27 dead, including 18 children, in Connecticut shooting spree!

[neverending]

Not due to a lack of trying

That's my point. Apparently it's a bit easier to inflict deadly harm to a large number of people, in a short amount of time, with a gun, than it is with a knife.

[Despare]

Originally Posted by neverending

That's my point. Apparently it's a bit easier to inflict deadly harm to a large number of people, in a short amount of time, with a gun, than it is with a knife.

Oooook, but those who want to get a gun and kill people will still find a way, just look at the map. My point is that there are always people out there who will want to hurt other people. We could use some stricter laws regulating the sale of firearms but not banning them. Personally I think US citizens should be taught how to use and respect firearms as they grow up, we want the Swiss' health care, let's take a page from their gun control book.


All I know is we're number one in guns per capita and not even in the top 100 of overall homicides per capita.

[neverending]

Again- not one person here has said we should ban all firearms. Why do you keep coming back to that? It's just rhetoric, not meaningful dialogue.

[Atraxi]

Originally Posted by Despare

A man stabbed 22 children outside of an elementary school in China today. Knife control needs to be looked at.

This is an insanely ignorant statement and not because you're mocking what I've had to say, but in the simplicity of your understanding. As neverending has stated, it's much easier to kill a high number of people in a shorter amount of time with a gun than with a knife. The frequency and specifics in which a weapon is used to kill has to be looked at, this is why we talk about gun control. Comparing knives to guns is ignorant. Guns can be used to kill mass amounts of people in a small amount of time, while concealed, from afar. Not one person has said that we need to get rid of all guns but making it more difficult for people who shouldn't have guns to get guns is essential and in no way should be viewed as controversial.

If this were to happen in Africa you would MAYBE read about it on the third page of Yahoo after hearing about the royal family's upcoming addition, Justin Beiber's favorite ice cream, and what some reporter said on ESPN. You would then close the browser, finish your Corn Flakes, and go to work. Shit happens every day and people are assholes.

It is not just "shit happens every day and people are assholes." How many people need to die for you to actually care? And comparing Africa to America, you have got to be kidding me. And your general assumption is that everyone views these events in the way in which you do- your assumption is incorrect.

Also, it's ridiculous that events like this are caused by so many issues but gun nuts end up co-opting tragedies to rage about their paranoia that the liberals are going to take away their guns. THAT is political.

[Atraxi]

I don't see this thread ending well so I'm bowing out now before it becomes a complete shit show.

[Despare]

Originally Posted by neverending

Again- not one person here has said we should ban all firearms. Why do you keep coming back to that? It's just rhetoric, not meaningful dialogue.

I agreed with Chrono that stronger gun laws would be a good thing pages ago... I also stated the other part of my position which has to do with the ban of pistols and firearms in general. I never claimed you or anybody else on the boards wanted to ban firearms but there are groups that do and I thought I would throw my entire opinion out there. Is that a problem?

You talk about legitimate dialogue without stating your real position. It's akin to asking somebody "Why?". So Atraxi... Neverending: What to do you guys want to see? Where do you want to see gun control go to and how far of a reach should it have? Don't come at me about meaningful dialogue when you haven't even told me where you stand.

Also, Atraxi, I don't assume anything about the way people look at events like this. I'm just curious as to why people gloss over events like the Houla Massacre or the Utoya Massacre. How many people have to die before you care?

Originally Posted by wizard of gore

i think every forum iv looked today at is having this argument.

Buckle up, this is just friendly discussion (except maybe for Atraxi, he seems angry), wait until our divided Congressmen try to justify their inflated paychecks by arguing over this.

[neverending]

I don't know the cure for violence in our society. Our country as a whole not only adores guns, they worship them. They are at the very core of our national psyche. At our founding, and for a long time afterward, guns were a necessity. They were needed not only for defense, but for livelihood as well. If you didn't have a gun, you were a non-entity.

The need for guns has largely disappeared, but we still revere them. It's an emotional issue for gun owners. It's such a complex issue I don't think it can be summed up in a few posts on a message board. Personally, I don't think people need guns, and I don't think people should own them. They're just not nice. Their only purpose is to harm.

On the other hand, I'm paranoid enough that the idea of a a society where the only people who own guns are the police and the government, frightens me. That's the idea behind the second amendment.

I think less people should own guns. I think guns should be harder to get. I think they should be tracked better. That's as specific as I'm willing to get.

[Ferox13]

Originally Posted by neverending

According to reports so far, this gentleman was also a law abiding citizen- until he did what he did.

And doesn't this seem to be the case in the majority of spree killings?

[neverending]

Yes.........

[Sdkdmd]

Gun control would only be the first step to preventing this kind of tragedy.

But than again why make it harder for them when they can always get a knife or make a bomb...