Another mass shooting in America

[HighGain510]

Not going to get into the whole gun control/gun laws debate as it's pointless, but that's like saying "well gasoline is what that guy used to burn down that church! BAN THE SALE AND USE OF GASOLINE!!!" or "the guy stabbed that lady in the neck with a kitchen knife?! Guess it's time to outlaw cutlery, because it can be used to kill someone!" I get it, guns used by idiots kill people. We don't need yet another thread about a tragedy to be the soapbox for "get rid of guns!" once again, those debates go nowhere and just get a whole bunch of folks fired up.

 

[Randy]

We live right on top of each other. We smell bad, we act poorly, we do things no human should be proud of. We are a flawed species that thinks too much, does too little, hates too easily, loves too guardedly, and we are prone to blind fits of inconsolable rage.

Well said and absolutely true.

Lots of other stuff in that post that I can agree with, despite having a different overall opinion on how this should be handled.

I live in a very gun-friendly area and I've known a lot of hunters and people who've kept guns for either personal protection or hobby shooting. Most or all of the people I know, I would never imagine executing a violent crime with those weapons (minus crimes of passion). So, as liberal as I am, I don't conclude that nobody has a right to own a gun and I'm also realistic enough to say that there are too many guns out there that you'll never get them all back. So there's a few things myself and a lot of gun owners/enthusiast could probably agree on.

That doesn't mean there's not a problem and that doesn't mean there's no solution, and it also doesn't mean some form of gun control isn't the solution. As I've mentioned previously, as it stands, there's no mechanism out there with tracks people purchasing large numbers of weapons or ammunition. Yes, you need to register guns but you don't need to register ammo and, as far as I know, there's no numeric "red flag" number that gets you investigated. And there's no requirement to so proof you still have possession of said guns and ammunition, so they can easily show back up on the street (which is where they usually do). Again, repeating myself... there's not some epidemic of guns being stolen from factories; they're being stolen or sold by "legal owners".

 

[Randy]

Not going to get into the whole gun control/gun laws debate as it's pointless, but that's like saying "well gasoline is what that guy used to burn down that church! BAN THE SALE AND USE OF GASOLINE!!!" or "the guy stabbed that lady in the neck with a kitchen knife?! Guess it's time to outlaw cutlery, because it can be used to kill someone!" I get it, guns used by idiots kill people. We don't need yet another thread about a tragedy to be the soapbox for "get rid of guns!" once again, those debates go nowhere and just get a whole bunch of folks fired up.

So far this thread equal parts "get rid of guns" and "guns don't kill people, people kill people", so in the interest of trying to find some common ground, I'd say both sides get thrown in all the time.

 

[wlfers]

I agree with what you say, but it would appear in your country criminals don't NECESSARILY have to do anything illegally, unless they're after automatic weapons. I think a good start is to make it very difficult for criminals to obtain guns legally, and make it very difficult for would-be criminals to have any first contact with guns.

They have to do something illegal to be a criminal in the first place... that's what defines a criminal. At that point if they are convicted felons they cannot legally buy firearms anyway.

 

[Church2224]

Well said and absolutely true.

I live in a very gun-friendly area and I've known a lot of hunters and people who've kept guns for either personal protection or hobby shooting. Most or all of the people I know, I would never imagine executing a violent crime with those weapons (minus crimes of passion). So, as liberal as I am, I don't conclude that nobody has a right to own a gun and I'm also realistic enough to say that there are too many guns out there that you'll never get them all back. So there's a few things myself and a lot of gun owners/enthusiast could probably agree on.

.

Well said. I own four guns guns and plan on getting more soon, many people on this very forum own guns, my father, mother, grandfather, cousins and many of my friends own guns. None of them would I ever think of hurting a fly let alone another human being. Why take away some one's rights when they have done nothing wrong? What many do not understand is that there are millions of gun owners in this country who have never committed a violent act in their lives. We cannot overlook them in situations regarding gun control. A silent majority, really.

I thought i was not going to get involved...dammit I did

My solution is reform in law enforcement and better education, I always thought that education, or lack there of, and crime rates had a correlation. We can start there. But another law or regulation will not do any good,

 

[Randy]

Rarely in crime are guns obtained legally.

In street crimes. Assuming most of us don't need to worry too much about getting shot in a drug deal, that's not the issue here. I'd like to see some statistics on the number mass shootings and the legal status of the weapons used. As far as I remember, a lot of the weapons used in those crimes are either obtained legally or obtained from a family member who purchased them legally.

As I said in my previous post, who's checking to make sure people still have possession of their legally purchased firearms and ammunition? Who's checking to make sure they're not being illegally modified? Let's be realistic... We all know people who leave guns lying around, leave their safe unlocked, etc.

And even still, no solution? I mean anything. I'll try a non-gun control idea. How about police with better response time? How about armed security guards that don't necessarily interact with the children, but they're nearby incase of emergency? How about being more strict about who are allowed in and out of school building and when?

See, that wasn't hard.

 

[fps]

Not going to get into the whole gun control/gun laws debate as it's pointless, but that's like saying "well gasoline is what that guy used to burn down that church! BAN THE SALE AND USE OF GASOLINE!!!" or "the guy stabbed that lady in the neck with a kitchen knife?! Guess it's time to outlaw cutlery, because it can be used to kill someone!" I get it, guns used by idiots kill people. We don't need yet another thread about a tragedy to be the soapbox for "get rid of guns!" once again, those debates go nowhere and just get a whole bunch of folks fired up.

No it isn't, and you know it isn't, because both those things you mentioned have practical primary applications that don't involve killing people. That is not the case with guns.

The correct analogy is this. If someone has a sudden uncontrollable urge to write something down, and has a pencil on them, they can write it down. If they don't have a pencil on them, they can't.

To stretch this, by the time they have obtained a suitable substitute for the pencil, they will probably have forgotten what they wanted to write in the first place.

Hint, a gun is the pencil.

 

[synrgy]

There is enough ammo on this earth to last hundreds of years. There are still billions of rounds left over from both World Wars and Vietnam.

So, why do we need more, then?

Further, how many people do you figure still personally own weapons that are compatible with all that old ammo? Sure, there are pellets left from the Civil War, but they're not gonna help somebody looking to load a modern pistol, are they?

 

[wlfers]

Actually a ton of people. He said leftover surplus from vietnam and wwii, not the civil war. The popular .223/5.56 dates back to vietnam and there are still plenty of people using surplus ammo from WWII. Much of the combat in the middle east is done with leftovers from the campaigns that took place there during the cold war

 

[Church2224]

So, why do we need more, then?

Further, how many people do you figure still personally own weapons that are compatible with all that old ammo? Sure, there are pellets left from the Civil War, but they're not gonna help somebody looking to load a modern pistol, are they?

.45 could still be used in .45 caliber hand guns and carbines used today, not to mention the abundance of leftover weapons from those wars that collectors have. You would be surprised how many people own M1 rifles from WWII.

Also ammo after the 1950s is still compatible with most guns today. NATO Standard 7.62 and 5.56 used back then is still used on many guns across the world today. The AK-47 has also not changed caliber in years except for the AK101 and AK-74, so the 7.62x 39 rounds are still used by many countries, as well as modded AR-15s.

 

[Church2224]

Actually a ton of people. He said leftover surplus from vietnam and wwii, not the civil war. The popular .223/5.56 dates back to vietnam and there are still plenty of people using surplus ammo from WWII. Much of the combat in the middle east is done with leftovers from the campaigns that took place there during the cold war

There have even been reports of old soviet T-34 tanks still in use by guerrilla groups from the 40s and 50s, plus I remember seeing a report of Soviet surplus PPSH SMGs being found by troops over there.

 

[synrgy]

But it WOULD run out EVENTUALLY if we stopped making it. Non-debatable fact. Also not answering my question regarding why we need more if we already have so much.

Anyway, here's a poignant opinion posted by an artist I follow on Facebook:

So much deep respect to the victims and families in the recent shootings. Very little angers me more than hurting or killing innocent people, especially children. While all of these circumstances and tragedies are extremely complex and unique, I hope people begin realizing the importance of Mental Health in society (lack there of in our case)... Gun control is necessary, violence in video games, better assistance to parents with troubled children, better protection near schools: all of that is important, but i don't think any of it is nearly as important as developing ways that normal humans can spend intentional & self-critical time and work on their mental health. Just like going to the gym and exercising, the mind and emotional body is so fragile and complex. They can pass laws and argue on the news, but with so many troubled individuals attacking innocent people and then killing themselves it is SHOUTING IN LOUD CAPITAL LETTERS: We need to spend more time, attention, and money on positive, encouraging social mental health, and less on prisons. Less time arguing against gun control, less time on distracting issues like adultery or the sex life of celebrities and more right here at home where we have semi-regular acts of horrific violence on innocent people.

 

[Randy]

Actually a ton of people. He said leftover surplus from vietnam and wwii, not the civil war. The popular .223/5.56 dates back to vietnam and there are still plenty of people using surplus ammo from WWII. Much of the combat in the middle east is done with leftovers from the campaigns that took place there during the cold war

Lot of mass shootings, muggings and car jackings going on in this country using WWII surplus, lemme tell ya'.

 

[fps]

I'm reposting this, because no-one has offered a counter to it

The correct analogy is this. If someone has a sudden uncontrollable urge to write something down, and has a pencil on them, they can write it down. If they don't have a pencil on them, they can't.

To stretch this, by the time they have obtained a suitable substitute for the pencil, they will probably have forgotten what they wanted to write in the first place.

A gun is the pencil.

 

[J7string]

Gun control is a bleeding heart liberal idea that tugs at the heart strings of people and causes them to believe that this solution actually solves anything. No matter what gets done, people will always find a way obtain things illegally. Me and a friend thought up an idea to make guns and ammunition very expensive and tax the hell out of them, but the conclusion was there was people would always get things by other means.

 

[fps]

Gun control is a bleeding heart liberal idea that tugs at the heart strings of people and causes them to believe that this solution actually solves anything. No matter what gets done, people will always find a way obtain things illegally. Me and a friend thought up an idea to make guns and ammunition very expensive and tax the hell out of them, but the conclusion was there was people would always get things by other means.

With all respect, that is not evidence, or data, or even an experiment, that's just you and a friend thinking things you clearly already think. This is obvious from your use of the right-wing media catchphrase *bleeding heart liberal* instead of just liberal, showing you're against gun control on an engrained, tribal level. I am liberal in some ways, and not in others, I do not fit black and white categorisations, I am more complicated than that, as most people are.

If your country's culture did not celebrate guns in such an overt way, and market them as just another lifestyle choice, fewer children would be interested in them, fewer teenagers would covet them, fewer adults would buy them, and not only eventually would the number of guns decrease, but people's appetites to own and use them would also decrease. Fewer guns means less gun crime. Again I use the UK as an example of this. Alternatively in terms of engrained crime between opposing factions Northern Ireland and the work done there would be a good example of what can be achieved.

 

[J7string]

With all respect, that is not evidence, or data, or even an experiment, that's just you and a friend thinking things you clearly already think.

I never said I was providing evidence, or data, or anything. I was just stating my own two cents, or is there a two cents control I'm unaware of?

 

[fps]

I never said I was providing evidence, or data, or anything. I was just stating my own two cents, or is there a two cents control I'm unaware of?

Well, you rather presented it as if tax hikes on legal guns were the only solution, and it was either that or the anarchy that currently reigns.

This is of course not true. There are many, many things that could be done, big and small, politically or with communities, to encourage fewer people to own guns, make it more difficult for people to get hold of guns, or even just to stop glamorising guns in order to bring up a generation that has less interest in owning them.

You were kinda presenting two cents while trying to distract us from the trillion dollars slightly to your right.

 

[ballr4lyf]

Well, you rather presented it as if tax hikes on legal guns were the only solution, and it was either that or the anarchy that currently reigns.

This is of course not true. There are many, many things that could be done, big and small, politically or with communities, to encourage fewer people to own guns, make it more difficult for people to get hold of guns, or even just to stop glamorising guns in order to bring up a generation that has less interest in owning them.

You were kinda presenting two cents while trying to distract us from the trillion dollars slightly to your right.

What happened was an absolute tragedy, however new gun laws will not solve the problem. There are already existing laws that should have prevented this (i.e. no guns allowed on school grounds). Taking guns away from law abiding citizens is also not the answer. That would mean that the only people who could get guns would be criminals, and law abiding citizens would have no way to fight back.

The gun has its uses. There has been no other tool that equalizes the footing between a 120 lb woman and a 200 lb rapist.

I do agree with you, tough, that glamorizing guns has got to stop. What's really funny though is that Hollywood--probably the biggest players in the gun "glamorizing" industry--is run by liberals who are largely anti-gun. Think of the movies Mark Wahlberg has made, and I'd bet you'd be surprised he's anti-gun. The same thing goes for the hip-hop industry which glamorizes gun violence... Russell Simmons is also anti-gun, but has made millions on "songs" that glamorize gun violence.

 

[Faine]

I dont understand how someone could do that. That town is 30 minutes from me. My girlfriends co-worker lost her kindergardener. I really have no words...