Another day, another shooting in the US

[drauch]

How much planning do you think he needed to grab two pistols from his mom and open fire on Elementary kids?

I mean, granted, she was obviously an idiot for owning a bunch of guns that I presume were readily attainable. I agree she probably should have kept them in a safe, like any responsible firearm owner should, especially with mentally deranged people living in the house. Take guns away, what does he have left? Melee weapons, fire, bombs? How many bombs have people set off at these places? I guarantee you could kill more people with a bomb than a single person with firearms. Bombs aren't readily available with a debit card. Like Skykid mentioned, you can read all over the internet on how to make bombs, but how far will you get? Look at the Columbine dolts. They tried to set off multiple ones and they planned for months and months, and even practiced.

Stricter access to guns just kinda seems obvious at this point. Sure, illegal weapons dealers are available, but where are social awkward, mentally handicapped, middle-class white kids going to get them at?

[Skykid]

Skykid that entire argument is so full of theatrics that it's hard to write a serious response.

Perhaps, but the point is far from sullied. I'd argue it succinctly outlines how a gun ban would deter homicidal acts, since the alternatives to pulling a trigger are far less attractive.

This is not a challenge in any major city, even London, despite your country's incredibly strict and unreasonable gun legislation.

I can't understand how denying people access to deadly weapons is unreasonable? There's not much to hunt here, except Friday night skirt.

Bet they'll live to regret having guns in the house.

Oh, no, they won't.

Try showing a little respect for the dead.

Only after they have a little respect for not allowing their mentally unhinged son access to a smattering of deadly firearms that could potentially result in the mass murder of a school full of infants.

If that is the case then she should have practiced safe gun ownership. If I have a mentally unstable kid I'm not going to get rid of the guns I have, but I'll damn well keep them locked up and out of his reach.

I'm under the impression you like guns njiska, kind of how I like videogames? Like a hobby? Not convinced that's a great reason to advocate their availability in a country struggling with gun related homicide, though.
I also like guns. I have two. One's from Japan, made of plastic and shoots plastic BB's, the other is made of pure steel and looks like something out of Dirty Harry. It also shoots plastic BB's, but it looks really cool and could probably kill a squirrel.

[NTSC-J]

The major attacks may have been planned, but would they have been as successful if the killers weren't able to get their hands on guns? I doubt it. The very availability of firearms is what I think gives these guys more incentive to plan these things.

"That prick can't fire me! If I wanted to I could just go down to the pawn shop, get a revolver and I'd fix his wagon!" as opposed to "That prick can't fire me! If I wanted to I could just go on the google and get instructions to make sarin gas! First all I need is some isopropyl methylphosphonofluoridate, a bit of O-isopropyl methylisopropoxfluorophosphine oxide, a few gallons of isoproposymethylphosphonyl fluoride and, then...ah fuck it, I'll just key his car."

Obviously there's something wrong with American men, but I don't see how making it harder to get guns would lead to more shootings.

[njiska]

How much planning do you think he needed to grab two pistols from his mom and open fire on Elementary kids?

We'll find out in the next couple of day/weeks, now won't we? More to the point, I did just provide a list of the last few major massacres, all showing a great deal of forethought and planning. And yes, if someone is going to go to the length of planning this big of an attack, then yeah, they'll find someone to buy a gun from. Gang, arms dealer, good ol' boy, whatever. Reasonable restrictions are perfectly fine, but what I'm trying to get you guys to understand that if someone really wants to commit a major crime like this, they'll find a way and laws aren't going to stop them. Trying to tighten up the laws to do so only ends up affecting innocent people who have no intention of ever doing anything illegal.

Skykid that entire argument is so full of theatrics that it's hard to write a serious response.

Perhaps, but the point is far from sullied. I'd argue it succinctly outlines how a gun ban would deter homicidal acts, since the alternatives to pulling a trigger are far less attractive.

Except that the evidence states that it doesn't.
Homicide: http://rechten.uvt.nl/icvs/pdffiles/Gun ... steren.pdf
Suicide: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/con ... /147/3/342

This is not a challenge in any major city, even London, despite your country's incredibly strict and unreasonable gun legislation.

I can't understand how denying people access to deadly weapons is unreasonable? There's not much to hunt here, except Friday night skirt.

Shall we ban axes, knives, kerosene and anything else that can be used as a deadly weapon while we're at it? Look guns are dangerous, but there is nothing wrong with them being in the hands of competent people.

Bet they'll live to regret having guns in the house.

Oh, no, they won't.

Try showing a little respect for the dead.

Only after they have a little respect for not allowing their mentally unhinged son access to a smattering of deadly firearms that could potentially result in the mass murder of a school full of infants.

Men who speak with anger in their hearts, speak with folly.

If that is the case then she should have practiced safe gun ownership. If I have a mentally unstable kid I'm not going to get rid of the guns I have, but I'll damn well keep them locked up and out of his reach.

I'm under the impression you like guns njiska, kind of how I like videogames? Like a hobby? Not convinced that's a great reason to advocate their availability in a country struggling with gun related homicide, though.
I also like guns. I have two. One's from Japan, made of plastic and shoots plastic BB's, the other is made of pure steel and looks like something out of Dirty Harry. It also shoots plastic BB's, but it looks really cool and could probably kill a squirrel.

Yes, I do quite like guns and no, I do not own a single one at the moment, specifically because I have not yet bothered to get the appropriate government paperwork completed. I am also legally prohibited from owning a number of weapons that I would like to have, purely for their significance in history and yes that does bother me. I have grown up around guns, they've been a part of my life since I was 10 or so and despite my many hours of shooting the only person I've ever come close to hurting was myself and that was a ricochet on a range that.

Because of this I know the following facts first hand. Most gun owners are good people. Normal people like you or I who just have a hobby and treat it with respect. Every time a major incident like this happens a bunch of people get overly emotion, start drafting laws that have the most absurd restrictions and every now and then they get passed. In particular my country passed a number of number of laws in response to 1989 École Polytechnique massacre. Some of the implementations were good, like the changes to licensing, but the bulk were terrible and made owning a gun a much more costly affair and the law also introduced a number of seemingly random loopholes were you could have all of your firearms taken and destroyed with little recourse. What did these laws do to affect actual gun crime here? Little, if any. They basically just made life harder for the normal man, but had not affect of the criminal portion.

All I'm asking for is for people to step back from the emotional "BAN EVERYTHING" wagon for five minutes and try taking a prudent look at what actually works and what doesn't. Outright banning firearms almost universally fails to actually influence violence in general. So stop pushing for it. Start taking a look at the real root causes and treating that. First step, fix the broken mental health system.

[Drum]

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compa ... 5,69,10,91


Guns clearly are not the problem.

Yeah, I'd say that poll pretty much backs up that guns are not the problem. If they were then there'd be some level of correlation between the number of guns per capita and the number of gun crimes. Yet we see the following:

US: 88.8 firearms per 100 people (9,146 homicides)
Switzerland: 45.7 firearms per 100 people (40 Homicides)
Sweden: 31.6 firearms per 100 people (18 Homicides)
Canada: 30.8 firearms per 100 people (173 Homicides)

Source: http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmi ... e-4-EN.pdf

There's no level of balance there. Granted there are about 50 billion other factors at play here and using such simple statistic is pointless, however the numbers do still show that raw numbers of guns along don't match up with the actual number of crimes. Thus I shall continue with my stance that the issue is the people, not the tools at their disposal.

So now look at the gun laws in those countries:

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compa ... 31,177,178

I guess you're right - guns aren't the problem.

[O. Van Bruce]

*looks this way*

Bowling for Columbine

*looks away full of shame of some people here*

Go to hell ameritards and Njiska

[Skykid]

Men who speak with anger in their hearts, speak with folly.

What?

You're good at arguing, but poor at convincing anyone of your argument. Basically you're pro-gun because you were brought up around them, shooting them, and respecting their historical value. That microcosm sadly doesn't account for tat when people are being murdered by them.

[drauch]

How are tightening up gun laws going to affect "innocent" people?

[drauch]

Go to hell ameritards and Njiska[/size]

Cute.

[Specineff]

Take guns away, what does he have left?

Stricter access to guns just kinda seems obvious at this point. Sure, illegal weapons dealers are available, but where are social awkward, mentally handicapped, middle-class white kids going to get them at?

Crossbows, machetes, survival knives and nail guns available from your friendly neighborhood Wal-Mart and Home Depot, on special this weekend.

[drauch]

Unless your Goro or Kintaro from Mortal Kombat, I don't understand how you're going to go on a massive killing spree with stuff like that before getting tackled after your second shot, maybe. If you did I'd probably be pretty impressed, at least.

[Skykid]

Crossbows

Now that would be amusing. School shooting by crossbow (foiled because criminal couldn't use a crossbow, missed with the first shot, and was hit by a chair while trying to reload.)

The knife thing is already closed. You need to be a real murderer to use knives. Guns are for psuedo murder-enthusiasts/wanabbee action stars.

[drauch]

Some dude went in to a college campus and shot his dad, a teacher, with a compound bow the other week I recall. Some other people got bruised up before he stabbed himself/people tackled him.

[O. Van Bruce]

Some dude went in to a college campus and shot his dad, a teacher, with a compound bow the other week I recall. Some other people got bruised up before he stabbed himself/people tackled him.

comparing

2 wounded people + some undetermined number.

20 dead kids + 2 adults dead + all the wounded.



just accept it americans, you like guns and you don't want anyone to take then from you in the same degree of your ignorance of how to use then and the responsability it has having one.

And, as someone mentioned, why do you need an assault rifle, a semiautomatic weapon or an uzi in your house? why americans should and need to have more than a handgun in their houses if it is for defence and/or a bolt action rifle or a shotgun for hunting?

[Drum]

I linked this upthread but here it is again:

http://www.latimes.com/news/world/world ... 3015.story

Almost exactly parallel to the Conneticut shooting, a guy in China attacked 22 elementary school students with a knife outside school. Nobody died.
Lucky he didn't have a gun.

[drauch]

Some dude went in to a college campus and shot his dad, a teacher, with a compound bow the other week I recall. Some other people got bruised up before he stabbed himself/people tackled him.

comparing

2 wounded people + some undetermined number.

20 dead kids + 2 adults dead + all the wounded.



just accept it americans, you like guns and you don't want anyone to take then from you in the same degree of your ignorance of how to use then and the responsability it has having one.

And, as someone mentioned, why do you need an assault rifle, a semiautomatic weapon or an uzi in your house? why americans should and need to have more than a handgun in their houses if it is for defence and/or a bolt action rifle or a shotgun for hunting?

I'm sure all the Americans that make up this community all feel that way. Thanks for your prejudice and bigotry. Did you even read anything that I've written in this forum, or are you just so blind with hate?

Who mentioned that we don't need assault rifles and uzis?

Who only owns a handgun for said home defense?

Who mentioned we need gun control and obviously have a problem?

Oh, looks like I did. Huh. Looks like I agreed with everything you said. Interesting!

I think you missed the point of the "comparison," which if anything was something I pointed out in jest in regards to Skykid's comment about the difficulty of murdering with a crossbow. I dunno if this is all stemming from my first comment, which I figured most people would see as satirical, and the fact that I'm rarely serious in the first place. If you missed that, then...uh, I don't know what to say.

but im just a dumb ameritard who dont no nuthin'.

[O. Van Bruce]

Some dude went in to a college campus and shot his dad, a teacher, with a compound bow the other week I recall. Some other people got bruised up before he stabbed himself/people tackled him.

comparing

2 wounded people + some undetermined number.

20 dead kids + 2 adults dead + all the wounded.



just accept it americans, you like guns and you don't want anyone to take then from you in the same degree of your ignorance of how to use then and the responsability it has having one.

And, as someone mentioned, why do you need an assault rifle, a semiautomatic weapon or an uzi in your house? why americans should and need to have more than a handgun in their houses if it is for defence and/or a bolt action rifle or a shotgun for hunting?

I'm sure all the Americans that make up this community all feel that way. Thanks for your prejudice and bigotry. Did you even read anything that I've written in this forum, or are you just so blind with hate?

Who mentioned that we don't need assault rifles and uzis?

Who only owns a handgun for said home defense?

Who mentioned we need gun control and obviously have a problem?

Oh, looks like I did. Huh. Looks like I agreed with everything you said. Interesting!

I think you missed the point of the "comparison," which if anything was something I pointed out in jest in regards to Skykid's comment about the difficulty of murdering with a crossbow. I dunno if this is all stemming from my first comment, which I figured most people would see as satirical, and the fact that I'm rarely serious in the first place. If you missed that, then...uh, I don't know what to say.

but im just a dumb ameritard who dont no nuthin'.

Should have pointed out that I'm not talking about you specifically but most of americans. Sorry for the inconvinience.

[Specineff]

The notion that heavy assault weaponry is as easily obtainable and that everyone is armed like those madmen from movies in the 80's is as exaggerated as believing that all British men wear suits, hats, canes and drop whatever they're doing to have tea and scones at 5 PM on the spot. (Or whatever the stereotype dictates).
.
Where there's a will, there's a way. Can't blame things like this one on gun availability any more than the choice of the person pulling the trigger.

[trap15]

Should have pointed out that I'm not talking about you specifically but most of americans. Sorry for the inconvinience.

So you're saying... what? Your comments as of late, pretty much everywhere on this forum, have been very odd, and I'm not sure why you're saying them. They come off as very negative, have heavy stereotyping, are generally uninformed, or are just generally off-putting. I don't know what your problem is, but I'd like to kindly ask you to quit it. Especially the crazy amounts of stereotyping.

[MJR]

Finland has twice the number of guns and twice the number of gun homicides compared to canada, but less than fraction of gun homicides compared to US, though our gun per citizen is half what US has.

Therefore I dont think that those charts can really inform us the reasons for homicides. Social sciences are notoriously difficult and elusive for anyone to grasp.

Banning guns may sound like easy solution and restricting civil rights, but quite frankly I don't think that it can be compared to censorship or freedom of speech.

Use common sense. If you dont hunt, you dont really need a gun. Ownership of guns does not increase safety or solve problems. Guns make killing too easy, yet would you really need the opportunity to be a murderer, even for self defence?

Increasing gap between the rich and poor and poor or non-existing welfare for poor will contribute more for lack of safety than anything else, yet you dont solve anything by allowing any fucking yahoo to buy murder weapon.

Attempting to fight against weapon ban gives the impression of a person who is a too much of a coward to walk streets unarmed, which is bit sad. While I dont think gun ownership contributes directly to killings, I find the need of some people to own guns with no restrictions unpleasant. If guns get banned I won't be feeling any sympathy for those.

[Skykid]

Should have pointed out that I'm not talking about you specifically but most of americans. Sorry for the inconvinience.

So you're saying... what? Your comments as of late, pretty much everywhere on this forum, have been very odd, and I'm not sure why you're saying them. They come off as very negative, have heavy stereotyping, are generally uninformed, or are just generally off-putting. I don't know what your problem is, but I'd like to kindly ask you to quit it. Especially the crazy amounts of stereotyping.

English isn't his first language, so I think you'll need to cut him some slack. He said he felt like slitting his wrists at not being able to get a Hibachi bowl the other day.

He's towing a stereotype, but it isn't a stereotype he invented. While most US citizens don't fit the gun nut profile, most of the outside world looking in does perceive it to be a hugely violent and dangerous country, with a social issue of unhinged, potentially violent individuals (mass shootings every other month don't do much to solve the image problem.)

In reality, it's probably about as true as Japanese people being a nation of perverts... no wait, bad example - probably about as true as English people walking around in bowler hats and having tea and scones at 5 O'clock sharp!

I think njiska is the only person with a pro-gun stance, and that's owed to a childhood nostalgia for shooting, most likely picked up from his immediate family. And he's Canadian.

All the US citizens commenting here seem to be very realistic about the problem IMO.

[trap15]

probably about as true as English people walking around in bowler hats and having tea and scones at 5 O'clock sharp!

You mean you don't!?

Now I don't want to go to England anymore

[O. Van Bruce]

Sorry about my stereotypes, but I have to point out that it's really incomprehemsible for me how can still be people who doesn't want gun control on th U.S. after all this incidents. They aren't you, but if you form part of the majority of U.S. citizens that get shocked by events like this one, why aren't you actively working towards a less lenient legislation?

I thought that civil iniciatives in america where as strong (or even more) as in any part of the west and the capacity of the americans at being very proactive would make then more succesful on this matter and what do I see? a lot of crazy gun lovers which are the minority and an indifferent and "live and let live" majority that moans their dead for just some days or a month and then, back to ussual.


Hell, your country even banned liquor at the end of the 10's, what impends you to take action and organize in an effective way like the guys who acomplished that?

PD: And Skykid, wait for the day I'll start inflicting Stigmata on my body

[greg]

Country's got a serious problem. Called guns. Wonder if Obama will finally implement the firearm ban (Charlton Heston turns in grave.)

Yes, there should be a complete ban on guns, and it will be just as effective as a ban on drugs, illegal immigrants and prostitution. Look how there is zero stoners, illegals, and hookers in America thanks to those bans.

No, I'm not a gun enthusiast. Right wingers and left wingers are both annoying as hell when this sort of thing happens. Banning guns is an overly simplistic approach to solving the problem. The problem is in the hearts of Americans. American society has become completely corrupted and there are too many people with rotten souls. This was another shitty, scrawny "remote" goth kid it seems. I'm sure as a fuller psychological profile emerges, it will turn out that he was obsessed with all sorts of death and crap and had a disregard for others. He shot his own mom in the face, even.

[Octopod]

People keep bringing up automatic weapons but this guy used 9mm handguns.

[greg]

Good point. Ban assault weapons, and they'll just use regular guns. Ban all guns, and they'll use knives or bombs. The Akihabara massacre resulted in only 6 deaths. The real problem is the motivation to commit mass murder. Guns just make it easier to kill more people quicker and more efficiently. Banning knives won't stop people from being stabbed to death, either. Guns don't kill people. People with rotten souls kill people. The gun is just a tool. My point is that the desire to commit mass murder seems to proliferate more among Americans than other countries.

[O. Van Bruce]

I'm not saying guns should be banned. But hey, I've only seen guns in the hands of cops here. The exception would be when I go outside the city and you can see the ocasional rifle in the hands of hunters with a firearm weapon license. I'm not saying that there aren't more weapons but the culture of firearms doesn't exist here.

In contrast, seems like in the USA you can get a weapon by legal means extremely easily because *you have to defend your family by yourself*, when, Ironacally, the crime rate is a lot better in west europe without letting any normal person have a gun.

and yeah, this should be abligatory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zqh6Ap9ldTs

[Acid King]

Violent crime has declined while gun ownership has stayed fairly consistent over the past 20 years, even though laws have been liberalized. Make of that what you will.

Called guns. Wonder if Obama will finally implement the firearm ban

There's also no political support for such a massive change in policy and a ban would be shot down in court. Furthermore, it'd be almost impossible to enforce after it goes in to effect. What do you do after the ban? Send police around to the homes of tens of millions of gun owners to confiscate their firearms? Have fun with that.

So now look at the gun laws in those countries:

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compa ... 31,177,178

I guess you're right - guns aren't the problem.

It's a flawed comparison. America has 50 different states and 51 different sets of gun laws so doing 1:1 comparisons with other countries is borderline worthless.

[undamned]

The right to bear arms has nothing to do with recreation or hunting. It's a basic right to protect oneself from any threat, whether it be foreign, domestic, or governmental. If the basic function of government is to protect the lives and properties of its citizens, then it's absolutely essential that citizens be able to protect themselves in the same way. Otherwise, you yield all responsibility for self-protection to the government, which undermines the fundamental notion of political mandate.

QFT.

On topic: I cannot fathom what it would be like to be one of the parents of those kids. Ultimately it would fall on my head for sending them to that particular school.
-ud

[O. Van Bruce]

The right to bear arms has nothing to do with recreation or hunting. It's a basic right to protect oneself from any threat, whether it be foreign, domestic, or governmental. If the basic function of government is to protect the lives and properties of its citizens, then it's absolutely essential that citizens be able to protect themselves in the same way. Otherwise, you yield all responsibility for self-protection to the government, which undermines the fundamental notion of political mandate.

QFT.

On topic: I cannot fathom what it would be like to be one of the parents of those kids. Ultimately it would fall on my head for sending them to that particular school.
-ud

Why does west Europe citizens have more rights and the same degree of liberty than an american citizen without the right of a normal person to use a firearm? we end up living more healthier, longer and with less preocupations and fears.