Exactly, people make ARs, etc some kind of boggieman but you can buy hunting rifles way more powerful. It's not like people are running around with full auto machine guns committing mass murder.
I'm on board with this. Unfortunately people who want to harm others like this miscreant from Charleston are going to find a way regardless if they have a firearm or not.
I'll never understand the pro gun lobby, but i know the law will never change so i dont really give much of a fuck. plus i dont live in america, so.
Ok so what would they have done to equate to something as bad as the mass shooting without the firearm?
It's very hard to get a full auto weapon and for good reason. I think people see things like ARs and simar weapons and assume it's something out of a movie. My extended clip 45 is a scarier weapon. Poweful, concealable, etc
Yeah. If the dude would have showed up with a hatchet or knife those nine would still be dead. I see all these post on facebook saying a guns a tool. Well it's a more powerful tool that does a lot more damage. I get what your saying, but the argument is terrible. If he didn't have access to gun he may have stabbed only one person, he may not have done anything at all, he may have built a bomb and killed more. We'll never know. Guns inflect a lot of damage and they do it quickly. They are also very easy to get.
Yea, no idea where to get heroin. I guess I would go to the bad part of town and ask those gentlemen there. I'm sure they'd receive me warmly.
I'll use the 16th St. Baptist Church Bombing as an example. Four little girls died, 22 more injured. 15 sticks of dynamite. If placed just about anywhere else in that church other than near the basement, there's probably a lot more dead people.
Dynamite is a lot harder to get. Since it's a lot harder to get the number of deaths by dynamite pale in comparison to the number of deaths by guns.
Thanks. This is where I was going with that post. While Shadow is looking up illegal dynamite statistics I'm going to guess very few people are killed by it... probably because it's difficult to get.
I find this hard to believe. The pro-gun crowd always tells me gun control laws are useless. I imagine everyone in her coupe score a fully automatic weapon in 24 hours.
I think we need to clearly segregate this debate into two distinct questions 1 What sort of gun culture would you like to see ideally? 2 What are the best steps to get there? As a European ive always thought the americans were nuts with their gunlaws for a few reasons 1 Most studies show guns do escalate situations that dont need escalation (all of suicidal, homocidal or even mass-homicidal tendancies) 2 A reading of the second amendment in its entirety combined with the historical basis of the american founding show a very big reluctance towards standing armies. This was the whole point behind militias and the wide presence of guns. So a government could not dominate a populace. This clearly is an outdated principle unless you are allowed to also have privately owned nucleair weapons and the likes 3 A high acceptance of guns, even out and about, severly hinders law enforcement. so i dont agree with guns in the public hands, its already an escalation of being able to protect yourself. Obviously there isnt a binary distinction anywhere so you need a boundary somewhere. If you allow guns why cant you have a bazooka, if you cant have guns can you still have big knives etc. So i realize its an issue where the line drawn in the sand will always be open for debate. However even if you try to get there you'll have issues: 1 Its ineviteble that criminals will initially hold on to their guns going through a situation where the people who you dont mind being armed will struggle more protecting themselves from gangs and stuff 2 Certainly in the beginning the black market for firearms will be vast and itll take probably decades for prices to reach their new normal, this simply because you have to deal with a huge supply shock that will take ages to absorb 3 Gun Lobby as the NRA can somehow always get the sheep to rally for them. So for now i think the biggest strides can and should be taken in 2 distinct points 1 Make all ridiculous guns that arent already illegal very illegal, like very long prison sentences 2 Adjust the culture in movies and stuff. I dont know how many movies contain the hero shooting people but basically hollywood glorifies it unwittingly edit: Ive tried to make it structured as i can become very ranty at times. Excuse me for the annoying sommations
I'm pro second amendment. These mass shootings are terrible tragedies and if some regulation can help reduce them without putting an undue burden on law abiding citizens then i would support them. My problem is that these shooting are so bad yet I dont see anyway to REALISTICALLY prevent them. And before you anti-gun people go on about saying a gun ban or taking guns away from citizens .... just stop. Its not going to happen. Not in our lifetime. For the second amendment to be changed there needs to be: The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. Its just not anywhere close. Republicans and Democrats like their guns. I would go as far as to postulate that violence would INCREASE if the gov was to try and confiscate guns in the United States. People will not just lay down their guns easily in a country where gun ownership was one of the founding principles. These shootings are terrible. I wish there could be a solution that would make these things preventable but I just can't come up with anything. But put me in the camp that banning / confiscation is far from the answer.
Im almost wanting to try this. I dont have a criminal record and am thinking about going to try and buy one today just so I can see the result. I honestly know nothing about the gun laws in the state i currently live in.
I know your being sarcastic so my post below is not directed at you. Just General discussion. I have two friends that have a few full auto guns. They have to buy them through a trust. They then have to have a sherif or someone like that to sign off on some stuff. They usually cost at least 15k and they end up waiting over a year until they can actually own it. It's not like one permit grants you access. Each full auto weapon is treated this way. There have probably been very few if any full auto gun deaths in the US in decades. Also if you have a full auto weapon and are not supposed to you can get locked up federally for a long time. It's not like carrying a pistol without a proper permit and getting fined. You are getting in serious trouble and going to jail if you have a full auto weapon. To me this shows that strict gun laws can work.
Fair enough. What about cars? I've found it's much easier to buy a car than it is a gun. What's to stop someone from driving through a large crowd of people if they're inclined commit mass murder? How about using fire? A gallon of gasoline and a match are readily accessible. In 2003 in Korea 200 people died when a man intentionally set fire to a train. In 2001, a school janitor in Okinawa, Japan killed 8 and wounded 15 others with a kitchen knife. I don't know about you but I've got about 50 more of those in my house than I have guns.
Love the gun debate... "How do we fix this?... and before you answer, let me take the most logical path off the table."
You may be able to get a pistol or semi auto rifle today in your state, but you will not be buying a full auto weapon anytime soon.
If any of these things were more practical to use than a gun, then we'd be having this discussion about them instead of guns. There's a reason people walk into a crowded place with a gun and not a set of matches.
Yes. And that reason needs to be addressed - not the method by which the act is carried out. /endthread
Why wouldn't you address the method? If people were being killed by something put into food, the government would address it. What exactly are we gaining by not addressing it?
Not sure. I guess people think since they are not violent then why should they have to wait, etc. I can have new pistol within the hour. As a gun owner that scares the shit out of me. I've got no problem waiting or adding laws to the books that make it a much more serious crime with long jail time if you carrying a gun and don't have proper paperwork, registration, etc.
As wicket said, banning guns might be effective in the long term, but it will take years, 10, 20 years, for the new norm of no one having guns to actually happen. It would be a complete mess. I don't know how anyone can think we could go from where we are now to no one having guns without some severe pain. You would undoubtedly have criminals illegally use guns, and the pro-gun crowd scream - this is why we can't ban guns!!! And what's the response? Just wait 10 more years and it will all be better? That's a tough sell. Is there anyone who realistically thinks a criminal, be it a robber, mugger, rapist, etc. would prefer to face a potentially armed victim vs. a victim they can be relatively certain is not armed? Of course not. I am not sure you can determine exactly how much of a deterrent that is, but it has to play some role, right?
It needs to be much more difficult to legally obtain a gun. You should have to pass a mental health test and multiple safety courses proving you can handle the gun safely. These should be required every 5-10 years or so. If you want to own a handgun or higher powered rifle, you should have to go through additional certification and subject to more frequent mental health tests.
Guys I am not stating that Heroin or an illegal gun is EASY to get. I am saying with someone who is determined to obtain one, with enough effort, it could be accomplished. Again, I am not saying its easy, but if people addicted to Heroin can get it regularly, then I feel pretty confident, that someone who has a decent level of intelligence could come up with a method to score some. Again it might be difficult, but if someone wanted it enough, they could get it.
Could i get a gun where i live? yes probably but it would take days. could i get anything high powered? no fucking way. could someone with all the right connections? yes but it would also take a long time. its not impossible for me to get my hands on a weapons, but its as close to it as can be.
Yea I have a buddy that is the same way, he bought a internally suppressed 22 recently which is a shitload of fun to shoot. My honest answer to this problem is it needs multiple levels to address the problem. In my eyes, addressing the criminal justice system is paramount. We need to spend less on prisons and more on rehabilitation facilities. We also need massive increases in funding of mental illness and research. Does stricter laws work? I am not sure. I don't think they do in my eyes. I don't think making it more difficult for me to get a gun is going to stop a person who wants to use a gun for harm. My issue is we need to identify why those people have a need or feel its acceptable to harm others. Stop THAT issue rather than addressing something which may or may not have a large impact.
Why do you think that? What evidence do you have that shows stricter gun laws ensure criminals have less access to guns?
No, I think fewer criminals would have guns. But criminals are criminals because they don't obey the laws. A criminal is many many many times more likely to illegally have a gun than the average joe law abider. I understand, you think the pro-gun crowd thinks everyone will have guns no matter what. And people seem to think that anti-gun crowd thinks that they day guns are banned, no one will own a gun. The truth is somewhere in between. All I said was that criminals would prefer to commit crimes against unarmed people. Do you disagree?
I think it's similar to the heroine question. I might be able to get some, but I have no real idea of where to go or who to ask. Similarly, I really don't know who I'd go to for an illegal gun. The types of people who deal with heroine and illegal guns know right where to go to get those. making guns illegal will not change those people's access to illegal guns significantly in the short term. Over time having less guns would certainly impact the black market, but it's a lot of time we are talking about. They types of people who buy guns and heroine from street dealers are not impacted in the slightest by making it illegal to sell guns at Cabela's.
Actually that is EXACTLY what I am trying to focus on. That people are killing others one way or the other. We need to address the issues related to why people feel inclined to shoot one or several other people.
Right, but you can still govern the tools they use. It's the same thing as drugs. There are other issues that lead people to have drug problems, that doesn't mean we make all drugs legal.
IDK, I think everyone who owns a gun should sacrifice their Saturdays for drills, training, and marching and whatnot. "The well regulated militia" part of the 2nd Amendment. No excuses. You want a gun, you need to get your ass to the parade ground come 0600 this Saturday. All that exercise and fresh air would whip our nation's fatbodies into shape too, iyam.
Do you think that people who committed these atrocities with legal guns would have had any issue with obtaining and using an illegal gun if they were as motivated as they seem to be? While I say I'd have no idea who to go to to get guns and drugs, if you give me some time I can figure it out if I really want to. Not many of these shootings is on a whim, most are planned out very long term. Give me time and I'll give you pounds of drugs and a trunk load of illegal guns.