Over-sensitive - 8

Fulgore · 11-13-2015

Posted by Yogurt

So because the amount of mass shooting crimes is less than gun crimes that aren't mass shooting, means we shouldn't ban guns?

I can put it blunty and ask whether you would like more or less people to die from guns. I want less, therefore I stick by my decision.

Yog · 11-13-2015

Posted by Fulgore

I can put it blunty and ask whether you would like more or less people to die from guns. I want less, therefore I stick by my decision.

How in the world would making guns harder to access increase gun violence?

Albie · 11-13-2015

Posted by Yogurt

How in the world would making guns harder to access increase gun violence?

This.
Taking away or banning guns will always decrease gun crime. No it wont stop it and criminals who already do it aren't going to stop, but at least it'll prevent people starting.

Vendetta · 11-13-2015

Posted by Fulgore

The amount of gun crime not related to mass shootings > the amount of gun crime related to mass shootings

I am not in favor of restrictions because if someone breaks into my house, I demand a way to defend myself from that person, being the ability to take my gun and shoot them if necessary.

It wouldn't just affect mass shootings, if guns were made illegal then they should increase in price which would decrease demand. Yeah, it's still a fairly small percentage that it would affect but it's still a lot of people dying to something because 19112526518 wants his freedom.

I'm not too sure how different it is in America but I've never personally felt that way but I guess if a lot of American's do then that's fair enough. Is there nothing else that could be used, such as tasers?

Posted by Fulgore

I can put it blunty and ask whether you would like more or less people to die from guns. I want less, therefore I stick by my decision.

How so? The amount of people dying due to a burglary in the USA is usually less than 100 a year.

Crono · 11-13-2015

its too late for the US to get rid of guns, too many in circulation. they're not civilized like australia, where they got rid of guns and cut down crime by a ton, so gl getting folks to give up their arms.

better education and better healthcare (including psychiatric help) is needed but what do i kno.

Fulgore · 11-13-2015

Posted by Crono

its too late for the US to get rid of guns, too many in circulation. they're not civilized like australia, where they got rid of guns and cut down crime by a ton, so gl getting folks to give up their arms.

better education and better healthcare (including psychiatric help) is needed but what do i kno.

I'd agree with that. I think mental health care needs to be improved rather than changing gun laws.

The point that I was going to type was also brought up. You can't just make them illegal and they'll instantly go up in price. As Crono said, there are far too many already out there. If some sort of mandate went into place, there's no way that these guns would all get taken. I'd say less than half the guns that there are would actually be confiscated.

Also, some quick stats.

Firearm homicides in the US (2013): 11,208
Number of people killed in mass shootings in the US in the past 7 years: 934

Don't tell me how many more people are killed in mass shootings as opposed to other firearm homicide. If the goal is to keep people safe, the target should not be the mass shootings.

Fix the mental healthcare to stop that, not the gun laws.

GOAT · 11-13-2015

Posted by Fulgore

The amount of gun crime not related to mass shootings > the amount of gun crime related to mass shootings

I am not in favor of restrictions because if someone breaks into my house, I demand a way to defend myself from that person, being the ability to take my gun and shoot them if necessary.

Posted by Yogurt

So because the amount of mass shooting crimes is less than gun crimes that aren't mass shooting, means we shouldn't ban guns?

No, what he's saying is that he doesn't want guns to be banned because he wants a way to protect himself from the crime that is not considered mass shootings. You think criminals have legal guns? You can ban guns and they will still be able to get guns, but that would only mean that your average citizen is screwed if he is attacked.

He even mentioned that he's ok with gun restrictions, so he understands something needs fixing. I also don't think banning would solve the problem of mass shootings.

Posted by Vendetta

Yeah, it's still a fairly small percentage that it would affect but it's still a lot of people dying to something because 19112526518 wants his freedom.

How many people you think actually die because they get killed by the legal owner of the gun(not accident)?

The problem is making the argument based on what 987897454 said. Guns were given to the people, so they could protect themselves. Stupid people with guns kill people and stupid people translate the constitution wrong Looking at you 75977897689679

SomeGuy · 11-13-2015

Posted by GOAT

No, what he's saying is that he doesn't want guns to be banned because he wants a way to protect himself from the crime that is not considered mass shootings. You think criminals have legal guns? You can ban guns and they will still be able to get guns, but that would only mean that your average citizen is screwed if he is attacked.

He even mentioned that he's ok with gun restrictions, so he understands something needs fixing. I also don't think banning would solve the problem of mass shootings.

How many people you think actually die because they get killed by the legal owner of the gun(not accident)?

The problem is making the argument based on what 987897454 said. Guns were given to the people, so they could protect themselves. Stupid people with guns kill people and stupid people translate the constitution wrong Looking at you 75977897689679

You will not stop mass shootings. But you can decrease mass shootings. Crime cannot be stopped.

Vendetta · 11-13-2015

Posted by Fulgore

I'd agree with that. I think mental health care needs to be improved rather than changing gun laws.

The point that I was going to type was also brought up. You can't just make them illegal and they'll instantly go up in price. As Crono said, there are far too many already out there. If some sort of mandate went into place, there's no way that these guns would all get taken. I'd say less than half the guns that there are would actually be confiscated.

Also, some quick stats.

Firearm homicides in the US (2013): 11,208
Number of people killed in mass shootings in the US in the past 7 years: 934

Don't tell me how many more people are killed in mass shootings as opposed to other firearm homicide. If the goal is to keep people safe, the target should not be the mass shootings.

Fix the mental healthcare to stop that, not the gun laws.

Yeah I think I'd have to agree, I wasn't really aware how many people actually owned guns and looking at it now it doesn't seem at all feasible to issue a ban.

I still stand by what I said though. Those figures show all homicides, so unless you're going to be carrying a gun with you at all times you're not going to be able to defend yourself. If you look at homicides through burglury (which are likely the only time you are going to be able to defend yourself with a gun) then it's much lower.

Mental illness is a massive issue that definitely needs more help. Similarly with banning guns though, you can't just stop it and although a lot can be done to help people going through it there's no "cure" as such.

Just within the past few hours this happen in Paris, I guess it really shows how this can happen in a country with fairly strict gun laws - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-euro...e=news_central

11-13-2015	110
Crono :pluffy: Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 5,946	its too late for the US to get rid of guns, too many in circulation. they're not civilized like australia, where they got rid of guns and cut down crime by a ton, so gl getting folks to give up their arms. better education and better healthcare (including psychiatric help) is needed but what do i kno.