Gun Control Debate

[AmericanManiac]

This recently arised to our governments concern yet once again, after such a tragic even that happened in Virginia. I personally am against what they are trying to do with the gun control, If we start changing all of our amendments that our founding fathers gave us, we are going to end up being a dictatorship government. (The past few elections, I believe we aren't a democracy anymore) If we had a majority of our teachers trained in firearm safty, and was able to have a fire arm on them in the school, do you think so many innocent lives would have been taking at VT? What are your thoughts on this.

[bleeding_angelgirl]

i do not my kids when i have them going to school with teachers that have guns i can see a teacher having a bad day and shooting some one

[stenchofdeath]

I agree with what is said about people's rights to bear arms. Teachers could be trained in some situation type tactic for disarming a gunman/woman, terrorist or other type criminal (situation allowing for this). For a teacher to actually carry a firearm in a school (just in case), would be very wrong. Aren't these schools supposed to have their own security patrols ( escorting students to their cars after dark etc)? They should be equipped with stun guns at least, but not pistols. Let's be honest too, it's not these type of events happen every week, well at least not yet.

[PR3SSUR3]

I see.

From your cold, dead hands?


http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B00005N9FD.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

[swiss tony]

is it just me or is it totally mad this right to bare arms. surely this law was written into the constitution in a time of danger and uncertainty. is it worth all the bloodshed just to keep a tradition in place that is dated. why would anyone cherish the right to carry around a gun?

[AmericanManiac]

I see your point about that stun guns, I do think that would be a better option than a hand gun, and your also right about this doesnt happen every week. But when they do happen they are just getting deadlier, more innocent lives lost. I also thought that to about having to talk student to their cars after dark, yeah right. I went to Art Institute in Pittsburgh classes let out about 1030 atnight and they didnt walk any of the women to their cars at all.

[PR3SSUR3]

why would anyone cherish the right to carry around a gun?

Because many Americans are thick as fuck, which sadly means the power of a gun replaces the power of their own brains in many troublesome situations.

[Despare]

Because many Americans are thick as fuck, which sadly means the power of a gun replaces the power of their own brains in many troublesome situations.

Not really, it's part of our identity because it's a RIGHT. Personally I don't own a gun and probably never will. I'll go shooting with my Wife's uncle but that's about it. However, I oppose any law that would take any freedom away from the people.

[Roderick Usher]

is it just me or is it totally mad this right to bare arms. surely this law was written into the constitution in a time of danger and uncertainty. is it worth all the bloodshed just to keep a tradition in place that is dated. why would anyone cherish the right to carry around a gun?

It's a huge part of the American state of mind. I for one, am conflicted about it, but I totally get it. It's deeply ingrained into the American psyche that governments are essentially bad and that those in "power" need to be reminded that they get their power from the public...who is armed and ready for another revolution if the government goes too far. The Democratic Republic in which we live is still an experiment that may need serious revising - the founding fathers knew that and the constitution was given this provision to keep the leaders honest (honest leaders...what a concept)

It raises awful problems, but it certainly isn't a bad thing for our leaders to fear the public just a little, right? So whether it's a hopelessly outdated ideal or not, the gun and the right to bear arms has been mythologized in the heart and mind of Americana.

[AmericanManiac]

surely this law was written into the constitution in a time of danger and uncertainty.

And the times we are living in isn't danger and uncertainty?

[PR3SSUR3]

Not really, it's part of our identity because it's a RIGHT. Personally I don't own a gun and probably never will. I'll go shooting with my Wife's uncle but that's about it. However, I oppose any law that would take any freedom away from the people

But over the years Americans have proved that they are not fit to have this right anymore, what with all the murders and whatnot.

[newb]

Because many Americans are thick as fuck, which sadly means the power of a gun replaces the power of their own brains in many troublesome situations.

NOW WAIT JUST A COTTON PICK'N MINUTE, PILGRIM

http://www.usgennet.org/family/bliss/images/john_wayne.jpg

I don't think the "right to bear arms" should be the issue as much as the process of obtaining weapons. You have to go through weeks of schooling to get a license to drive yet in some states even people on medication for psychological problems can get not one but two handguns in the span of three weeks.

[_____V_____]

The incident at VA is a sad one. Especially because such a case had never happened before. Anyone who is an American wont do such shit. We have had our McVeighs and Dahmers but this was totally uncalled for and unnecessary.

Remember USA is a Union of States. And a lot of the integrity of this country is dependent on the Constitution that the forefathers wrote. The right to hold a gun is something which has been exercised by a lot of the citizens, and the state that this country lives in, it is imperative that people do it. Its not that they are insecure, but tomorrow when need be, under any situation, they can fall back on it.

It all boils down to this...is this question moral or Constitutional? Either choice will lead to completely different answers.

[Roderick Usher]

But over the years Americans have proved that they are not fit to have this right anymore, what with all the murders and whatnot.

But there are more guns, a higher percentage of gun owners and more lax gun laws in Canada than the US...and they have a lower murder rate.

It isn't the guns that are the problem. It's the culture of fear and paranoia that's at the root of the problem. We are constantly being told how unsafe we are by our leaders and the media. The American press adage "if it bleeds, it leads" is ingrained into our newsstories to the point that ONLY sensational stories of people being wronged or attacked get any attention.

It's a huge cultural problem. :(

[_____V_____]

I don't think the "right to bear arms" should be the issue as much as the process of obtaining weapons. You have to go through weeks of schooling to get a license to drive yet in some states even people on medication for psychological problems can get not one but two handguns in the span of three weeks.

How many of em are really deemed fit to be even worthy of having a gun let alone two? In most states, it isnt bothered with.

Its like walking into a store and asking "Lemme have a gun..." and presto, he got one.

[_____V_____]

If you are blaming the upsurge in recent times about owning a gun, think back to 9/11, and Bin Laden's comments about Jehadists in every nook and cranny of the US. Can we really blame the people for wanting at least one gun in their homes?

[AmericanManiac]

If they did do something to ban fire arms, it still isn't going to stop the criminals from owning a gun, there is still the black market. So I think I would have the right to defend myself with a firearm if somebody is endangering my life, my families or another individual. Some states have different laws, about this mine for example if an intruder breaks into your house and you shoot and kill him, then you the victim that shot him is facing murder charges, and it relies on you to show that it was self defense.

[newb]

How many of em are really deemed fit to be even worthy of having a gun let alone two? In most states, it isnt bothered with.

Its like walking into a store and asking "Lemme have a gun..." and presto, he got one.

Exactly.......and this case in particular is very disturbing. There where so many red flags going off.....christ this guy had to be tutored because students were afraid of him.

[_____V_____]

AM got a point there. Tweaking the Constitution and taking away the right wont be the cure here, because THEN the common man will be deprived of one defence he has. There has to be some other method out of this...

[Despare]

But over the years Americans have proved that they are not fit to have this right anymore, what with all the murders and whatnot.

No, SOME people aren't fit to have that right. Cho was already 6 when he came to this country which means that America wasn't the ONLY influence throughout his life. You can ban guns all you want but the people who want to use them will still get or make them. AM got there first, good post heh.

It's a huge cultural problem. :(

Which culture? We have such a mish-mash of culutres and identities that there's almost a lack of our own.

[PR3SSUR3]

But there are more guns, a higher percentage of gun owners and more lax gun laws in Canada than the US...and they have a lower murder rate


Because many Americans are thick as fuck, which sadly means the power of a gun replaces the power of their own brains in many troublesome situations


>>>>>>><<<<<<<

[_____V_____]

Many, not all. Most people would know the places "many" refers to.

[PR3SSUR3]

I think the Canada comparison is the final word on the subject - what is it that makes America so much more violent apart from their culture?

[Despare]

33 were people killed is the deadliest shooting in our country which is nothing compared to many shootings in the history of other nations around the world. We're still a young country but I don't think we're more violent than the next... we're just allowed express more. At least if this guy didn't die in the VA shootings he could have been tracked because he used a legally purchased gun. "The legal gun owner is not a problem for public safety," said Streitburger. "It's the illegally held gun that is." In Germany, less than 1 percent or gun crimes involve a legally owned gun. Yet Germany has had their share of shootings, look back to 2002 when in Erfurt, Germany 18 people were killed in a high school shooting.

I still think it's the LACK of culture in America that's the issue but this topic is about controlling guns... not people.

[bleeding_angelgirl]

i think they should make it harder to get a gun but not make it impossible. truthfully no matter what you do people will find a way to get one and if some one wants to kill they will find away its human nature being unleshed

[PR3SSUR3]

We're still a young country but I don't think we're more violent than the next... we're just allowed express more

But you are - you are more violent in fact than the very next country that sits above your heads on the map, as proven by statistics.

Illegal guns come from legal sources, which means the ATF can trace ownership back to the last Federal Firearms Licence... but little thereafter.

Express more... say it with bullets!

:cool:

[bleeding_angelgirl]

guns are dumb i hate guns to many people have died from them, people that deserved to live over rapest, murderurs, phyco paths, and many others.

[AmericanManiac]

But you are - you are more violent in fact than the very next country that sits above your heads on the map, as proven by statistics.

Express more... say it with bullets!

:cool:

Do you pay attention to what is going on in Iraq and Afgan ? You want to call us violent? People over there take out their own people ranging from 30 - 100 a day.

edit: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070418/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq check that out 183 deaths in one day, just happend today!

[bleeding_angelgirl]

this fucking war in irauq is pissing me off god we cant fix there issues we tryed and its getting pointless and to many soldiers are dieing

[Despare]

And what about Hitler's rule in Germany or North Korea. Give me a break, we're not the "most violent" because we aren't Canadians.

[AmericanManiac]

And what about Hitler's rule in Germany or North Korea. Give me a break, we're not the "most violent" because we aren't Canadians.

You can't forget the crazy fucker in Iran!

[bleeding_angelgirl]

every country has diffrent issues hitler was germany, we had some but not like that, at least that i remeber and also you cant realy judge vilence unless its a world poll. we live in hell right now. and most likly we will destroy our own race

[Phalanx]

Rights handed down by forefathers...etc...to bear arms or not, you can't really argue the comparative difference in armed robbery, armed assault and firearms related death rates between the states, and countries that have more stringent anti-gun laws in place.
Yeah, it's a right...but as long as it's a right for you, it's a right for them unfortunately. Yes, I'm well aware that the criminal element could get their hands on these weapons even if they were outlawed...but, it would be by far a monority in comparison...There'd be less "everyday" variety psychos that just have a bad day and decide putting bullets in a few folk is the best way to vent their frustration.

[bleeding_angelgirl]

Rights handed down by forefathers...etc...to bear arms or not, you can't really argue the comparative difference in armed robbery, armed assault and firearms related death rates between the states, and countries that have more stringent anti-gun laws in place.
Yeah, it's a right...but as long as it's a right for you, it's a right for them unfortunately. Yes, I'm well aware that the criminal element could get their hands on these weapons even if they were outlawed...but, it would be by far a monority in comparison...There'd be less "everyday" variety psychos that just have a bad day and decide putting bullets in a few folk is the best way to vent their frustration.

i agree wepons are to easy to get ahold of and there realy is nothing you can do though there will always be crime its part of life

[PR3SSUR3]

Nobody said America was the most violent country, but it is significantly more violent than the next country, and most of what we might class as the civilised world.

And yes the outlawing of home shooters would slowly but surely reduce gun crime in America, since the source of illegal weapons would be severely affected.

[Posher778]

I think guns are fine. I think it's idiots who need to be controlled. This cycle could go on forever with specifics but... It isn't the gun that kills, it's the hand pulling the trigger.

[paws the great]

Responsibility?Don't blame the individual....blame Society!:confused:


Ban all firearms,knives,pornaghraphy and alcohol!How many people die becouse of this stuff every year?



Ted Bundy blamed porn for his actions.....if porn made Bundy rape and kill women....Why not ban it?

[bleeding_angelgirl]

ones self is there worst enemy

[paws the great]

ones self is there worst enemy

No,thats not politically correct.......never blame the individual!




A lot of people die from" Aids" every year...should we ban premarital sex?

Homsexuality?Religion?



We should ban everything.....then the world would be a perfect UTOPIA!;)

[AmericanManiac]

Well I was out today and some guy here shot someone, and I must say our police force really stepped up their game to catch the guy. They called in the helicopter from pittsburgh, and the swat team. I was suprised to see how fast they acted on this, maybe this tragedy was actually a wake up call for most enforcments. What the guy shot the other guy for? Drugs. They was stopping everycar and doing a quick search like it was the mexico border.

[AmericanManiac]

The "founding fathers" were a bunch of inbred hillbilly, near primitve jackasses. Times have changed. No-one should be allowed to own guns now. We have law enforcement.

Your new your opinion doesn't count :p

[paws the great]

The "founding fathers" were a bunch of inbred hillbilly, near primitve jackasses. Times have changed. No-one should be allowed to own guns now. We have law enforcement.

Where was our LAW ENFORCEMENT monday?


Did they stop Cho Seung Hui's execution of 32 INNOCENT people?




Sick and evil people will find a way to get guns......no matter if they are legal or not.

[Despare]

Sick and evil people will find a way to get guns......no matter if they are legal or not.

The USA is #8 in murders with a firearm per capita while they're #24 in total murders. Take a country like Russia who is #5 in total muders and yet they're not even in the top 30 for murders with firearms. People would still kill each other, gun control wouldn't help a damn bit.

Lol. That's cool. I'm obviously not in favor of "the right to bear arms"...in this day and age, it isn't necessary.


250 years ago it was a completely different story....


Yeah, let's give the government complete control over who can have weapons, they'll be fair. That's how they squash the people and increase government control.

[Posher778]

Fuck the law enforcement. We have just as many cops that get women to suck them off to get out of tickets and sell guns to minors as we do "good" cops.

[Kemal]

The "founding fathers" were a bunch of inbred hillbilly, near primitve jackasses. Times have changed. No-one should be allowed to own guns now. We have law enforcement.

I find that very insulting. As far as I'm concerned, those "jackasses," for all their faults, were very enlightened and liberal people who created what became the greatest country in the world. Frankly, I think the world would be a far shittier place if they had never gotten together and had the balls and the brains to form this country.

The police are not legally required to protect you, nor are they usually capable of protecting you. I've lived in neighborhoods where the cops were afraid to go. Remember that hurricane New Orleans? One third of the cops deserted, and the average person was fucked. The cops will not protect you. The government will not protect you. You are on your own.

By the way, why don't you take a wild guess as to what group of people was the first in America to be forbidden from owning guns. Do you really think that was about public safety?

^ Joined the NRA last year

[Posher778]

By the way, why don't you take a wild guess as to what group of people was the first in America to be forbidden from owning guns. Do you really think that was about public safety?

<==== Joined the NRA last year

I bet it was those damn property owning white bastards!

[PR3SSUR3]

The government-controlled gun policy has not done the squashed people of the UK any harm.

And I doubt very much that a lack of firearm to hand in a potentially violent situation will cause the same instant death to an individual. It's very easy to pull a trigger, much harder to swing a weapon - not to mention less likely to be fatal. Russia has its own agendas with regards to murder, America has others - and it is the gun culture, the glamour, the pride which leads to misuse and legal guns falling into the wrong hands.

Sounds like Kemal is issuing a call to arms for all vigilantes living in the Greatest Country in the World.

:eek:

:cool:

[paws the great]

The government-controlled gun policy has not done the squashed people of the UK any harm.


:eek:

:cool:


What is the population of the UK?




Isn't the UK "the land of milk and honey?":)

[monalisa]

I find that very insulting. As far as I'm concerned, those "jackasses," for all their faults, were very enlightened and liberal people who created what became the greatest country in the world. Frankly, I think the world would be a far shittier place if they had never gotten together and had the balls and the brains to form this country.

The police are not legally required to protect you, nor are they usually capable of protecting you. I've lived in neighborhoods where the cops were afraid to go. Remember that hurricane New Orleans? One third of the cops deserted, and the average person was fucked. The cops will not protect you. The government will not protect you. You are on your own.

By the way, why don't you take a wild guess as to what group of people was the first in America to be forbidden from owning guns. Do you really think that was about public safety?

^ Joined the NRA last year

I agree totally. And I don't even care if you were meaning to be sarcastic, cuz like it or not, what you said is true.

I'm not sure that potentially drunk (on their off hours) college students with guns is a good idea, but at least maybe arm the faculty. They would at least have had a chance then. The shooter obviously didn't care that guns were banned on the University grounds.

I do strongly support the 2nd Ammendment. Laws only take the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Criminals don't give a shit about the laws. Granted, nothing prevented him from buying the guns, but surely the signs on the doors stating that guns are banned on the University grounds should have stopped him (NOT!). Spare me!

OH! Here's an idea... How about putting locks on the inside of classroom doors! Then people wouldn't have to block the doors with their bodies. Duh. :confused: :mad:

[Despare]

The government-controlled gun policy has not done the squashed people of the UK any harm.

America's not the UK, in fact I think there was some sort of fight that made sure of that... damn violence.

[Posher778]

America's not the UK, in fact I think there was some sort of fight that made sure of that... damn violence.

Wasn't greenland involved in that?:rolleyes:

[Despare]

Wasn't greenland involved in that?:rolleyes:

Nope. The "UK" wasn't involved really. If it hadn't happened we WOULD be, NOW, a part of the UK. Unless we disagreed with parliment's decision in 1833...

[swiss tony]

looks like americans are the only ones who can't grasp how detrimental to their own society their gun laws are. i suppose if the majority of americans want guns to be this accessible then let them. then, if a nutter goes mental and wastes some innocents then its just a case of 'you gotta break a few eggs to make an ommelette'. it seems that the americans on this thread aren't sure if they want guns cause they wanna hunt or if its to preserve the constitution and to make the government think twice before it exercises further measures of control. lets face it, as soon as they tighten their gun laws and have a gun amnesty they'll lose the gun culture. then it won't be in joe publics mindset to use guns to solve his problems. its a lot harder to kill someone with cold steel. i bet the parents of the dead students in VA aren't that bothered about tweaking the constitution

[bwind22]

The world is on it's way to hell in a handbasket. In this day & age, I question the sanity of anyone not wanting to have a gun.

[bwind22]

looks like americans are the only ones who can't grasp how detrimental to their own society their gun laws are. i suppose if the majority of americans want guns to be this accessible then let them. then, if a nutter goes mental and wastes some innocents then its just a case of 'you gotta break a few eggs to make an ommelette'. it seems that the americans on this thread aren't sure if they want guns cause they wanna hunt or if its to preserve the constitution and to make the government think twice before it exercises further measures of control. lets face it, as soon as they tighten their gun laws and have a gun amnesty they'll lose the gun culture. then it won't be in joe publics mindset to use guns to solve his problems. its a lot harder to kill someone with cold steel. i bet the parents of the dead students in VA aren't that bothered about tweaking the constitution

You need to keep in mind that if the US just outlawed guns one day, only the legal, registered guns would get turned in and that'd be by the good, responsible gun owners. The guns owned by criminals are generally not on the books anyways & I can't imagine them all lining up to turn them in.

So if we were to take away our gun rights, all that would be doing is preventing the decent folks from having a way to protect themselves should some nutjob (that didn't turn in his gun) kick in their front door one night with the intent to kill your whole family or rape your wife.

"If guns were outlawed, then only outlaws would have guns."

[PR3SSUR3]

What is the population of the UK?

Well, it's significantly less than the USA, but about double that of Canada and still with less shootings. We'd rather talk things through I guess.

No, indeed America isn't the UK - nor is it Russia, yet out of all these countries America is home to the most gun crime, right up there with war-torn and drug producing nations.

Interesting mention of The War of Independence - perhaps it is that America has never really laid down its guns. Understandable perhaps, since maybe this manufactured country has yet to calm down and find its own identity. This might explain the seemingly forced booming of national pride and bombastic nature of celebration and entertainment. Who knows what the future holds?

A little like Cho Seung-hui, who in his final video has again highlighted the disturbing obsession with both religion and guns in the Land of the Free, as he talks about his hatred for success and hedonism.

[monalisa]

You need to keep in mind that if the US just outlawed guns one day, only the legal, registered guns would get turned in and that'd be by the good, responsible gun owners. The guns owned by criminals are generally not on the books anyways & I can't imagine them all lining up to turn them in.

So if we were to take away our gun rights, all that would be doing is preventing the decent folks from having a way to protect themselves should some nutjob (that didn't turn in his gun) kick in their front door one night with the intent to kill your whole family or rape your wife.

"If guns were outlawed, then only outlaws would have guns."

Thank you bwind! A voice of reason!

BTW, one of the first thing Nazi's did was unarm the Jewish people so they could no longer defend themselves. Looky at the result of that whole charming disarmiment (I know I probably spelled that wrong).

And to respond to someone else's earlier comment, YES, out of my cold dead hands. Just don't come around my home meaning any harm.

[PR3SSUR3]

You know, when watching aliens must joke about the Earth destroying itself... you can bet which corner of it they've got their eye on.

:D

http://www.shipbrook.com/karen/blog/images/kang.gif

[AmericanManiac]

You know, when watching aliens must joke about the Earth destroying itself... you can bet which corner of it they've got their eye on.

:D

http://www.shipbrook.com/karen/blog/images/kang.gif

You know watching your posts, it's no wonder your not liked here :D

[bleeding_angelgirl]

yah bitch fight

[PR3SSUR3]

Only by the reprobates and the guilty, my friend....


;)

[Despare]

Everybody likes a little Pressure now and then.

[bwind22]

Where was our LAW ENFORCEMENT monday?


Did they stop Cho Seung Hui's execution of 32 INNOCENT people?





Nope, but I bet if a few of the people in the school building had been excersing their right to bear arms, they probably would have stopped him. In fact, if Cho knew that other people probably did have their own guns, he might have thought twice about the whole fiasco in the first place. The restrictions we already have in place on guns (not being able to have them in public places) probably, on some root level, allowed this whole situation to take place to begin with. Guns were not allowed on VT campus, yet this psychotic rule-breaking dude had 2. That's a perfect example on a small scale of what would likely be the case nationwide if they tried banning guns at this point. The bad guys do what they want & have their guns, the good people follow the rules and become fish in a barrel for the psychopath.

[monalisa]

Only by the reprobates and the guilty, my friend....


;)

Not true deary. :p ;)

[monalisa]

Nope, but I bet if a few of the people in the school building had been excersing their right to bear arms, they probably would have stopped him. In fact, if Cho knew that other people probably did have their own guns, he might have thought twice about the whole fiasco in the first place. The restrictions we already have in place on guns (not being able to have them in public places) probably, on some root level, allowed this whole situation to take place to begin with. Guns were not allowed on VT campus, yet this psychotic rule-breaking dude had 2. That's a perfect example on a small scale of what would likely be the case nationwide if they tried banning guns at this point. The bad guys do what they want & have their guns, the good people follow the rules and become fish in a barrel for the psychopath.

Yah, what he said!

Damn bwind, I never realized how much on the same wavelength we were. :) :eek:

[stubbornforgey]

Nope, but I bet if a few of the people in the school building had been excersing their right to bear arms, they probably would have stopped him. In fact, if Cho knew that other people probably did have their own guns, he might have thought twice about the whole fiasco in the first place. The restrictions we already have in place on guns (not being able to have them in public places) probably, on some root level, allowed this whole situation to take place to begin with. Guns were not allowed on VT campus, yet this psychotic rule-breaking dude had 2. That's a perfect example on a small scale of what would likely be the case nationwide if they tried banning guns at this point. The bad guys do what they want & have their guns, the good people follow the rules and become fish in a barrel for the psychopath.


nicely said Bwind
This is an ongoing debate everywhere..and still innocent ppl are being butchered in order to satisfy 'the rights' of law abiding citizens who continue to arm themselves.
According to his students police check..he too was a law abiding citizen who just lost it for some unexplainable reason.

[bwind22]

Yah, what he said!

Damn bwind, I never realized how much on the same wavelength we were. :) :eek:


:)



For the record, I don't have anything against making guns more difficult to obtain either. Current laws are too lax in that department, but I'm a MILLION % against an outright banning of guns to the general public. In addition to the already in place background checks, I'd suggest mandatory psychiatric evaluation & competency testing as well as classes and training (rifle or handgun specific) to educate gun owners.

[PR3SSUR3]

The withdrawal of the general right to own and shoot guns would reduce your gun crime in the long term, since this would stem the flow of illegal weapons.

There would be less chance of a person going beserk with a weapon, so less need for you to have one.

A national amnesty would of course not remove all illegal weapons, but their numbers would thin significantly and the gun culture slowly change.

Perhaps it is too late for Americans however, who through deep rooted feelings of insecurity will continue to destroy themselves out of fear of being destroyed - a violent country like this seems destined to remain that way.

Let's just hope they keep the really big guns out of it...

:eek:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/nuclear_explosion.jpg

[bwind22]

The withdrawal of the general right to own and shoot guns would reduce your gun crime in the long term, HERE! since this would stem the flow of illegal weapons.


Right there, where I said "HERE', that is where you lose me. Banning guns would not magically make all the people that are bad and already have them disarm. Nor would it stop them or future bad people from buying or selling them on the black market. The only flow it would stem would be the regular joe who wouldn't be willing to break the law to get one.

Drugs are illegal here, but I could probably find anything you wanted with a few phone calls. *shrug* Just because something is illegal does not make it go away.



There would be less chance of a person going beserk with a weapon, so less need for you to have one.

A psycho is a psycho. People use weapons other than guns all the time. If someone snaps & they wanna kill someone, they find a way.

A national amnesty would of course not remove all illegal weapons, but their numbers would thin significantly and the gun culture slowly change.

Perhaps it is too late for Americans however, who through deep rooted feelings of insecurity will continue to destroy themselves out of fear of being destroyed - a violent country like this seems destined to remain that way.

Let's just hope they keep the really big guns out of it...

:eek:





We'll take it under consideration, but let me tell you... Iran & North Korea are pushing their luck. ;)

[Prey]

I do agree to an extent to what you say, Pressure. But its not the insecurity which drives a person to get a gun. If that was the case, all geeks and pessimistic people would be gun owners in the first place.
Post 9/11, this number has increased significantly because the common American citizen's first priority is safety of his family, his wife, his child and his parents.
And with Bin Laden somewhere out there calling the shots and our own administration unable to stop him, he has no choice, actually.

[PR3SSUR3]

I quote from New Yorkers Against Gun Violence:-

'WHERE DO ILLEGAL GUNS COME FROM?

Virtually every illegally possessed firearm recovered in New York State began its life as a legal product, manufactured or imported by a company licensed by the federal government and sold by a licensed dealer. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) has determined that there are multiple streams carrying guns downstream into the illegal market: corrupt sales by licensed dealers and distributors, straw purchases by individuals or rings, unregulated, multiple or unlimited sales in states with weak gun laws, sales at gunshows, private sales, and theft.

GUNS FLOW SWIFTLY FROM THE LEGAL TO THE ILLEGAL MARKET

The flow of firearms downstream into the illegal market is rapid. 70% of guns entering the stream of illegal trafficking are new. 30-40% of all crime guns traced by the federal government pass in less than three years from a legitimate sale by a licensed dealer into the wrong hands at a crime scene. Illegal weapons pour even more swiftly into the hands of youth: the BATF estimated that as many as 54% of the illegal firearms recovered in connection with persons ages 18-24 were sold by a federal firearms licensee less than three years before.'

Conclusion: illegal guns are primariy, and rapidly, sourced from legal sales. Therefore stopping legal sales will indeed stem the flow of illegal weapons. Those already circulating the underground will be offered an amnesty, then continuing policing and a cleanup operation will gradually reduce what firearms remain.

Drugs: if they were all legal, you would find a lot more junkies about - good for society?

Again, it takes more effort to use a blade or bar against an individual than to pull a trigger - and the results are less likely to be fatal.

The armed 'safety' of the American family is borne from fear, which is generated from the right to bear arms. Really, Americans haven't stopped shooting since they were first made.

[AmericanManiac]

I just heard on the radio, school all across the country are getting bomb threats now. Guess what marks this friday ? The ann. of Columbine, and they were trying to decide to cancel classes or not.

[meetthecreeper]

First try and think logically and not emotionally.


Here is the problem with America coming from an american. We as a society have fostered a public of narcissism and cowardace. Everyone is concerned about one thing themselves and noone else. This is what fosters situations like this Cho wacko.

The other thing is we are a nation of cowards. Someone comes in with a gun and we cower in the corner like sheep in a burning barn while the damn barn door is wide open waiting for the farmer to come and save us all.

Sorry brothers and sisters it isnt going to happen. Not one of those people with the exception of courageous professor tried to stop this clown. They were all too concerned with their own safety and too scared to do anything to try and stop it.

I guess 9/11 didnt teach us anything. In any situation FIGHT BACK. Our survival as a society depends on it.

I am not ready to die as much as the next person but if the situation arises I am not going to sit there and just take it. Someone comes to kill me, family or friends they have got a fight coming. SHit I teach my 6 and 8 year olds that. Its sad that this is the way the world is but its something we all have to face.

About guns. No amount of banning is going to stop what happened. Cho was determined to kill and the students at VT were denied the right to have the tools to defend themselves. I am not saying firearm ownership is for everyone its not. In fact I think iif you want a firearm then you need to have a mentor to guide you in the proper use and safety of a firearm.

Law enforcement is there to solve the crime after the fact. They dont have the time or resources to protect everyone. Nor do they have an obligation to do so.

Everyone has an obligation for thier own personal responsibility and safety.

[PR3SSUR3]

Well banning guns now cannot fix crimes in the past, nor some that are destined to happen in the future - but it will gradually reduce the availability of weapons to people like Cho.

I was wondering myself how he managed to kill 32 people on his own - surely somebody must have tried to seize him and grab his weapon(s)? I fucking would - if he came near he'd better not miss because he wouldn't get a second chance.

Surely with a campus the size of Virginia Tech, there should be allowances for a small amount of 'on site' arms in the wake of these college shooting trends? These could remain under the control of qualified security/police operating on the campus, even after a public firearms ban.

[Despare]

if he came near he'd better not miss because he wouldn't get a second chance

From what I've read he didn't... almost everybody shot (including the survivors were shot three times). You're right though, how did he do all that, find time to mail his video and crap, and then go back to shooting!? I blame rap music.

[PR3SSUR3]

NBC should not have shown any of his video either, allowing him the final word even from beyond the grave. But principals won't get in the way of commerce and a good scoop.

He also mentioned Columbine, and perhaps the gun debate should steer round to media coverage which is a clear factor in further 'copycat' incidents.

[bwind22]

He shot 2 people in the dorms, then went back to his room & got the package & went to the post office. Then he returned to campus & went into the classroom building & proceded firing. I don't know how much everyone knows about guns, but one of the guns he used was a Glock which can be reloaded in literally just a couple seconds. The shooting would have been nearly nonstop so it's not like there would have been any "good" time for someone to try to stop him. Doing so would have almost surely resulted in getting shot.

[Despare]

He shot 2 people in the dorms, then went back to his room & got the package & went to the post office. Then he returned to campus & went into the classroom building & proceded firing. I don't know how much everyone knows about guns, but one of the guns he used was a Glock which can be reloaded in literally just a couple seconds. The shooting would have been nearly nonstop so it's not like there would have been any "good" time for someone to try to stop him. Doing so would have almost surely resulted in getting shot.

If he was rushed by five or six people from every direction then he would have been stopped. I personally would have thought, "I'll probably get shot anyway so I may as well try and charge him...".

[bwind22]

If he was rushed by five or six people from every direction then he would have been stopped. I personally would have thought, "I'll probably get shot anyway so I may as well try and charge him...".

Yeah, well that's the sorta thing that is much easier said than done. I'm sure anyone in that situation is just reacting on adrenaline & instinct.

[PR3SSUR3]

Unless he had an electric forcefield around him, I don't see how some brave souls couldn't have attacked him and pinned him down.

But apparently the gun being seen as the harbringer of death on this day has resulted in only blind panic or pleads of mercy.

[Despare]

Yeah, well that's the sorta thing that is much easier said than done. I'm sure anyone in that situation is just reacting on adrenaline & instinct.

You would think somebody's instinct would be to fight back. Also I know quite a bit about Glocks and they are prone to reloading complications and jamming which is why many police and security forces are starting to move away from them. It seems like people just don't try but, it's not their fault, this kid was a maniac and didn't deserve the media attention he's got. His name, his face, and his videos should have never been shown. I agree with Pr3ssur3 about the whole final word thing.

[bleeding_angelgirl]

im so glad im a girl and i dont have to know shit about guns.!!!

[swiss tony]

im so glad im a girl and i dont have to know shit about guns.!!!

if you lived outside america you wouldn't have to no shit regardless of your gender. also, one final thought as this thread is losing momentum, i'm absolutely shocked that some of you lot think that more guns are the answer to these massacres. i propose a ban on guns closely followed by bruce willis and john wayne movies. less guns=less murders.

[paws the great]

if you lived outside america you wouldn't have to no shit regardless of your gender. also, one final thought as this thread is losing momentum, i'm absolutely shocked that some of you lot think that more guns are the answer to these massacres. i propose a ban on guns closely followed by bruce willis and john wayne movies. less guns=less murders.

Ban "Bruce Willis" flicks?Are you CRAZY?:mad: :D


They can take our guns,but don't F*CK with "Die Hard."

[bwind22]

You would think somebody's instinct would be to fight back.

Like I said, I'm sure if the other students were armed as well and it would have been a fair fight as opposed to a suicide quest, they probably would have fought back.


Also I know quite a bit about Glocks and they are prone to reloading complications and jamming which is why many police and security forces are starting to move away from them.

How is that relevant? Cho's gun didn't jam & USA Today ran a story this morning about how his shooting spree was nearly ceaseless. On a Glock 19, after the last shot of a clip, the slide locks back automatically. One push of a button near the trigger with the thumb ejects the cartridge, the other hand pops in the new clip, then the same thumb pushes the slide release & you are back in action. It literally takes like 3 seconds at the most for someone that knows what they're doing.

It seems like people just don't try but, it's not their fault, this kid was a maniac and didn't deserve the media attention he's got. His name, his face, and his videos should have never been shown. I agree with Pr3ssur3 about the whole final word thing.

No arguement there. The media sensationalizing the event feeds into the fear (Media cultivating fear. Imagine that!) people have in general and is probably creating new pyschopaths as we speak.

[Prey]

The media needs something to cook its beef upon, and they have got a barbecue on their hands. This incident's levity is only being marred by its sensationalisation. As long as they keep cooking the story up, this country will hit the meat-grinder in no time.

[MisterSadistro]

What I find truly sad is that after Columbine, you'd think that there were more measures to prevent such an occurance again. Apparently history will continue to repeat itself. News stations will play Cho's videos and another gaggle of disenfranchised people will copycat for their 15 minutes of infamy, the same finger pointing from the "No Guns/ More Guns" sides debate will flare up again long enough until something more sensational happens, the families will bury their fallen and everyone will go on with their lives until the next one. Nothing changes. People get riled up enough to have an opinion, but never enough to do anything.
CK

[bleeding_angelgirl]

yes banning guns will bring down crime and murder for a short time mabe 20 years if were lucky but people will always find away to distroy one another. and you can kill people with more then guns, the problem is society makes us think there is a certain social standerd on how to act what to think, and that causes out casts, racism, people being judge, these things can cause phycological problems, then society says if you get help for your issues your broken and that is not normal, so that creats more tension then one day a boy in school has had enough of people thinking hes wierd because he likes blue hair or because he dosent dress trendy etc and he goes and kills, it could be avoided if people excepted that every one is diffrent no ones personality is alike and that its ok to get help when things are bothering you, there will always be crim and murder as long as societys views are like this im saying if it changes that peoplewill stop doing bad things but it will go down, think how many kids and women kill there parents/husband because of the abuse that goes on, its to hard to get it dealt with you know how much proof a school needs to have to get a parents right taken away when there abuseing there kids, there has to be pictures, the kids have to stand on that stand and tell there parents beat them, wives have to risk there lifes to just try to escape, and i dont want to hear that there is no reson a girl cant keep a guy from herting them, guess what some guys are stronger then girls and from exspriance if you go to leave a man and he says no and is stronger then you he will foce you against a wall and scare the shit out of you and punch and hit you just to make sure you dont walk out that door, its hard to get the cops involved they need proof otherwise there is nothing they can do, so some times people get killed some times its the abuser some times its the victiom, dont you think if a person could get people to help them it would stop? but crime will never stop, i feel its because people dont give a shit enough about other people, most people would walk by when they see a girl in a ally geting yelled at and hit in a store they wouldent say shit because its"none of there buissness, they have no compasion, im sorry guns arent the problem people are, were to selfish, we dont want the issues that come with it, and we give in to our anger, and thoughts, i would go on more but im probily gonna get bitched at by people and i dont want to get in fights i just had to say this

[AmericanManiac]

good stuff there, but try using a period (.) *that looks like a small tittay*

[bleeding_angelgirl]

yeah i foget to use them, bad habbit and then i forget to proof read another bad habit but yeah thanks for pointing out, glade you have my back (sarcatic)

[bleeding_angelgirl]

Banning guns will do absolutely nothing to prevent criminals from getting their hands on guns. If someone really wanted to get their hands on a gun, they can. It's NOT hard. Removing the legal right to have guns only takes guns out of the hands of people who abide by the law. The people who could put a stop to a criminal with a gun are no longer able to because the government says it's illegal.

You think if someone wants to go on a shooting spree, that they are going to be deterred by the fact that it's illegal to have a gun? I'm sure he'd have much larger legal matters on his hands than whether or not he had an illegal weapon in his posession. 32 dead by his hand? Wow, if only someone had been legally empowered to have a gun in that situation, the situation might've been a lot less severe.

Making certain things illegal only increases crime. No contest. Drugs? They're illegal but they're still around, and quite easily obtained. The drug dealing occupation is not a non-violent one in most situations. One bad deal can get you bashed, or even killed. People will always find a way to get their hands on what they want, whether its illegal or not. That's the criminal state of mind. If they want something bad enough, rules are damned. Same with guns as it is with drugs. If someone wants a gun bad enough, they drop a few words with a few people, and all of a sudden they're in a back alley dealing with auto's and glocks with some colombian guy who doesnt give half a FUCK what your mental health or background is. All he knows is you've got the green and the time.

THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is why we need to have the right to bare arms. Do you think some criminal is likely to go on a shooting spree if he knows that any number of people might have a .38 special concealed under their coat? That's not a risk they would want to play with. Gun sprees are made possible by fear and a lack of other weapons in the equation.

Gun control disarms the wrong people.


i like your point of view and oppinion its a good one, it might be difrent then mine but i can agree with it some what.

[stubbornforgey]

what does one do .?
This has nothing to do with the rights to own a gun..however it has more to do with ..how easy it is to obtain one,whether it be legally or illegally.
These students who have been on killing sprees all had 2 things in common..
they were upset by something on thier campuses and easy access to weapons.
I want to also point out..that these students came from good..law abiding homes.
So where does that leave this issue..?

[bleeding_angelgirl]

There's been nothing to indicate that Cho came from a good home, Stubborn. If you read his screenplay "Richard McBeef" (yes, that's the name..) you can probably deduct that he had very severe father issues. The screenplay is about a kids inability to accept his stepfather. It's a VERY POORLY written screenplay, almost like a middle schooler wrote it, but the message is still there. In it, the kid lashes out at his stepfather, who is presumably presented as a pedophilic bisexual pervert, and eventually the father kills the kid. I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case, but I think the kids home life should be explored.

Law abiding or not, that's not to say he wasn't beaten and oppressed at home. His father, or even some other adult figure in his life, could've been a dominating factor in his mental health.

once again abuse causes vilolence.

[bleeding_angelgirl]

i had a friend who tried to kill them selfs and was in critical condition in the hospital, i went to go see there mother and i asked her why he wasent seeing a theripist she said (my child dose not need counseling, those are for phycopaths and insane people) i looked at her and said (are you serious your son was abused by his father sience he was 5 and you stood by and did nothing until two years ago, then because he fails school you ship him back to the fucker who abused him which resulted in him wanting to kill him self. he told me this. and you ddont think he needs help. why?" she said back "last time i checked it was none of your business what are family situation is like" i said "it is if my firend tells me and then almost sucedes in killing him self" i left the house after that and never went back

two weeks later the boy was locked up on the phyc ward of a state hospital because he told the theripist if he went back to his dads house he would either succed in killing him self or if his dad beat him up again he was going to poisen him. he was in the hospital for 1 year and he lives by him self know im not sure were but he wont go near his father becasue of what he is scared to do, so you see my point in abuse causes vilence and peoples ignorace on thereapy is having an effect. you also dont need a gun to kill some one. you can use just about any thing

[bleeding_angelgirl]

im not saying there all going to kill. i was abused, you dont see me beating people up, but most people who haved killed abused or not have mental health issues that have mostlikly not been dealt with enough for some reson im a true believer in therapy and meds if need. i think alote of murders should have been in thereapy all along you never now mabe some of the most famous murders would have never had a chance to commit a crime

[bleeding_angelgirl]

I think you're missing what I'm saying.

I'm saying that abuse could have been ONE of MANY factors that caused Cho to do what he did.

I don't think it would've been one little thing that caused him to explode on the level he did. It was the single largest shooting spree one person has ever gone on. He racked up more kills than the Columbine kids. It would be a hard thing to believe that just any one event or factor could've caused this.

oh yeah it never is one factor i agree im not saying that its just abuse sorry i think i was being missunderstood and then i missunderstood you. but i definatly agree that it never is one reson and how many was it with the columbine shooting? i forgot

[bleeding_angelgirl]

for some reson i thought they killed more people then that

[bleeding_angelgirl]

so he just went and killed people alwasy a nice thing to do you know not be racist in killing (being sarcastic)

[bleeding_angelgirl]

lol no its good i find things funny

[PR3SSUR3]

Banning guns will do absolutely nothing to prevent criminals from getting their hands on guns. If someone really wanted to get their hands on a gun, they can. It's NOT hard. Removing the legal right to have guns only takes guns out of the hands of people who abide by the law. The people who could put a stop to a criminal with a gun are no longer able to because the government says it's illegal.

You think if someone wants to go on a shooting spree, that they are going to be deterred by the fact that it's illegal to have a gun? I'm sure he'd have much larger legal matters on his hands than whether or not he had an illegal weapon in his posession. 32 dead by his hand? Wow, if only someone had been legally empowered to have a gun in that situation, the situation might've been a lot less severe.

Making certain things illegal only increases crime. No contest. Drugs? They're illegal but they're still around, and quite easily obtained. The drug dealing occupation is not a non-violent one in most situations. One bad deal can get you bashed, or even killed. People will always find a way to get their hands on what they want, whether its illegal or not. That's the criminal state of mind. If they want something bad enough, rules are damned. Same with guns as it is with drugs. If someone wants a gun bad enough, they drop a few words with a few people, and all of a sudden they're in a back alley dealing with auto's and glocks with some colombian guy who doesnt give half a FUCK what your mental health or background is. All he knows is you've got the green and the time.

THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is why we need to have the right to bare arms. Do you think some criminal is likely to go on a shooting spree if he knows that any number of people might have a .38 special concealed under their coat? That's not a risk they would want to play with. Gun sprees are made possible by fear and a lack of other weapons in the equation.

Gun control disarms the wrong people.


This is completely wrong, given that the majority of illegal firearms in America come from legal sources.

Therefore if guns are harder to obtain, there is far less chance of casual shootings like at Virgina Tech - the fewer illegal guns that would remain in the system after amnesty may be available to determined killers, but through much more effort and at a higher cost.

Using the drugs comparison again, if they were legal we would have a lot more addicts harming society.

[Despare]

"I can't go to school
cuz I ain't got a gun
I ain't got a gun
cuz I ain't got a job
I ain't got a job
cuz I can't go to school
So I'm looking for a girl with a gun and a job ( and house... with cable )
Don't you know where you are

Lost in America"






Cho's gun didn't jam but I'm saying that since I personally know they have those issues I would have rushed him. If you read about me dying in a gun shooting then I will be the "overzealous victim who should've thought before he rushed at the gunman". Now if seven or eight people rushed him...
Ah well, as far as the drugs thing goes I think it's an unfair comparrison but marijuana is illegal here and that doesn't stop anybody who wants some from getting it.

[PR3SSUR3]

But more people would be able to casually try it - and become hooked - if it was available for sale in shops.

[Phalanx]

I agree with pr3ssure on most of his points.

Banning guns will do absolutely nothing to prevent criminals from
getting their hands on guns. If someone really wanted to get their hands on
a gun, they can. It's NOT hard. Removing the legal right to have guns
only takes guns out of the hands of people who abide by the law. The
people who could put a stop to a criminal with a gun are no longer able to
because the government says it's illegal.

I don't agree with this.
Speaking as a person from a country where stricter firearms laws are in effect, I can tell you that I've seen more bullshit happen on account of easily "legally" accessble weapons in the states just last week than I've seen here all year...many a time have I looked and thought it's the ongoing backwards referrals to backwards times, and many attitudes about the potential of change only scream fear and paranioa...It's hard, I guess to make the first step an admission that maybe things aren't going so shit-hot with your current laws (or ways of life, it seems, for some) and all that, but hey - take it from the "outside"...it's largely worked here. I'm unaware of exact figures of crime, assault and death by firearms here throughout my lifetime to compare with that of the states, but from what I've seen, there's no way it could be remotely close.
The whole "rights" issue is null, in my opinion. If you've got the "right", so do they.
Think about it this way...I know it's a seperate matter, but it comes to mind...If chemical drugs and weed (not that I've got any problems with WEED at least...some laws are stupid, unequal, unfair, and do little but take up the valuable time of law enforcement, but hey, another issue) were as legal as, say alcohol, they'd be more easily accessible too, wouldn't they? More prone to getting used? almost certainly...
There's a reason alcohol effects more peoples health and lives than pretty much any OTHER drug, right?
Why do you suppose that is?
Availability.
Humans...they're impulsive, and at times irrational.
I mean, how many times have you seen an argument, or even, hell ,been in one yourself when you've thought if there was a gun involved someone might just get shot?
We are capable of going zero to "what the fuck" in mere seconds.
Well hey...you states folks might in fact SEE it first hand a whole lot more than I ever would...I just think as a species (thats right not just focussing on you guys in the US) the majority of us are too volatile to have these weapons readily and legally available to us...
As for non-lethal weapons, I'm all good there. Pepper sprays, tazers, whatever...at least you'd know if one nutjob decided to go take out his issues with a bunch of innocent people, nobody would have to DIE...I'm sure even if the criminal element had the choice of a either obtaining LEGAL tazer, or an illegal firearm, they'd go with the easier option. whats the worst that could happen? A few people get zapped before a few others manage to apprehend or disable the attacker? See, I dunno about you guys, but personally, I'd rather hear about something like that happening, than ONE GUY taking the life of OVER 30 PEOPLE.
Too bad he had the RIGHT too, hmm....
That's all I think I'll jump in and say here.

[bloodrayne]

See, I dunno about you guys, but personally, I'd rather hear about something like that happening, than ONE GUY taking the life of OVER 30 PEOPLE.
Too bad he had the RIGHT too, hmm....
He had a right to own a gun (if he was over 18, and the gun was legally registered in his name)...He did NOT have a right to kill people...

I have a right to go to the pharmacy and purchase Tylenol, take it home, keep it in my medicine cabinet and use it when I need it...BUT, I do NOT have a right to give my baby a bottle of Tylenol and kill him with it...

Just about anything can be a weapon if you intend to kill someone with it



That being said...My personal opinion on guns is "Guns are portable, metal testicles"

[Phalanx]

He had a right to own a gun (if he was over 18, and the gun was legally registered in his name)...He did NOT have a right to kill people...

Thing is...as a (seemingly) rational person in general, YOU might see the distinction between the two, but do they?
Everyone's got a right to buy one, yes?
Seems that in some peoples perspective, their rights go a little bit further.

You either don't get my point or you're an idiot.
But yeah, ok I'm an idiot...I must be wrong because you think you must be right, hm? Nice logic.

Putting stricter gun laws in place takes guns out of the hands who would use them responsibly.
When we had our last changes in the law regardng firearms, MANY, of the number of firearms handed in for destruction were not legally obtained or under the liscence of the intended owner.
Guess it takes them out of the hands of both?

Even if there were "stricter gun laws" in place, Cho still could have obtained a weapon if he wanted to. It is NOT a hard process to illegally obtain one. In fact it's a much easier process than to legally obtain one.

...and generally far more expensive. I don't know how your whole criminal element works, but in my experience here, the SHIT you'd have to go through to get one, and THEN the price...wouldn'yt be worth MY effort that's for sure. Not even if I was "a little bit angry"...
Yes, you would have to odd extreme case here and there...but I think the problem in general would be far less, I mean, one would assume you DO see what's been happening as a problem, yes?


The 'availability' of these drugs does NOT make them more prone to use. If people want to do a drug, they will find a way to gain access to it and use it. Legal or not.


It's paranoid thinking like this that'll keep your kids getting shot.;)
Sure, if people want it that bad, they can and probably will get it...but should they be giving away free samples of the latest manufactured drug with every beer, you saying that you honestly don't see the drug problem becoming worse?

Yes, there is. It's because it's a FAR MORE DANGEROUS DRUG than "pretty much any OTHER drug".

I'd say that people just fall into alcoholism far easier, and it's a more widespread problem than most other drug use, but...however you want to put it...it wouldn't be so dangerous if every asshole above a certain age COULD legally get their hands on it, would it?
This is why there's responsible service of alcohol laws in place....I assume you folks have them too? Say I agree with you...
Guns. Far more dangerous than many a non projectile weapon...
Yeah, unfortunately I'd say there's not quite so many "tell" signs (I mean, hey...obviously...) on a customer looking to buy a gun it seems...removal of the ability to buy a gun, would be the only way to effectively lessen the problem.

Coke, Weed, Speed, X, Painkillers, shrooms, acid, mescaline... whatever.
None of those drugs makes people so prone to violent outbursts, and no other drug impairs the decision making ability of a person quite as much as alcohol.

Horse-shit. Speed and other amphetamines, just to begin with the REALLY obvious one...make people FAR more prone to violent outbursts. Also might want to have a look next time you get between a "dry" heroin addict and their next score. Another good point from someone calling ME the idiot.

Next time, try talking about something before chucking a little GIRL hissyfit and saying "waaaah, you're wrong! idiot!" Just because you believe your point of view to be valid doesn't mean that all and any other, aren't.
You cannot argue with the facts.
Mere comparison speaks volumes...
Live your life controlled by fear, that'll just fuck up your day.

Seriously, learn a little bit more before you come in here spewing that shit again.
I think you should definately take your own advice.
What's YOUR big groundbreaking solution then? Don't see you coming up with a whole lot...too bad people like you...who seem to be a majority...are just too damn sure of themselves to even give anything (that's a proven successful solution) else a try...guess in this case we'll never know.

But...whatever...I don't try and convince the lost.
Wasn't my initial intention...'nor was it to start or participate in an argument with a snappy little cunt that thinks they know everything.
So...have a good 'un, and listen, I hope that none of your family gets shot up by the local kid you last condescended to, forcing you to reassess your point of view.
;)

[Adventure Man]

This thread sucks...and so do all of you. :D

[bleeding_angelgirl]

nice job maniac post a thread thats going to start fights, people every one has there own oppinion and unless you have a phd in drugabuse, abuse phycology, or personal exsperiance you have no right telling people there idiots, my mom new people who would mug some one for another hit of hairoin (i know spelled wrong sorry) or coke, lsd, e, but then she new people who could kick the habbit with no problem and no vilont out burst, and alchole my dad was an alcholic and abusive do to it, but my mom was one to and the nicest person drunk, the way drugs effect people is always diffrent in my oppinion any hard drugs other then pot and alchole are idiotic to do because of what it dose to you physcaly and emotionaly and drinking people need to be more responsible and admit when there having a problem, im not bashing any ones oppinions im just stating every ones chemical make up in there brain is diffrent, drugs will always exist and so will weapons, i think mabe every one needs to be less critical of others oppions to the point were your calling some one an idot and meaning it, were supposto be friends and talk like adults when it comes to serious issues, truthfully i could dissagree with alote of you when you say i smoke pot and say to you fuck this i hate pot it ruins people and stop talking to you but i dont because your good people and i think you react to it diffrently and probily dont have a problem. cant we all just get along and be friends sorry for miss spelling lack of commas and etc, its not a big thing to me

[_____V_____]

Discussion? Debate? Argument? I thought this was a t-h-r-e-a-d...not a t-h-r-e-a-t...

Pointing...then replying and pointing...then replying and pointing...then replying and pointing...honestly, all the jib-jab in this thread wont bring back the people who were lost...neither will it heal the families who stand broken...

Wanna put your energies to where it counts? Go to the nearest church, light a candle at the altar for all those who are gone, and then walk into the world you live in, and make someone happy. Who knows where you and the other person would end up the very next moment?

Or if even THAT is too difficult, make someone smile.

In a world such as this, it would be the least you could do. For a fellow human.


My two cents in.

[bleeding_angelgirl]

Discussion? Debate? Argument? I thought this was a t-h-r-e-a-d...not a t-h-r-e-a-t...

Pointing...then replying and pointing...then replying and pointing...then replying and pointing...honestly, all the jib-jab in this thread wont bring back the people who were lost...neither will it heal the families who stand broken...

Wanna put your energies to where it counts? Go to the nearest church, light a candle at the altar for all those who are gone, and then walk into the world you live in, and make someone happy. Who knows where you and the other person would end up the very next moment?

Or if even THAT is too difficult, make someone smile.

In a world such as this, it would be the least you could do. For a fellow human.


My two cents in.


verry true

[AmericanManiac]

I always make people smile, It makes me feel all warm and good inside.

[Phalanx]

Drug use would not see a significant increase with the legality of said substances. More people would be apt to try them, sure, but that's a given. Legalizing them would cut down on crime.

Yes...because it wouldn't BE a crime?
Duh.
Are you saying legality is the only driving factor for you to make your decisions on? Oh sure...legalize murder...sure, you can kill someone legally, but yknow it STILL would be something I'd consider a "problem". Just as your "legal" firearms are.
Most people can draw the line between
*I can legally obtain a firearm to protect myself...etc
&
*If it's legal, I can obtain it and use it as I see fit.
...Unfortunately, that doesn't really apply to those that all of a sudden snap and say "fuck it, they're all gonna die".

Do you think if someone wants to pack heat under the radar of the law that they would mind paying a couple hundred more bucks? You underestimate the mind of your common killer, gangster, drug dealer.. whatever.

Maybe if your laws were different, the case would be different. Here, the laws ARE different, and it's not just a matter of a few hundred dollars more, the pricing easily goes up tenfold. Yeah, sure, some people could do this...but it would be far fewer and further between...and I believe it would take most STUDENTS out of the equation at least?
If there's one thing I've known criminals to be, it's notoriously lazy...fits in with their whole deal..."what can I do so I don't have to get a job"...etc They go with what's easy.
You keep referring to the criminal element as though it's mainly them that's the problem? The problem is availability...kids shooting eachother up and everyone says "they were always really quiet, kept to themselves, I'd never expect them to do this" time and time again. Are these people your standard CRIMINAL element? No.
For fucks sake...this guy got through 30+ people! Where were all your fellow citizens with THEIR guns to stop him, hm? didn't happen. A lot of good legal firearms did THIS situation...No staff, no security, nobody stopped them before that high a headcount...and it took place over two hours?
I don't think there's ever been a better case to think about changing certain laws.

Nice, a passive aggressive threat against my family. You lost any sort of credibility you MIGHT have had.
If that's what you think it was...coming from someone over the internet, living in a different country and all:rolleyes: How astute. It wasn't a threat, passive aggressive or otherwise.
Are you saying that if yourself or family fell victim to such an attack carried out by a person who simply did it "because they could", you wouldn't feel a little differently about the easy availability of firearms?
See...you've just illustrated my point about the paranioa. So you've moved on from calling me an idiot to perceiving me a threat? Anything to ignore the validity of the points I've clearly made, sinking so low as to insult sombodies intelligence when what's written here is in no way reprasentative of a persons IQ or smarts...all of this hostility, even though I speak from an outside perspective, from a country that because of anti-gun laws, suffers far less than yours?
What you ignore is before your eyes, and it's sad.
Since we're calling names though, allow me to offer you my take.
You're obviously a dogmatic, self absorbed fool.
It's unfortunate that a discussion had to swing towards an argument...but at least it's clear who turned it that way, I was trying to provide an observation and some imput from an outside perspective, then someone went on the immediate defensive...touch a nerve?
Nothing personal, but I think maybe you ought to be medicated.
Don't bother talking to me again...you're just trapped, and I have no intention of running in circles with someone of such closed mindedness. It's people like you that contribute to the negative perception of your country.
End of discussion.

[bloodrayne]

This recently arised to our governments concern yet once again, after such a tragic even that happened in Virginia. I personally am against what they are trying to do with the gun control, If we start changing all of our amendments that our founding fathers gave us, we are going to end up being a dictatorship government. (The past few elections, I believe we aren't a democracy anymore) If we had a majority of our teachers trained in firearm safty, and was able to have a fire arm on them in the school, do you think so many innocent lives would have been taking at VT? What are your thoughts on this.
Well, I guess we can end this debate now...As it turns out, this didn't happen because of the easy accessibility of guns (or the fact that the shooter was a fucking nutcase)...It was all because of video games :rolleyes:

http://horror.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29410

[_____V_____]

Well, I guess we can end this debate now...As it turns out, this didn't happen because of the easy accessibility of guns (or the fact that the shooter was a fucking nutcase)...It was all because of video games :rolleyes:

http://horror.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29410

All I got to say to that is...BLAH!

:mad: :rolleyes:

[DP McCoy]

And I thought it was all Oldboy's fault!

[bloodrayne]

And I thought it was all Oldboy's fault!Oh, I'm positive it would have been because of horror (or violent action) movies, IF someone had seen him watching horror movies instead of playing video games:rolleyes:

[zwoti]

Oh, I'm positive it would have been because of horror (or violent action) movies, IF someone had seen him watching horror movies instead of playing video games:rolleyes:

they don't need that,


just the chance that he could have seen it is enough




childs play 3 anyone :rolleyes:

[Posher778]

they don't need that,


just the chance that he could have seen it is enough




childs play 3 anyone :rolleyes:

http://www.middlemiss.org/lit/weblog/film/picnic_hanging_rock.jpg
he was inspired by the violence and extreme gore.

[_____V_____]

they don't need that,


just the chance that he could have seen it is enough




childs play 3 anyone :rolleyes:


Whats next? Blame the kitchen-sink for being too slippery? Or the breeze for being too loud? Maybe the flies and bees who keep buzzing around the ears...:rolleyes:

Honestly, this is a pathetic attempt to feebly grasp at straws. They should ve taken it a whole lot more seriously than this.

[DP McCoy]

they don't need that,


just the chance that he could have seen it is enough




childs play 3 anyone :rolleyes:

Yep,I remember that example.

[zwoti]

Yep,I remember that example.

more wonderful reporting by the scum newspaper,
sorry i mean the sun newspaper :rolleyes:




with one hand they blame violent cinema for everything wrong with society...


...and with the other they give away copies of hellraiser/halloween to boost their circulation.

[DP McCoy]

more wonderful reporting by the scum newspaper,
sorry i mean the sun newspaper :rolleyes:




with one hand they blame violent cinema for everything wrong with society...


...and with the other they give away copies of hellraiser/halloween to boost their circulation.

The good old British Press!!

[bloodrayne]

The good old British Press!!Speaking of the British Press...I saw this news item from over there this morning when I was looking for news...

This is the REAL reason that kids are so fucked up:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2062100,00.html

And those bitches ended up not even being punished:mad:

[DP McCoy]

Sick isn't it,I can't understand how they were allowed to walk away from court with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

[zwoti]

Speaking of the British Press...I saw this news item from over there this morning when I was looking for news...

This is the REAL reason that kids are so fucked up:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2062100,00.html

And those bitches ended up not even being punished:mad:

the kids have been taken into care and won't be returned to the family ever


that's something, not enough though :mad:

[_____V_____]

Speaking of the British Press...I saw this news item from over there this morning when I was looking for news...

This is the REAL reason that kids are so fucked up:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2062100,00.html

And those bitches ended up not even being punished:mad:

When interviewed by police, one of the women said: "I didn't see any harm in toughening them up - I done the same with my own children."

"You laughed at them, you mocked them, you swore at them," he said. "You compelled them to hit each other even though they clearly did not want to. You were cruel, callous, clearly causing the children to hurt each other for your own pleasure."

The video shows the boy and girl - neither of whom was identified in court - in tears but still being shouted at to carry on by the laughing women.


Those women are mothers of any children? I wonder...:mad:


This is the state of affairs we live in...pretty soon another Cho ll be springing up in the UK, and they ll blame video games and horror movies for it...again.:rolleyes:

How much does it take for the world to be live-able?



(turning away) those women make me sick!

[crabapple]

That's really too weird.