Posted by Thallen

Brilliant statement... And less bombs cause less bombings, and less knives cause less knifings, whoo!

So you'd agree that banning guns would cause less shootings?

Posted by Thallen

You know what else causes less shootings? Not being the country with the most mental health problems in the world. The guns do not jump up off the rack and shoot people on their own.

Next you're gonna say vaccines cause autism, and that's what causes shootings.  

Posted by Crono

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Map_of_world_by_intentional_homicide_rate.svg (Unsupported image host)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._homicide_rate

It's not acceptable for the US to be ranked so badly.

There aren't so many countries on that graph lower than us. France is very, very strict against guns yet they're just a tier lower than us. That seems like such a small difference when you consider there are more guns in the US than there are citizens.

I agree that we are the gold standard, and I agree that we should have less homicides, but liberals whining to take away everyone's guns isn't going to do it. That's going to leave Americans feeling unprotected and it doesn't fix the ridiculous mental health and religious issues that are causing these shootings to happen in the first place.

Posted by Yog

Next you're gonna say vaccines cause autism, and that's what causes shootings.

Where's the correlation between this dumb statement and what I said? You're Chelterrar-level stupid if you don't think the core of the issue is America's horrible mental health... Guns are inanimate objects, bro. Put a few million guns in front of me and nothing is going to happen until I have some sick mental or religious influence.  

Posted by Thallen

There aren't so many countries on that graph lower than us. France is very, very strict against guns yet they're just a tier lower than us. That seems like such a small difference when you consider there are more guns in the US than there are citizens.

I agree that we are the gold standard, and I agree that we should have less homicides, but liberals whining to take away everyone's guns isn't going to do it. That's going to leave Americans feeling unprotected and it doesn't fix the ridiculous mental health and religious issues that are causing these shootings to happen in the first place.

Yeah those are issues that must be addressed, but imposing heavier restrictions on a tool literally created to slaughter people with ease should also be a priority.  

Posted by Thallen

Where's the correlation between this dumb statement and what I said? You're Chelterrar-level stupid if you don't think the core of the issue is America's horrible mental health... Guns are inanimate objects, bro. Put a few million guns in front of me and nothing is going to happen until I have some sick mental or religious influence.

Your statement implied that somehow the places with more gun violence means they have more mental illnesses, as if it's something that can be controlled.  

Posted by Yog

Your statement implied that somehow the places with more gun violence means they have more mental illnesses, as if it's something that can be controlled.

I'm not afraid of guns at all. I'm afraid of people with extreme religious beliefs and mentally ill people. I own two small handguns, one under the seat of my car and one in my nightstand, and I feel extremely comfortable and secure knowing I'm able to protect myself should one of the aforementioned freaks pose a threat to my life.

Less guns will result in less shootings just like less cars will result in less car crashes... No one's clever or intelligent for making the claim. It's the fact that we're giving guns (or cars, sure) to people who apparently aren't responsible enough to have them. So, if anyone thinks that guns are "bad" or eliminating guns entirely will fix the problem, they're very wrong.

The guy that killed Christina Grimmie used a handgun, not an assault rifle. He could have probably used a knife if he wanted. The freak ISIS sympathizer who shot up the club in Orlando did have an assault rifle when he clearly shouldn't have. But do you really think that if a civilian owning an assault rifle was "illegal," he wouldn't have found a way to get one? And do you think that if he couldn't find a way to get one, he wouldn't have found another method to kill those people? A bomb maybe? Bombs are illegal, right? Don't we still see people using them in attacks like this?

People who want to mass murder don't care what's illegal. Making it illegal is a very small road bump for them and an injustice to the majority who don't misuse guns.  

I don't see why people have a problem with common sense gun control. I love guns and I want to get a permit when I'm 21. If someone being investigated by the FBI for terrorist ties is able to legally purchase a gun (Orlando shooting) then there is a serious problem. Gun purchases should always require background checks, which includes at trade shows. I believe the more guns the better, but I also believe that common sense restrictions is perfectly fine, and needed. Banning guns won't happen, and shouldn't happen. But there should be an effective system in place to prevent people who shouldn't have guns from getting them. I think if more people had guns, there would be less gun crime. But that statement also requires a system that makes sure the right people have guns.

Posted by Thallen

People who want to mass murder don't care what's illegal. Making it illegal is a very small road bump for them and an injustice to the majority who don't misuse guns.

I'd also like to point out that drugs like mrijuana, cocaine, etc. are illegal, but it doesn't stop people from doing it. It makes it harder for every-day law-abiding citizensto get it, and by harder, I mean impossible. Like in Ohio, there was a story for a family that had a very sick young daughter, and needed medical marijuana because it reduced her daily seizures by like 90% and made her much more comfortable with her illness. But medical marijuana was illegal for everyone. Tons of people had marijuana, but they weren't the right people. The law-abiding people who actually needed it and would use it for the correct purpose were not allowed to have it. That relates to guns easily. If it's illegal, only the criminals will have guns. The correct solution is to make sure the right people get it, not outlaw it for everyone. America isn't kindergarden, where a kid can "ruin it for everyone". The whole point of the 2nd amendment is for citizens to protect themselves from a corrupt government if that time ever comes. For the gov. to take away that protection - that right there violates the constitution and opens us up to a lot more potential dangers than we would have by having guns legalized.  

Look, all I know is you can't make weapons completely illegal.

It would only cause more crimes for the sake of obtaining them through illegal means like during prohibition.

HOWEVER, we obviously cannot permit the use of firearms or dangerous weapons to certain individuals.

Doing this is extremely difficult and it would be easier to say just make guns illegal.

There is always a bad side to everything, and careful evaluation and execution of the options is absolutely imperative.  

Posted by 5hift

Look, all I know is you can't make weapons completely illegal.
It would only cause more crimes for the sake of obtaining them through illegal means like during prohibition.
HOWEVER, we obviously cannot permit the use of firearms or dangerous weapons to certain individuals.
Doing this is extremely difficult and it would be easier to say just make guns illegal.
There is always a bad side to everything, and careful evaluation and execution of the options is absolutely imperative.

I agree. Although, banning guns will probably never happen. It's not easy getting rid of an Amendment to the constitution, especially the 2nd amendment. Plus the process of collecting guns would be as flawed as our illegal immigration prevention system is.  

Posted by Thallen

I'm not afraid of guns at all. I'm afraid of people with extreme religious beliefs and mentally ill people. I own two small handguns, one under the seat of my car and one in my nightstand, and I feel extremely comfortable and secure knowing I'm able to protect myself should one of the aforementioned freaks pose a threat to my life.

Less guns will result in less shootings just like less cars will result in less car crashes... No one's clever or intelligent for making the claim. It's the fact that we're giving guns (or cars, sure) to people who apparently aren't responsible enough to have them. So, if anyone thinks that guns are "bad" or eliminating guns entirely will fix the problem, they're very wrong.

The guy that killed Christina Grimmie used a handgun, not an assault rifle. He could have probably used a knife if he wanted. The freak ISIS sympathizer who shot up the club in Orlando did have an assault rifle when he clearly shouldn't have. But do you really think that if a civilian owning an assault rifle was "illegal," he wouldn't have found a way to get one? And do you think that if he couldn't find a way to get one, he wouldn't have found another method to kill those people? A bomb maybe? Bombs are illegal, right? Don't we still see people using them in attacks like this?

People who want to mass murder don't care what's illegal. Making it illegal is a very small road bump for them and an injustice to the majority who don't misuse guns.

Had Christina been attacked with anything other than a gun, the results may have been different. If the club in Orlando had been attacked with anything other than a gun, the results may have been different.

Your logic makes no sense. "Don't make them illegal because people will still find ways to get to them." Don't you see that the goal is to not completely end mass murders (obviously everyone wants this, but it is unlikely to be achieved), but to at least lower the rates?

You're crazy if you think gun regulation isn't a problem in America. There have been 100+ mass shootings in 2016 in America. It is only the 164th day of 2016 so far.  

Posted by CM

Had Christina been attacked with anything other than a gun, the results may have been different. If the club in Orlando had been attacked with anything other than a gun, the results may have been different.

Yes, the result could have been more severe or less severe. What is your actual point here?

Posted by CM

Your logic makes no sense. "Don't make them illegal because people will still find ways to get to them." Don't you see that the goal is to not completely end mass murders (obviously everyone wants this, but it is unlikely to be achieved), but to at least lower the rates?

You're crazy if you think gun regulation isn't a problem in America. There have been 100+ mass shootings in 2016 in America. It is only the 164th day of 2016 so far.

Nope, your logic is that one that makes no sense. You think seem to think criminals, as in people who break the law, care about the law. You seem to think that we can snap our fingers and make all guns disappear. I mean, yeah, we can make them disappear from the innocent, responsible, law-abiding citizens, and then that empowers criminals and murderers even more. Well done.

You seem to think that a prevented murder by gun equals a prevented murder overall. That is absolutely stupid. No guns means no shootings, not no murders. If a mass murderer wants to mass murder, they will do it. They will use a plane, a car, a bomb, items you can find at a department store, anything.

Again, following this horrible logic is as if to say we should take away all cars since there are car accidents, we should take away plans since 9/11 happened, and so on. No thanks.

You don't just take away things like some ******ed brat, you fix the root of the problem. The root of the problem behind car accidents are things like cell phones, so hey, we made laws against using them while driving. The root of the problem behind plane hijackings is poor security, so we now have the TSA. The root of the problem behind murdering is guns, according to you? So, we just take away everyone's guns? What?

Preventing a murder by gun is not as if you're preventing a murder. Murderers aren't just going to say, "Aw man, they said it's illegal so now I can't kill people with guns! Dang!" They're going to find other ways to do it, potentially even more devastating ways. Look at the Middle East. Civilians don't have guns there. Look at the murder rates. They can't even defend themselves. Great living conditions over there.  

Posted by Thallen

Nope, your logic is that one that makes no sense. You think seem to think criminals, as in people who break the law, care about the law. You seem to think that we can snap our fingers and make all guns disappear.

Where did I say that...? I said we need more regulations. Of course we can't make them disappear. We should at least have more rules for them, though. I don't know what you're trying to say here. What is your actual point here?

Posted by Thallen

You seem to think that a prevented murder by gun equals a prevented murder overall. That is absolutely stupid. No guns means no shootings, not no murders. If a mass murderer wants to mass murder, they will do it. They will use a plane, a car, a bomb, items you can find at a department store, anything.

Lol what? Your logic is basically "mass murderers will do mass murder anyway, so we might as well make it easier for them". Okay then. I now see the type of "logic" I am arguing with.

Posted by Thallen

Again, following this horrible logic is as if to say we should take away all cars since there are car accidents, we should take away plans since 9/11 happened, and so on and so forth. No thanks.

Don't see where anyone brought up cars or planes. Hypocritical for you to bring up an irrelevant topic since you seemed to not like it when someone mentioned gun laws in Germany (which was actually relevant to the topic, but okay).

Nothing you say makes sense. You're basically saying that since mass murders can be caused by anything, we might as well not ban guns. Okay. Well since teen pregnancies will always happen, let's just stop teaching sex-ed in schools. Or since people will always get cancer, let's just stop treating it and focus on things that can be cured.

^--- your logic  

Posted by CM

Had Christina been attacked with anything other than a gun, the results may have been different. If the club in Orlando had been attacked with anything other than a gun, the results may have been different.
Your logic makes no sense. "Don't make them illegal because people will still find ways to get to them." Don't you see that the goal is to not completely end mass murders (obviously everyone wants this, but it is unlikely to be achieved), but to at least lower the rates?
You're crazy if you think gun regulation isn't a problem in America. There have been 100+ mass shootings in 2016 in America. It is only the 164th day of 2016 so far.

In gun advocates' defense, if people at that night club had been carrying guns, they may have been able to stop the shooter from killing anywhere near as many people as he did. There's 2 sides to that gun debate. I'm just not sure that illegalizing guns would actually solve any problem.  

Posted by PigParty

There's 2 sides to that gun debate.

No, there really isn't... In what world would every person in a single, loud, crowded room be able to have a gun on them? That scenario is unrealistic, and thus does not serve as a good counter-scenario to the one that was presented. Regulating guns is realistic. Allowing every single person to have one on them at all times wherever they go is not realistic.

That's pretty the same thing as saying less people could have died in 9/11 if they all had fire-resistant suits and oxygen tanks that would allow them to walk through the fires in the building and prevent them from suffocating to death, thus allowing them to escape. Technically that's true, but is that a realistic scenario?  

Posted by CM

No, there really isn't... In what world would every person in a single, loud, crowded room be able to have a gun on them? That scenario is unrealistic, and thus does not serve as a good counter-scenario to the one that was presented. Regulating guns is realistic. Allowing every single person to have one on them at all times wherever they go is not realistic.

That's pretty the same thing as saying less people could have died in 9/11 if they had wings to fly down from the buildings. Technically that's true, but is that a realistic scenario?

I never said everyone would. Hell, just 1 person having a gun could stop a shooting scenario like that from becoming more severe. I also never said everyone should be able to carry a gun anywhere. You're making up balogna and pretending like I said that. There's actually more than 2 sides to the gun debate. But the biggest sides are legal, or illegal. It's naive of you to think that there's no debate about illegalizing guns completely. Illegalizing guns completely is implausible. People will still get guns. People already have guns and will not give them up. People have guns that aren't on record. It's in fact unrealistic to believe that illegalizing guns and actually enforcing that is realistic. I don't even know how to respond to completely fantasized examples. People growing wings has no correlation to people carrying guns. People can carry guns easily. That's plausible, and possible. Not sure what you're arguing either to me, since I in fact did say we need more and better regulations on guns. Seems like you're just arguing with remarks you made up yourself.  

Posted by PigParty

I never said everyone would. Hell, just 1 person having a gun could stop a shooting scenario like that from becoming more severe. I also never said everyone should be able to carry a gun anywhere. You're making up balogna and pretending like I said that. There's actually more than 2 sides to the gun debate. But the biggest sides are legal, or illegal. It's naive of you to think that there's no debate about illegalizing guns completely. Illegalizing guns completely is implausible. People will still get guns. People already have guns and will not give them up. People have guns that aren't on record. It's in fact unrealistic to believe that illegalizing guns and actually enforcing that is realistic. I don't even know how to respond to completely fantasized examples. People growing wings has no correlation to people carrying guns. People can carry guns easily. That's plausible, and possible. Not sure what you're arguing either to me, since I in fact did say we need more and better regulations on guns. Seems like you're just arguing with remarks you made up yourself.

Illegalizing guns isn't implausible though...for whatever reason you want to believe it is, but it isn't. You said "if everyone in that club had a gun, the situation would be less severe"...obviously, but are we going to give everyone a gun? "If one person had a gun"...again, obvious, but why would a person take a gun into a night club (with the intent of having a good time) in the first place?

The growing wings part is meant to make an unrealistic scenario. People can have guns, yes. But...why would I be taking a gun to a night club in the first place? If we ever get to the point where people need to be taking guns into night clubs just in case an attacker may pop up, then there is something seriously wrong.

Just because something will "always happen" does not mean we should stop working towards ways to minimize the amounts of times that it happens. Again, cancer is always popping up, so should we stop working towards ways to minimizing the amount of times it does develop?