Re: USA gun violence thread

[DuringTheWar]

ok ok people tell me ur arguments against guns being sold

It's not guns, it's assault weapons. Do you really need a weapon capable of killing 30 people in 90 seconds to go hunting? For anything at all? Keep your guns, but these things belong in a war theater, not in a civilized country. Australia should be looked at as an example.

I think because most of them own guns in anticipation of a civil war type scenario, it does actually matter to them a lot how deadly the weaponry is.

[BarrileteCosmico]

I think it's because people like guns, and if you like guns you probably like powerful guns. Kinda similar to how if you like cars you're probably going to like Ferraris and Lambos. If someone came along and said "You will never need to go at 200 mph, we're going to ban all sports cars!" and you're this sort of person you would be outraged, even though you would realize that only in very specific scenarios would you ever go that fast, if ever at all. The problem is that there are some very serious downsides to being upset about keeping assault rifles...

[rwo power]

For the speeding on the Autobahn stuff please go here: http://www.goallegacy.net/t38374-speeding-on-the-autobahn

[RedOranje]

And now someone will, again, tell the world how this wouldn't have happened if everyone on Campus had been armed...
Incredibly sad.

Students on campus WERE armed. Students on campus as the incident happened actually had concealed weapons but lacked the knowledge/time to have any impact.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/01/oregon-student-veteran-gun-200-yards-shooting-not-help/

Its sad that i just saw 'US Campus' and immediately thought it was a shooting. My condolences to all the deceased and their families.

I'm curious as to what could be the solution to this? How can they eliminate (or greatly reduce, if you want) the number of these incidents? Total ban on guns? Even so how would they go about retrieving firearms from every person who owns it? (I imagine some ppl will retaliate)

We can start by trying to identify all the variables that are constant in all these cases. There might not be a singular cause, but isolating one factor and nullifying it might help.

Obviously thats been attempted with proposals of gun control, and the Americans reacted by buying more guns than ever.

But you know, America hasn't always had this problem, while they have always had guns, so id guess there is other stuff going on.

Maybe mind altering drugs (legal prescribed ones as well as illegal) is something we need to talk about, but there is as much resistance to that as there is to banning guns.

The times you're referring to ("always") had so very many different factors, from types of weapons, to distance between population centers, and so on. These types of events have become more commonplace as they've become easier to commit due to more concentrated populations and more accessible/powerful firearms. To suggest that guns now, and their saturation, are comparable in their effect/influence to the situation a century ago is frankly absurd.

And now someone will, again, tell the world how this wouldn't have happened if everyone on Campus had been armed...
Incredibly sad.

its usually gun free zones, where these tragedies happen

Statistically completely inaccurate. There has not been a single case where it's been determined or even suggested by the evidence that a shooter intentionally selected a place that was "gun-free."

[Tomwin Lannister]

There's far too many mentally unstable people and far too many easily acquired deadly - sometimes ridiculously deadly - weapons. But we, they, everybody else already knows that. The problem is, how the hell do you crack down on it

I don't believe they could aggressively clamp down on people and seize their weapons, there would be gun nuts everywhere up in arms literally in a national outcry shouting about how the government's taking control etc etc. It would be a violent way to go about it.

Really they have to find a compromise, i'd say you start by trying to take the fully automatic weapons out of circulation. Obviously any average joe can still do some damage with a modern pistol but a group of students/whoever in a confined space like a classroom confronted with some piece of shit with an automatic assault rifle stand no chance really.


Either way this is probably going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

[Kick]

There's far too many mentally unstable people and far too many easily acquired deadly - sometimes ridiculously deadly - weapons. But we, they, everybody else already knows that. The problem is, how the hell do you crack down on it

I don't believe they could aggressively clamp down on people and seize their weapons, there would be gun nuts everywhere up in arms literally in a national outcry shouting about how the government's taking control etc etc. It would be a violent way to go about it.

Really they have to find a compromise, i'd say you start by trying to take the fully automatic weapons out of circulation. Obviously any average joe can still do some damage with a modern pistol but a group of students/whoever in a confined space like a classroom confronted with some piece of shit with an automatic assault rifle stand no chance really.


Either way this is probably going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

I know Australia isn't the size of America, but they did took almost all guns away during the 90s and while many gun enthusiasts complained originally, many changed their opinion on it at a later point.

I think someone just has to make it happen, even if they are hated by half of USA. It will save a lot of lives.

[RedOranje]

No one reasonable is talking about breaking down doors and seizing weapons though. The ONLY people suggesting that's an option are the people extremely opposed to ANY form of gun control, using the extreme as a slippery slope fallacy as a form or argument. Similarly, there's basically no real discussion of a full ban of guns... it's about making better/more effective regulation on who can get a firearm and what types of firearms are available (see previous discussions of assault weapons). The Right has managed to drag the discussion so far in their direction that, other than their own imaginary boogey-men, the "Left" is basically Middle-Right when compared to most other parts of the world.

[Grande_Milano]

Its interesting that you dont here about these atrocious incidents from other places that have guns sold to people i.e Baltic states. So maybe thats a US thing?

My take on this: Americans have problems with women (no other country has such wide men's right sphere) and that creates these accidents

[McLewis]

What are you talking about? This shooting had nothing to do with domestic violence.

[Grande_Milano]

I am saying american men have problem with women in general which results in crazyness like this.

[Art Morte]

The award for the best reply in the thread goes to:

And it's usually the War Zones, where everyone is equipped with a gun...

The award for, by far, the weirdest post in the thread goes to:

For the speeding on the Autobahn stuff please go here: http://www.goallegacy.net/t38374-speeding-on-the-autobahn

And the award for the most confusingly speculative post goes to:

I am saying american men have problem with women in general which results in crazyness like this.

[RealGunner]

Criminal histories and documented mental health problems did not prevent at least eight of the gunmen in 14 recent mass shootings from obtaining their weapons, after federal background checks led to approval of the purchases of the guns used.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/03/us/how-mass-shooters-got-their-guns.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

[RedOranje]

Its interesting that you dont here about these atrocious incidents from other places that have guns sold to people i.e Baltic states. So maybe thats a US thing?

My take on this: Americans have problems with women (no other country has such wide men's right sphere) and that creates these accidents

I am saying american men have problem with women in general which results in crazyness like this.

Could you perhaps go into a bit more detail about what you mean here? I'm having real trouble trying to understand what you're trying to say.

[El Gunner]

Dude's saying you folks are misogynists

[RedOranje]

I'd prefer to hear from him what his meaning is, but I'll keep your interpretation in mind.

[Freeza]

I more read it as he though American men are so bad with women and anti-social that they have no will to live and choose to kill people.

No matter what he meant, it's not well-articulated at all, and if I'm right it's also straight up bullshit putting nationalities in a box like that.

[McLewis]

Ok so that guy said he was pissed off about not being able to meet women. He also said he asked the victims if they were Christians before he shot them. That's what's getting way more attention than simply his inability to attract women.

This is not exclusively an American problem. Men the world over have problems attracting women. Very few become mass murderers and serial killers. it's a copout for a much deeper psychological problem.

[rwo power]

The award for, by far, the weirdest post in the thread goes to:

For the speeding on the Autobahn stuff please go here: http://www.goallegacy.net/t38374-speeding-on-the-autobahn

That's because you obviously don't realize that the thread I've been pointing to was originally part of *this* thread until I split it off and turned it into a separate thread.

[Unique]

banning guns will stop crazy criminals from shooting people. because a crazy criminal will not shoot people if guns are illegal.

[Kaladin]

Not sure if this is already in place but what about psycometric testing for gun owners every 6-12 months? (Kinda like pilots)

[Tomwin Lannister]

banning guns will stop crazy criminals from shooting people. because a crazy criminal will not shoot people if guns are illegal.

But your average er... 'Crazy criminal' would struggle to get hold of a weapon if they weren't so ridiculously easy to obtain. Look at the UK, plenty of crime here and plenty of 'crazy criminals' but chances are they can't shoot you because they can't actually get a hold of a gun.

Obviously more organised/connected people can and will get hold of firearms especially now even if they were outlawed in America there's going to be ridiculous amounts in circulation. But chances are that the weird kid at the back of your classroom who hates life and gets rejected on the count than he's a strange creepy bastard won't find himself in possession of an automatic rifle in a country with strict gun control laws. No matter how badly he wants one.

[Unique]

banning guns will stop crazy criminals from shooting people. because a crazy criminal will not shoot people if guns are illegal.

But your average er... 'Crazy criminal' would struggle to get hold of a weapon if they weren't so ridiculously easy to obtain. Look at the UK, plenty of crime here and plenty of 'crazy criminals' but chances are they can't shoot you because they can't actually get a hold of a gun.

Obviously more organised/connected people can and will get hold of firearms especially now even if they were outlawed in America there's going to be ridiculous amounts in circulation. But chances are that the weird kid at the back of your classroom who hates life and gets rejected on the count than he's a strange creepy bastard won't find himself in possession of an automatic rifle in a country with strict gun control laws. No matter how badly he wants one.

don't take this the wrong way here buddy. but if people were going round killing others with a car would people say we should ban cars. guns are not the problem. people are the problem. guns are just one of many ways to kill people. but make no mistake. people will allways find a way to kill other people. alcohol. smoking. and prescription drugs kill far more people per year than guns.

[Freeza]

Guns = made for killing people.

Cars = made for transporting people.

It's an insanely stupid comparison, and doesn't make sense in this debate, yet it's used every time.

But let's say you really want to compare the cars to the guns. Well, strict gun control should be just as strict as it is with cars. You have to wear a seat belt, you have take medical tests to get a license, you can't drive drunk etc.
There simply isn't as much control and enforcements with guns as their is with cars.

Letting a mentally ill person be able to buy a gun letalone an assault weapon is like sitting a drunk blind man behind the wheels of a tuned Lamborghini.

Also the perscription drugs example, yet again, doesn't make any sense. Just because one thing is wrong and kills more people, doesn't make the other thing okay. Gun control is desperately needed.

None of these things will happen in the US political system though, since it has too many checks and balances in order for there to be any legit changes to a somewhat broken system.

A socialliberal point of view could help out with more control of all these things. That includes drugs and weapons.

[Unique]

Guns = made for killing people.

Cars = made for transporting people.

It's an insanely stupid comparison, and doesn't make sense in this debate, yet it's used every time.

But let's say you really want to compare the cars to the guns. Well, strict gun control should be just as strict as it is with cars. You have to wear a seat belt, you have take medical tests to get a license, you can't drive drunk etc.
There simply isn't as much control and enforcements with guns as their is with cars.

Letting a mentally ill person be able to buy a gun letalone an assault weapon is like sitting a drunk blind man behind the wheels of a tuned Lamborghini.

Also the perscription drugs example, yet again, doesn't make any sense. Just because one thing is wrong and kills more people, doesn't make the other thing okay. Gun control is desperately needed.

None of these things will happen in the US political system though, since it has too many checks and balances in order for there to be any legit changes to a somewhat broken system.

A socialliberal point of view could help out with more control of all these things. That includes drugs and weapons.

true. but crazy people do drink and drive and use cars without a licence. the same way crazy people will use guns to kill. but you would never think about stopping sensible people from having cars. but its ok to stop sensible people from having guns. I have owned guns since I was 8yo. I have never once wanted to go out and kill people. so my point is would banning me from owning guns stop criminals from shooting people.

[rwo power]

you would never think about stopping sensible people from having cars. but its ok to stop sensible people from having guns.

The question is - do you really need a gun? I need a car to go to work and to visit people who live in remote areas where I can't go by public transport, but as a gun is only good to kill, why does one need a gun in the first place?

[RedOranje]

People DO regularly kill other people, and themselves, with cars... and yet there is no outcry for banning motor vehicles. It's a flawed comparison on many levels, but even more than that it's actually simply factually inaccurate.

[Sponsored content]