Guns

[EricMM 0]

Because that's what regulations are FOR.

 

But I agree that it's not really a large concern compared to, say, Global Warming.

[Nighthawk 0]

You should also look at it from a different perspective. Whether it will stop them or not (and it absolutely would slow them down, because yes, there are actually people who snap one day, plus what I was saying about proximity and opportunity), it certainly isn't going to hurt to have more regulations, is it?

[Nightwing 0]

Because that's what regulations are FOR.

 

They are? Huh. I didn't realize that gun restrictions magically stopped rampages. I mean, they obviously don't stop criminals from getting their hands on illegal guns to commit a carjacking, but guys who are prepared to kill dozens of innocent people?

 

Man, will they think twice!

 

But I agree that it's not really a large concern compared to, say, Global Warming.

 

You're exactly right: It shouldn't be a concern. It's a symptom of a problem we need to take care of: Poverty in cities. Heck, I wish the Democrats would get off the "Gun Control" bandwagon and turn it around on the Republicans: Guns aren't the problem, people are? Fine, let's help these people, fix their lives, and stop giving guns a bad name. Use it as a way to push one of the classic platforms of the Democratic Party instead of just getting hung up on it and losing votes from people who would otherwise vote Democrat.

 

The vast majority of gun violence doesn't involve rampages. And they do occur in other places across the world. Ever heard the word "amok"? It comes a Malaysian syndrome where a man will just go insane and starting killing anyone he meets, often occurring with a knife or even their bare hands. How about this one, in Finland? You have this idea that rampages are spontaneous things. They often aren't. They're planned and they aren't going to be deterred by some gun laws.

[Nightwing 0]

You should also look at it from a different perspective. Whether it will stop them or not (and it absolutely would slow them down, because yes, there are actually people who snap one day, plus what I was saying about proximity and opportunity), it certainly isn't going to hurt to have more regulations, is it?

 

I just don't understand why we should concentrate on it. To me, it detracts from what is really causing the problem. I'm in Michigan, and the problems of Detroit and gang-violence aren't going to be solved with more gun regulation. I do agree that we should strive for registering guns and such. But putting more and more regulations on guns doesn't do anything to halt the flow of illegal guns, stop gun violence in big cities, and other problems that they are associated with. Why not put our efforts towards curbing the majority of gun violence rather than putting reactionary regulations into effect to curb the least likely gun violence of all?

 

Again, these rampages won't just stop because people who snap will find ways to kill people: run people down with cars, go crazy with a knife, create explosives. Just because someone snaps doesn't mean they are going to immediately going to kill someone; it just means they no longer care about their lives and have little care for those around them. They are still reasoning beings. If they want to kill someone, they aren't going to be stopped because you've made guns harder to get to. At this point, legality doesn't really matter much anymore.

 

We can't control when someone snaps. People just do from the stress of life. Let's concentrate on solving issues we have much more control over, like changing the culture of the inner cities.

[Nighthawk 0]

Ok, that I'd agree with. Here in California, they regulate the hell out of guns, and people still get shot all the time. I just wouldn't agree with "Well, they're going kill people anyway, so let's not bother." But there are higher priorities, yes.

[Jingus 0]

Oh yeah, plenty of bigger problems. Every time I hear a public outcry about anything that's killing people in this country, I wonder why nobody seems to care about the untold millions of deaths in car accidents. Nobody ever seems to give a shit about stopping the number one cause of death in America.

 

anybody remember that 2-3 hour stand-off in California in the mid-90's? Two or three men covered in head-to-toe body armor with assault rifles robbed a bank, the silent alarm went off, and they held off the police for a few hours just by having superior firepower. Think about that: CRIMINALS have superior firepower than LAW ENFORCEMENT. Illegally obtained, true, but then the police went to a gunshop around the corner and found matching weapons, and that's how it ended.

Sort of. Those two guys had full-auto AK-47s, iirc. The cops just had their 9mms and 12-gauges, which don't have great penetration on heavy-duty body armor without specialized ammunition. So they went to the gun store and requisitioned a few hunting rifles. I don't know of the rifles even really affected the outcome; one of the robbers was clipped in the back of the leg by a bullet that snuck in between a gap in the armor, and it severed his femoral artery and the guy bled to death pretty quick. The other one shot himself (ironically, it might have been on accident; the footage and forensics are somewhat disputed on whether he deliberately committed suicide or just dropped his pistol and inadvertently shot himself in the face while trying to pick it up again).

[Guest Smues]

Speaking of that shootout, whatever happened with the lawsuit? I know the family of one of the killers sued the police but I never found out if they won or not.

[Guest My Pal, the Tortoise]

But I agree that it's not really a large concern compared to, say, Global Warming.

Aaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnnd here it is!

[EricMM 0]

Hey. It's the truth.

[Turbo Lion 0]

I'm kind of in the same area as Nightwing on this. The problem isn't guns, the problem is inadequate psychological help, poverty, etc., but also there's no reason to not try and find regulations that help.

[Toshiaki Koala 0]

Global warming is a natural climatic cycle that's not happening.

[theintensifier 0]

Yep, no other countries have violence or murders. Just the US and our evil guns.

Simply awesome.

 

A psycho with a gun can kill more people than with a knife. There will always be gun deaths in countries, regardless of the existing gun laws. Surely the aim however would be to stop half-witted suicidal morons from acquiring a gun. In Australia, gun control was boosted heavily after the Port Arthur Massacre which saw about 30+ people get killed. There are still gun deaths, but so far there haven't been any incidents where an idiot was able to easily acquire a gun and start firing at whoever crossed his/her path.

Technically, it really depends on who's holding the gun, and who's wielding the knife. A normal person with a gun, vs. a trained Navy SEAL with a knife. Hmm.

 

i don't like guns. they're dangerous and cowardly. if you're going to kill someone, you should do it face to face.

 

on the other hand, i'm not going to go around and tell other people that they can't have guns.

 

it's not the guns that is the problem, it's the people who use them. there's a cliche of sorts that i think is totally true, 'if we blame guns for killing people, then we can blame pencils for mispelled words' or something like that.

The first part of your post is absolutely retarded. Guns are efficient killing tools, and if used properly, will wield the results the handler is looking for. I don't see how they are exactly considered cowardly. I'm assuming you mean in any/all circumstances, which is ridiculous. What are the troops supposed to use, their fists and feet? I do think it's cowardly for someone to use a gun in a normal, every day situations though. Like when someone is mugging you, and they have a gun, yeah, that's easily considered cowardly.

 

I disagree with the notion that guns "aren't the problem, the people are". Both parties are equally responsible. Guns are made for one purpose, that's to kill. Making guns available to civilians is one of the biggest fuck ups our Constitution has ever made. People, by nature, are greedy/corrupt, as they were back in the 1700's. To bad our founding fathers couldn't think that far into the future.

 

Eric, you think regulations will actually help with this growing problem? Ever heard of prohibition? Yeah, they still got ahold of what was "regulated/banned", didn't they? There is no solution to this problem. And you're not a fan of imprisionment, so what would the punishment be for breaking this regulation?

 

We can sit here all day, and try to find a solution, but we never will. The government takes guns away, people find other ways to get them. Government finds out, locks said people up. Said people get anally raped in prision. Said rapists get eventually murdered via physical force/shank/STD. Said rape victims become hardened criminals seeking revenge for being raped/thrown into prision for having guns, which USED to be allowed. Said people then become repeat offenders, and ultimately, institutionalized. Such a vicious circle.

[Retard Girl 0]

i don't like guns. they're dangerous and cowardly. if you're going to kill someone, you should do it face to face.

 

on the other hand, i'm not going to go around and tell other people that they can't have guns.

 

it's not the guns that is the problem, it's the people who use them. there's a cliche of sorts that i think is totally true, 'if we blame guns for killing people, then we can blame pencils for mispelled words' or something like that.

The first part of your post is absolutely retarded. Guns are efficient killing tools, and if used properly, will wield the results the handler is looking for. I don't see how they are exactly considered cowardly. I'm assuming you mean in any/all circumstances, which is ridiculous. What are the troops supposed to use, their fists and feet? I do think it's cowardly for someone to use a gun in a normal, every day situations though. Like when someone is mugging you, and they have a gun, yeah, that's easily considered cowardly.

 

I disagree with the notion that guns "aren't the problem, the people are". Both parties are equally responsible. Guns are made for one purpose, that's to kill. Making guns available to civilians is one of the biggest fuck ups our Constitution has ever made. People, by nature, are greedy/corrupt, as they were back in the 1700's. To bad our founding fathers couldn't think that far into the future.

 

 

 

 

 

okay, let me clairfy. some situations may call for a firearm. wars and shit, self defence. i hate the idea though of "i need a gun because he has a gun". i'm aware that this is somewhat true, but i like to live in my own little world where guns aren't a problem.

 

i still personally hate guns though. if someone mugged me with a gun, i'd take pride in knocking him senceless. hopefully before the fucker has a chance to shoot me.

 

the guns aren't going to go away. it's the society that's fucked up. it's so easy to just blame things on "society" though. so... yeah. that's all i got.

[theintensifier 0]

That's basic human nature, though.

 

X has a PS3 - Y is envious and wants a PS3 as well - O is so envious of X, he'll kill Y (to eliminate the threat of someone else getting what he wants) and steal the PS3 from X.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Yep, no other countries have violence or murders. Just the US and our evil guns.

Simply awesome.

 

Wait, are you the two guys that tried to argue that the murder rate was homogeneous throughout the planet the last time we had this dicussion?

 

Yes, Invader, other countries do have violence, but the US has higher murder rates than other developed countries. Is this not common knowledge?

[Guest Tzar Lysergic]

I'm a little surprised up there to see a marine think that an armed populace is a huge fuckup. I'm convinced that the fact that this country is armed to the teeth is the last thing prevents an outright dictatorship. Not the only thing, but the most significant.

[Retard Girl 0]

well, the US does have a higher murder rate than most of the 'developed' world. i'm paraphrasing George Carlin here when i say "America was populated from those that were castoffs and misfits from their home countries." so it's pretty much a bad stock to begin with XD

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

well, the US does have a higher murder rate than most of the 'developed' world.

 

Is this not what I just said?

[Retard Girl 0]

i was agreeing with the statement. there's no denying that it's a violent country.

[chuck415 0]

well, the US does have a higher murder rate than most of the 'developed' world.

All the more reason to arm yourself.

I don't want to beat a dead horse but criminals will always find a way to be criminals regardless of what laws are put into place. Maybe the answer is harsher penalties, I don't know, but as long as there are bad guys then people should have the ability to protect themselves.

[Nighthawk 0]

Harsher penalties won't do it either. Not for nothing, by and large, criminals don't want to hurt you. That's a pretty small fraction of what goes on. Drug dealing and the related violence alone is most of it. Then usually in a murder case, it's the most likely suspect, and they had a reason to do it. If you have an obsessive exlover, then by all means, carry a gun. That's basic human rights.

 

I see two foolproof solutions: 1984 or Superman IV. Dystopian police state or god-like alien hurling all the weapons into space. Neither sound good to me.

[theintensifier 0]

I'm a little surprised up there to see a marine think that an armed populace is a huge fuckup. I'm convinced that the fact that this country is armed to the teeth is the last thing prevents an outright dictatorship. Not the only thing, but the most significant.

Ten years ago, it was fine. Back in the 80's, fine. In the 70's, fine again. Every generation before this one, guns were good, and generally respected. Obviously there were still murders, but not at the alarming rate that today sees. It's gotten ridiculous.

 

Wouldn't matter if every person had a AK-47, if the government wanted to take us out, we'd be hard pressed to hold them back.

[Jingus 0]

Actually, the murder rate is down, way down from previous decades. Yet studies show that the news media tends to do more reporting about crime now than they've ever done before. Sets up a false feeling that everything is getting worse.

 

The one thing that is up is the rate of random "I'm gonna go kill everyone I see" massacres. These sorts of crimes have historical precedence, don't forget the Charles Whitman bell tower snipings which happened before any of us were born, but there have been more of them in the past ten years or so than previously. Considering that it's harder to get guns now than it was back when these incidents were more rare, obviously gun control hasn't worked in this particular type of situation.

[theintensifier 0]

I doubt the murder rate is down. Linkage.

 

The bell tower shooting is one of the more famous mass killing sprees back in the day. The only other ones I recall is the one in L.A, and the killing of the FBI agents.

[Jingus 0]

Check it for yourself. Our current murder rate is the lowest it's been in forty years. It's now half what it was at its highest point, in 1980.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Jingus is right. Crime began to take a big drop in the 90s.

[Timmy8271 0]

Here in Orlando it's way up. The country might be down but what about the state or local level? Isn't Chicago going through a record crime rate among black teenagers?

[theintensifier 0]

Ah. I stand corrected then. I guess I can't really recall much media coverage when I was younger, not that I was even paying attention to the media.

 

It's just surprising that the homicide/murder rate has crashed since the 90's. In all honesty, I'd have figured it would have doubled.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

For an interesting discussion of why crime dropped so much in the 90s, read Freakonomics.

[Perfxion 0]

Is that the book that claims, Roe v Wade(series) is the reason that crime rate is lower. Because a lot of would be kids being born to single improvised mothers?