousand people and waste trillions for nothing...
 
Last edited:
jimmydean

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
41,155
13,323
Portland, OR
MMike said:
Little kids are getting slaughtered because of the idiotic policies on firearms.
Click to expand...
I blame the person, not the gun. While I think assault rifles are stupid for anyone not in the active military or police, I don't think it is the access to those types of weapons that cause people to go batsh!t crazy.
 
kidwoo

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Aug 25, 2003
42,146
13,340
Squirtin ketchup n' mustard on charred flesh
jimmydean said:
I blame the person, not the gun. While I think assault rifles are stupid for anyone not in the active military or police, I don't think it is the access to those types of weapons that cause people to go batsh!t crazy.
Click to expand...
No one says it's NOT the person. And no one says it's the weapon that makes them crazy (although I'm sure you've seen the slow and not so subtle changes a lot of people, okay dudes, undergo when they start really really getting into collections).

But wouldn't you rather that when someone does start to lose it and think the world is out to get them and wants to show that world a thing or two, his arsenal consists of a swiss army knife and a baseball bat?
 
mattmatt86

mattmatt86

Turbo Monkey
Feb 9, 2005
5,347
10
Bleedmore, Murderland
jimmydean said:
I blame the person, not the gun. While I think assault rifles are stupid for anyone not in the active military or police, I don't think it is the access to those types of weapons that cause people to go batsh!t crazy.
Click to expand...
Of course access to a gun doesnt cause someone to go crazy. I have access to fattening foods and I'm not Fat. Someone can go crazy and kill someone with a spoon, a rock, their hands, whatever. An assault weapon allows them to kill with more precision and speed. If there were an assault weapons ban he still could have killed people with a hunting rifle or a shot gun, but their might only be 5 or 6 parents burying their children instead of 20+.
 
syadasti

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
jimmydean said:
I blame the person, not the gun. While I think assault rifles are stupid for anyone not in the active military or police, I don't think it is the access to those types of weapons that cause people to go batsh!t crazy.
Click to expand...
China has strict gun control. Their crazy person on the same day injured 22 children in a half hour with a kitchen knife. The problem and difference is obvious.
 
Last edited:
jimmydean

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
41,155
13,323
Portland, OR
mattmatt86 said:
Of course access to a gun doesnt cause someone to go crazy. I have access to fattening foods and I'm not Fat. Someone can go crazy and kill someone with a spoon, a rock, their hands, whatever. An assault weapon allows them to kill with more precision and speed. If there were an assault weapons ban he still could have killed people with a hunting rifle or a shot gun, but their might only be 5 or 6 parents burying their children instead of 20+.
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe with a shotgun he could have cleared more than 1 room. I don't see a need for public access to assault type rifles or any large capacity rifle for that matter. Shotgun for home defense, hunting rifle for hunting, hand gun for fun if needed.

And at least if you go after someone with a knife, it's more personal than just aim/fire. A ban on kitchen knifes would go too far IMO.
 
syadasti

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
jimmydean said:
And at least if you go after someone with a knife, it's more personal than just aim/fire. A ban on kitchen knifes would go too far IMO.
Click to expand...
Nobody died so a ban wouldn't save anyone. They aren't as efficient.

Just as nations have banned some times of weapons from warfare the same makes sense for the civilian sector. Certain levels of efficiency/suffering have no place in our society.
 
Last edited:
jimmydean

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
41,155
13,323
Portland, OR
syadasti said:
Certain levels of efficiency/suffering have no place in our society.
Click to expand...
:stupid:

The issue with a ban is what do you do about ALL THE ONES OUT THERE NOW? Hell, GFF drove up with 3 in the back seat. While I was envious of the overbuilt night vision setup he had on one of them, I fail to see an actual need for such a powerful weapon in society.

I love the "I need it for hunting" argument. I know you would have nailed the trophy buck if you only had 15+ rounds in burst mode.
 
syadasti

syadasti

i heart mac
Apr 15, 2002
12,690
290
VT
Weapons bans in warfare have had an effect. The rules of supply and demand will not stop so with time things will improve. The magnitude of a problem is not a valid excuse to give up and do nothing.

As people have said bullet sales bans, quotas, taxes, etc could also be proposed
 
Last edited:
AngryMetalsmith

AngryMetalsmith

Business is good, thanks for asking
Jun 4, 2006
21,210
10,009
I have no idea where I am
AngryMetalsmith said:
I remember reading news articles about the Gabby Giffords shooting and noticed that the type of gun, brand, caliber and model were mentioned. Sales of that particular weapon increased immediately following the massacre. I expect this time to be no different as the the weapons used in yesterday's shooting have been equally identified.

Reading the comments posted below the current online news articles in favor of gun rights and the defense of the 2nd amendment is just sickening. This country's love affair with guns at all cost is beyond disturbing to me. Twenty children were gunned down and frothers can offer no sympathy for the grieving but instead vehemently defend their right to weapons. Is the unrestricted right to posses firearms more important than the lives of children ?

Some offer such nuggets of wisdom as to suggest that yesterday's tragedy could have been avoided if the teachers were carrying side arms. Their idea is to add more guns to the equation. This is insane, completely.

We have a problem in the US, and the need for gun control is only a symptom. We as culture and a people have some serious issues that need to be addressed. The mentality needs to change before laws can have any impact.
Click to expand...


Well that didn't take long:

Sandy Hook Shooting Sparks Gun Sales Surge

Robert Caselnova, who owns a Connecticut gun shop located less than 10 minutes from the school, said firearms flew off his shelves over the weekend, with multiple requests for AR-15 style rifles, a weapon Adam Lanza used in the Newtown massacre.
Click to expand...
Mancard Reinstated




Sometimes I am ashamed to be an American.
 
Last edited:
Silver

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,840
1
Orange County, CA
Bushmaster should man up and make a Lanza pro model.

They can sell magazines in the favorite Crayola colors of the dead kids. After all, there's not such thing as bad publicity, amirite?
 
DirtMcGirk

DirtMcGirk

<b>WAY</b> Dumber than N8 (to the power of ten alm
Feb 21, 2008
6,379
1
Oz
When did Ridemonkey become the left wing pussy club?
When you're all done blowing Bloomburg, wipe the cum off your cheeks and pull your heads out of your asses.

Hugs and kisses,
Dirt
 
H8R

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,959
35
I wan't to open the discussion here about hand grenades.

I mean if assault rifles are ok, why not hand grenades and bazookas? These are "arms".


I want grenades. You know, for home defense and hunting.
 
AngryMetalsmith

AngryMetalsmith

Business is good, thanks for asking
Jun 4, 2006
21,210
10,009
I have no idea where I am
In my state I cannot own a tazer, but an assault rifle is totally legal. So clearly grenades should be legal and sold at a convenience store right between the jar of pickled eggs and the boiled peanuts. Just one state over you can take your ar-15 into the bar with you. Seems totally reasonable to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom