Gun Control debate - What the hell is wrong with people???

[just play]

With all due respect,as I said in my last post,how would this guy being drunk driving have worked yesterday whilst kids were in class?

This is all about the easiness of people being killed.Take away the guns then how hard would it have been for the guy to drive into their classes and commit his act? I'm betting it would be somewhat difficult.

Seems strange to defend the use of guns by saying but,for example,"baseball bats kill-why not ban these?"

It seems strange that more people die from alcohol than from guns, but banning alcohol never enters anyones mind?

I wasn't talking about just yesterday, I was talking about deaths throughout the year/s.

I am in NO WAY defending this SCUM!!! Lets make that clear please.

I was saying people want to get rid of guns, but not alcohol that clearly kills more.


Did a quick google search.....



alcohol deaths per year

drinking and driving causes over 25,ooo deaths a year. overall 100,000 deaths occur each year due to the effects of alcohol.Correction: According to the NHTSA web site (nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/RNotes/2006/810686.pdf), there were 43,443 alcohol related traffic fatalities in 2005 in the USA. As a comparison, AIDS claimed 18,000 lives in 2003.




How can alcohol be blamed for 100,000 deaths each year?

5% of all deaths from diseases of the circulatory system are attributed to alcohol.
15% of all deaths from diseases of the respiratory system are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all deaths from accidents caused by fire and flames are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all accidental drownings are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all suicides are attributed to alcohol.
40% of all deaths due to accidental falls are attributed to alcohol.
45% of all deaths in automobile accidents are attributed to alcohol.
60% of all homicides are attributed to alcohol.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

It seems strange that more people die from alcohol than from guns, but banning alcohol never enters anyones mind?

I wasn't talking about just yesterday, I was talking about deaths throughout the year/s.

I am in NO WAY defending this SCUM!!! Lets make that clear please.

I was saying people want to get rid of guns, but not alcohol that clearly kills more.


Did a quick google search.....



alcohol deaths per year

drinking and driving causes over 25,ooo deaths a year. overall 100,000 deaths occur each year due to the effects of alcohol.Correction: According to the NHTSA web site (nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/RNotes/2006/810686.pdf), there were 43,443 alcohol related traffic fatalities in 2005 in the USA. As a comparison, AIDS claimed 18,000 lives in 2003.




How can alcohol be blamed for 100,000 deaths each year?

5% of all deaths from diseases of the circulatory system are attributed to alcohol.
15% of all deaths from diseases of the respiratory system are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all deaths from accidents caused by fire and flames are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all accidental drownings are attributed to alcohol.
30% of all suicides are attributed to alcohol.
40% of all deaths due to accidental falls are attributed to alcohol.
45% of all deaths in automobile accidents are attributed to alcohol.
60% of all homicides are attributed to alcohol.

Its ones own choice to throw the contents of a bottle down your neck.Its not ones own choice to have a bullet inserted into ones self.Bar suicide obviously.

 

[just play]

Its ones own choice to throw the contents of a bottle down your neck.Its not ones own choice to have a bullet inserted into ones self.Bar suicide obviously.

So it's the child in the car seat choice to be killed on impact from a drunk driver???

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

So it's the child in the car seat choice to be killed on impact from a drunk driver???

Obviously not.I was referring to the health implications as by your previous post I thought you were talking about alcohol in general.Not just drink driving.You did provide numbers to diferent types of alcohol related deaths after all.

Just because drink driving deaths happen,it doesn't provide a reason or logic for additional deaths to occur by an alternative method.

 

[skiny]

I have to chime in just for a second here.

What kills more? People owning guns or drunk driving? I have no idea, have no statistics, but my guess would be drunk driving.


Here's a story...my friends uncle was a drunk, and he drove all the time. He got busted FIVE times for drunk driving, but always got let off. The sixth time he killed someone. Now he's in jail for the rest of his life. Now tell me, why did he get FIVE chances?


Why not ban alcohol? Driving drunk ONE time is ONE time too many, but everytime there is a drunk driving death, which is all the time, I don't ever hear people talking about banning alcohol? I'm almost possitive alcohol kills more (chidren and adults) than people owning guns. (again, I have no statistics)

And for anyone that says, well yesterday there were 20 children that died, what about all the combined children that die every year from alcohol? Are they less important?

Drunk driving is a very serious issue and no less important. It is however an entirely different issue. People are not always aware they are too impaired to drive. Often the intoxication gives people a false sense of their abilities. Being drunk in itself isn't a crime. Operating a motor vehicle while you're drunk is. There should be no second chances when people are convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol. People are killed in literally millions of different ways and any of these can be hand picked to suggest if we can't ban this we shouldn't ban that but the reality is, cars are not designed and purchased as weapons. Alcohol is not consumed for the purpose of killing someone later. Guns are designed one purpose and the average civilian should not require them for that purpose. People should not need to arm themselves to feel safe. I don't know a single person who owns a gun and I have never heard a single person tell me they would be safer with a gun.... Except for SOME Americans.

 

[Balthazar]

Fact: There were more guns per capita in the US 100 years ago than there are today. Mass shootings were practically nonexistent. Do you still blame the guns?

Fact: Shooters pick "gun free" zones on purpose. They have no interest in entering into a gun fight. When was the last time that a civilian shooter entered a military installation or a police station?

Fact: Criminals don't care about laws, only law abiding citizens do. Banning guns will remove the guns from the hands of the good guys while the bad guys will keep them.

 

[just play]

Obviously not.I was referring to the health implications as by your previous post I thought you were talking about alcohol in general.Not just drink driving.

Just because drink driving deaths happen,it doesn't provide a reason or logic for additional deaths to occur by an alternative method.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, I was only talking about drunk driving, not alcohol in general.

I agree with your last line.


I just want to say I don't own a gun, never will own a gun, I personally don't like them. We had a BBgun in our house when I was young, I grew up with all men, and I made my father get rid of it, lol. BUT...if my neighbor wants to own one, who am I to say no you can't. I agree that shop owners should own a gun, they get robbed all the time, it's their right to protect themselves and their livelyhood. I also agree that if a family wants to own a gun, that's also their right to protect their family.

If you take away guns from law abiding citizens, then only the criminals will have them, we all know they will find a way to get them. I don't like that scenerio.

 

[just play]

I don't know a single person who owns a gun and I have never heard a single person tell me they would be safer with a gun.... Except for SOME Americans.

Maybe it's just a USA thing then? I have no idea.

I think it's 50/50 here with people saying if they feel safer with a gun or not, but I can't be sure, never did a poll, lol.

 

[Westland Bowl]

Disarm America? The powers that be? The fact that you seem to be under the impression that some higher power is trying disarm America for some devious purpose tells me you're in high end, full blown conspiracy theory mode and discussing this suddenly became a waste of time.

By holding on to some deluded theory that everyone will be better off if everyone is armed and making ridiculous claims like teachers should be carrying guns around school yards and in class rooms and that civilians should have the right to shoot each other whenever they feel threatened is doing nothing more than perpetuating an ideology that has awarded a single nation with more violent crime than most of the rest of the civilized world combined.

America is better than that. I know it is and so do a lot of Americans. It's long past time the rest of them realized it.

You are entitled to your opinion as far as whether there is an intentional effort to disarm Americans by the PTB. israel's teachers have assault weapons in schools- best way to protect the safety of school children.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

Fact: There were more guns per capita in the US 100 years ago than there are today. Mass shootings were practically nonexistent. Do you still blame the guns?

Fact: Shooters pick "gun free" zones on purpose. They have no interest in entering into a gun fight. When was the last time that a civilian shooter entered a military installation or a police station?

Fact: Criminals don't care about laws, only law abiding citizens do. Banning guns will remove the guns from the hands of the good guys while the bad guys will keep them.

50 years ago,people tell me,(as they never fail to do so),you could leave your front door open on a hot sunny day and nobody would burgle you.

Times change.

Banning guns will work eventually,it may take 50 years to clean them up but eventually it will work.Not to say nobody will ever die from a gunshot wound again,gun runners even operate in the UK.

But banning the will act as a deterrent for most law abiding US citizens,thus removing the temptation to anyone that may have access to that gun.

 

[Westland Bowl]

You are missing the point.Whilst there is still the potential of children being shot-or anyone for that matter guns are just another option that can kill.

Yes anyone can be killed with a car,but how would this have worked yesterday-would he have driven through a concrete building to kill these innocent people?

I have never heard of anyone driving their car into a school in an attempt to cause a large amount of people to lose their lives in the uk.

You have to think along the lines of making these events harder to complete,a man with a gun is far too easy,a man with a car trying the same is far more difficult-it would have been at my school as there wasn't a pathway big enough for a car to drive down.

Of course, if he only had a car and intention of killing children then, of course, he wouldn't attempt to drive into a school. He would just wait at a school crossing when a lot of kids are crossing. The point I'm making is that people are saying, "If he did not have a gun, he wouldn't have killed those kids" but the choice of weapon would determine the mode of killing. The focus should be on the person and the cause of the killing, not the thing used.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

Of course, if he only had a car and intention of killing children then, of course, he wouldn't attempt to drive into a school. He would just wait at a school crossing when a lot of kids are crossing. The point I'm making is that people are saying, "If he did not have a gun, he wouldn't have killed those kids" but the choice of weapon would determine the mode of killing. The focus should be on the person and the cause of the killing, not the thing used.

Increasing the risk of arousing suspicion and the possibilty of being caught before the act-occurring due to things being made more difficult for him.

 

[Balthazar]

But banning the will act as a deterrent for most law abiding US citizens,thus removing the temptation to anyone that may have access to that gun.

You make me want to bang my head against the wall every time that you talk about "temptation". I've owned guns all my life and was never "tempted" to shoot anyone. Just like I'm not "tempted" to run over people when I drive my car or stab people when I cut vegetables.

You'll never understand what's a free man, and you'll never understand what not being forced to put your life in the hands of your government is either. Guns are not evil, some people are evil.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

You make me want to bang my head against the wall every time that you talk about "temptation". I've owned guns all my life and was never "tempted" to shoot anyone. Just like I'm not "tempted" to run over people when I drive my car or stab people when I cut vegetables.

You'll never understand what's a free man, and you'll never understand what not being forced to put your life in the hands of your government is either. Guns are not evil, some people are evil.

But my whole point about temptation is you can only account for yourself.

Anyone else have access to those guns? You can tell me nobody will ever think of using that gun in the wrong way?

You will say no,how many US families will have said the same?

 

[Balthazar]

Increasing the risk of arousing suspicion and the possibilty of being caught before the act-occurring due to things being made more difficult for him.

This guy was willing to kill young children, his mother and then kill himself and you think that going to the black market to get a gun would be a deterrent?

 

[Westland Bowl]

Here is an interesting (IMO) article on staged incidences like this. Two shooters were seen running from the school. Who were they? Government operatives?

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[Balthazar]

But my whole point about temptation is you can only account for yourself.

Anyone else have access to those guns? You can tell me nobody will ever think of using that gun in the wrong way?

You will say no,how many US families will have said the same?

Considering that there are over 200 million privately-owned firearms in the US, I'd say a friggin' lot.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

This guy was willing to kill young children, his mother and then kill himself and you think that going to the black market to get a gun would be a deterrent?

It would certainly be somewhat more difficult for people to get a gun,granted not impossible but having a gun at arms reach imo certainly isn't healthy when people are in rash decision mode.

 

[Balthazar]

50 years ago,people tell me,(as they never fail to do so),you could leave your front door open on a hot sunny day and nobody would burgle you.

So do you blame the doors for this change? Since you blame the guns for the mass shootings.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

So do you blame the doors for this change? Since you blame the guns for the mass shootings.

I was providing a reason/logic as to why 'times change',not a reason for several kids and adults being shot.

 

[just play]

Can't we all just agree to disagree?

No one is going to change their mind on this subject I presume.

 

[Balthazar]

It would certainly be somewhat more difficult for people to get a gun,granted not impossible but having a gun at arms reach imo certainly isn't healthy when people are in rash decision mode.

This guy didn't get up one morning and decided to kill everyone. Everything was planned, just like the Colorado theatre shooting. There's NO way to prevent such tragedy and there's only one way to control the damages: to have more responsible armed people in place. Like I said earlier, if teachers would have been armed, this guy would NOT have killed 20 kids. If people were armed on the island in Norway, how many people would have been saved? 50? 60? 70? Banning guns is dangerous and a threat to society.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

This guy didn't get up one morning and decided to kill everyone. Everything was planned, just like the Colorado theatre shooting. There's NO way to prevent such tragedy and there's only one way to control the damages: to have more responsible armed people in place. Like I said earlier, if teachers would have been armed, this guy would NOT have killed 20 kids. If people were armed on the island in Norway, how many people would have been saved? 50? 60? 70? Banning guns is dangerous and a threat to society.

You see,this is what concerns me.To solve a countries evident problem with guns,a persons answer is you employ more people with guns.

Edit: Norways 1 shooting event in how long? Compared with your 31 since columbine - school shootups alone.

 

[Balthazar]

You see,this is what concerns me.To solve a countries evident problem with guns,a persons answer is you employ more people with guns.

It's called fight fire with fire and it works.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

It's called fight fire with fire and it works.

I doubt we will agree on much here but to me its just bizarre.

 

[just play]

I doubt we will agree on much here but to me its just bizarre.

I think the thing with guns is how you were raised, where you were raised, and so on.

Of course a counry boy who went out with his father, shot and then ate the deer will be for guns.

And maybe a city person would think the opposite?

Or even vise versa.


I have no idea I'm just speculating.

 

[Balthazar]

I doubt we will agree on much here

Now THAT I agree with

but to me its just bizarre.

That's because you see things with an emotional point of view. It's similar to fighting fire with fire (literally), which seems bizarre too if you don't fully understand why it's done.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

Now THAT I agree with



That's because you see things with an emotional point of view. It's similar to fighting fire with fire (literally), which seems bizarre too if you don't fully understand why it's done.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I understand what you are trying to say,however I would like to see someone with a similar view explain this to the parents who unfortunately have a christmas funeral to arrange.

Edit: I know what the phrase means,I just don't think its applicable here.To say it works as a defence yet we're here discussing this subject proves all is good and in 1 months time we won't be discussing the same thing after another event like this?

 

[Balthazar]

I think the thing with guns is how you were raised, where you were raised, and so on.

Of course a counry boy who went out with his father, shot and then ate the deer will be for guns.

And maybe a city person would think the opposite?

You're right. Personally I was raised around guns, my dad is an avid hunter and I've owned my first rifle at age 12. I was teached at an early age how to use firearms and what not to do with them. Guns don't scare me and I've a whole bunch of them stored at home, from handguns to semi-auto rifles (all legal and registered stuff). While I don't hunt much anymore, target shooting is my favorite hobby and I'm a member of a club.

However, for someone who was born and raised in the UK, I understand why this person would see guns as only a bad thing. Guns are seen as evil because they only see one side of the story when they talk about guns in the news, and they have no first hand experience with them because they are almost all banned.

It's all perspective.

 

[Balthazar]

I understand what you are trying to say,however I would like to see someone with a similar view explain this to the parents who unfortunately have a christmas funeral to arrange.

"I'm sorry madam, we had no answer and didn't know what to do. We tried to hide but we couldn't do anything else and had to wait for the police to come."

Maybe this will help you understand better. That said, I'm done with this thread now

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

I think the thing with guns is how you were raised, where you were raised, and so on.

Of course a counry boy who went out with his father, shot and then ate the deer will be for guns.

And maybe a city person would think the opposite?

Or even vise versa.


I have no idea I'm just speculating.

I'm not really a city person,I live in a sort of a rural location-almost inbetween if that makes sense.

I do understand your point and the majority of gun owners in the US are as much a law abiding citizen as myself,as usual in cases like this its the minority that spoil things for the majority.

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

"I'm sorry madam, we had no answer and didn't know what to do. We tried to hide but we couldn't do anything else and had to wait for the police to come."

Maybe this will help you understand better. That said, I'm done with this thread now

Erm,I meant your view on guns.

 

[cpdnd31]

OK after reading this tread. Listening to all, debate about the gun laws. I would like to give my thoughts. These are my thoughts and I really don't care if you agree or not. I won't argue with you and I am also trying to respect everyone's opinion here.

Fact: These children were slaughtered - they didn't have a chance- imagine there fear. Imagine how there parents are feeling.

Fact: Too many horrific I'm a crazy person so I will make myself known to all by killing as many as I can. Then killing myself.

Fact: The guns they used were all assault/semi automatic rifles. Tell me why would you need a gun like this? These are not little handguns. Give me a reason you would need a semi automatic rifle in modern America today. I mean did I miss something are we at war? If I was in a middle eastern country maybe I could understand the purpose but here- tell me the logic.

Fact: Many Americans carry handguns- most of these handguns have 16 bullets? Why? If you can't hit what you need with a six bullet revolver you shouldn't have a gun!

Fact: I was a cop- I have seen the dead kids who found daddy's gun- I have seen the dead kids who were shot by the gang bangers because they have no aim- do me a favor if your a gang banger I really don't care if you shoot each other but hey get some lessons because you keep missing and shooting the kids mothers and innocent. I'm not joking on that. I've seen the car jackers --the grieving parents - do I need to go on for I hope you get the point. It is senseless.

All one thing in common the gun.

I put this last thought in you heads this whole thread everyone started arguing about the guns-- did anyone mention the crazy person over 150 times? No!Go count how many times the word gun was used. That has become the main topic of this thread- take the hint- you all answered your own questions. It's the gun- they kill - you can try to defend it but until you see the deaths from that weapon you will never understand it.

For those of you that have one - I pray no one steals it- yes it was safe in your hands but what if- I hope no child gets to it- and I pray you never ever have to use it- Just by buying one you are saying I am willing to take a life or you would never had bought one to begin with.

 

[Simmo!]

The guns they used were all assault/semi automatic rifles. Tell me why would you need a gun like this? These are not little handguns. Give me a reason you would need a semi automatic rifle in modern America today.

That's exactly the point I was going to make.

Someone earlier intimated that you need to understand a culture before you can pass judgement and, as someone who lives in the UK, I don't understand the need for guns at all. But they are part of US society and clearly you can't just ban them overnight even if you wanted to. But you can reduce their impact by getting rid of the guns like semi-automatics that are more suited to mass killing.

----

It's horrible to say but events like this, thankfully irregular, are the trade-off for allowing the public to own guns and sadly, the likelihood of this happening again is high, arguably inevitable. Because while you allow guns, you simply can't stop psychologically unstable people getting hold of them. The only way you can minimise the impact is to gradually "lock down" (ie: imprison) everyday folk within their surroundings but even that won't stop the person intent to destruction.

To me, this event is probably the most heartrending event of it's type to date. And at such a time of year...just so, so sad

 

[just play]

I agree with you on some of the things you said. This statement stands out to me....

I put this last thought in you heads this whole thread everyone started arguing about the guns-- did anyone mention the crazy person over 150 times? No!Go count how many times the word gun was used. That has become the main topic of this thread- take the hint- you all answered your own questions. It's the gun- they kill - you can try to defend it but until you see the deaths from that weapon you will never understand it.

I started the thread worried about how to talk to my daughter about this, and that I was sick.

In turn the thread turned into a gun debate...that's why the word gun was mentioned so many times. It was now a gun debate, not a debate over this sick fuck crazy person. Which of course I didn't want, but people post how they choose.



I agree with you on.....

The guns they used were all assault/semi automatic rifles. Tell me why would you need a gun like this?

I have some questions (like always, lol)


I don't understand this part either? What do people use these kind of guns for? To my slim knowledge of guns, you don't use them to hunt correct?

Since you were a cop, don't you think that if we were to eliminate assault/semi automatic rifles, only criminals would have them? That would be worse wouldn't it? There would still be these mass murders because they would own them. Again since I know practically nothing about guns, I don't know why normal average people own these types.

And again since you were a cop, you carried a gun right? So you know the criminals probably have one as well. I'm not sure if you mean you want to rid guns completely or just the assault/semi automatic rifles?

OK after reading this tread. Listening to all, debate about the gun laws. I would like to give my thoughts. These are my thoughts and I really don't care if you agree or not. I won't argue with you and I am also trying to respect everyone's opinion here.

Fact: These children were slaughtered - they didn't have a chance- imagine there fear. Imagine how there parents are feeling.

Fact: Too many horrific I'm a crazy person so I will make myself known to all by killing as many as I can. Then killing myself.

Fact: The guns they used were all assault/semi automatic rifles. Tell me why would you need a gun like this? These are not little handguns. Give me a reason you would need a semi automatic rifle in modern America today. I mean did I miss something are we at war? If I was in a middle eastern country maybe I could understand the purpose but here- tell me the logic.

Fact: Many Americans carry handguns- most of these handguns have 16 bullets? Why? If you can't hit what you need with a six bullet revolver you shouldn't have a gun!

Fact: I was a cop- I have seen the dead kids who found daddy's gun- I have seen the dead kids who were shot by the gang bangers because they have no aim- do me a favor if your a gang banger I really don't care if you shoot each other but hey get some lessons because you keep missing and shooting the kids mothers and innocent. I'm not joking on that. I've seen the car jackers --the grieving parents - do I need to go on for I hope you get the point. It is senseless.

All one thing in common the gun.

I put this last thought in you heads this whole thread everyone started arguing about the guns-- did anyone mention the crazy person over 150 times? No!Go count how many times the word gun was used. That has become the main topic of this thread- take the hint- you all answered your own questions. It's the gun- they kill - you can try to defend it but until you see the deaths from that weapon you will never understand it.

For those of you that have one - I pray no one steals it- yes it was safe in your hands but what if- I hope no child gets to it- and I pray you never ever have to use it- Just by buying one you are saying I am willing to take a life or you would never had bought one to begin with.

 

[skiny]

You make me want to bang my head against the wall every time that you talk about "temptation". I've owned guns all my life and was never "tempted" to shoot anyone. Just like I'm not "tempted" to run over people when I drive my car or stab people when I cut vegetables.

You'll never understand what's a free man, and you'll never understand what not being forced to put your life in the hands of your government is either. Guns are not evil, some people are evil.

It's sad when a person requires a gun to be a "free" man. The more I read about Americans who feel the need to be armed the more I understand how many Americans live in fear.

You're right. Personally I was raised around guns, my dad is an avid hunter and I've owned my first rifle at age 12. I was teached at an early age how to use firearms and what not to do with them. Guns don't scare me and I've a whole bunch of them stored at home, from handguns to semi-auto rifles (all legal and registered stuff). While I don't hunt much anymore, target shooting is my favorite hobby and I'm a member of a club.

However, for someone who was born and raised in the UK, I understand why this person would see guns as only a bad thing. Guns are seen as evil because they only see one side of the story when they talk about guns in the news, and they have no first hand experience with them because they are almost all banned.

It's all perspective.

People own hunting rifles for hunting. People own hand guns and assault rifles for killing. Call it a constitutional right. Call it personal protection. Call it anything you like but a society that perpetuates the idea that people need to be armed to be safe is truly sad.

 

[Balthazar]

It's sad when a person requires a gun to be a "free" man.

No one "requires" it, it's a choice (hence the "free" part). What's sad is when the government employees own them and then prohibit the citizens to do the same.

People own hunting rifles for hunting. People own hand guns and assault rifles for killing.

Very few civilians own actual assault rifles. What the media calls "assault rifles" are actually just plain ol' semi-auto rifles that look mean. I own them, and I own handguns, and I'm Canadian, and they are legal, and they are not for killing. How do you feel about that?

 

[just play]

The more I read about Americans who feel the need to be armed the more I understand how many Americans live in fear.

Some places here are extremely BAD!!! There are a few places you do not feel safe walking down the street in daylight. Google...Holyoke Massachusetts and Springfield Massachusetts. Both these cities are within 30 minutes from me. Driveby shootings are common, even daily occurrences in those 2 places. And this is just two areas near me, imagine all the areas in the whole USA.

My husband has a part time job, he has to take pictures of houses for people who are late on mortgages, insurance and such. He got asked to be taken off of these 2 areas.

Call it anything you like but a society that perpetuates the idea that people need to be armed to be safe is truly sad.

I have never been out of USA...so this may seem naive to some, but not to me.....

There are no places in Canada where you can't walk the streets in daylight? Every city/town/providence are all happy go lucky people and never go off and kill people? It seems strange to me that in the whole world USA is the ONLY place that have psychos?

 

[secret2]

Question

Since there never seems to be a good time to talk about Gun control, do you think that school personel should be allowed to carry guns?

Sounds frightening but what do you think?

 

[Balthazar]

Since there never seems to be a good time to talk about Gun control, do you think that school personel should be allowed to carry guns?

Sounds frightening but what do you think?

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

Since there never seems to be a good time to talk about Gun control, do you think that school personel should be allowed to carry guns?

Sounds frightening but what do you think?

Imo I think there's just as much potential for the same thing to happen should this be implemented.Even then different buildings/organisations will then be targeted.

Where do you stop? You guard every school you then have to have armed guards at every hospital,cinema,library....

 

[cpdnd31]

Someone asked me some cop questions so here goes: As a cop I dealt with Criminals who had guns. Yes I carried one and my hand shook every time I had to unsnap my holster. It was the last thing I ever wanted to do... As a cop if I pulled over someone for lets say drugs- I would say I won't pull you in for this if you cough up where we can get some Guns off the street-- We would rather confiscate a gun then put a kid in jail for dope-- Semi-automatic guns no need for them- they are designed for quick fire and destruction.. Most of these people we dealt with knew how to take a 16 shot hand gun and redesign for rapid fire as well. There is no need for them - I say stop manufacturing of certain weapons- Its not a solution to the problem but it is a start-- Something needs to change and if the deaths of 20 children are not enough to show that then what will be. I honestly am more outraged today then I was yesterday. Listening to the crap on TV and the people defending yes defending the guns and why they should have them. I'm not fighting for me anymore I am fighting for the safety of my children. Those who are parents will understand that statement.

 

[Mouche12]

No one "requires" it, it's a choice (hence the "free" part). What's sad is when the government employees own them and then prohibit the citizens to do the same.




Very few civilians own actual assault rifles. What the media calls "assault rifles" are actually just plain ol' semi-auto rifles that look mean. I own them, and I own handguns, and I'm Canadian, and they are legal, and they are not for killing. How do you feel about that?

Do you use handguns for hunting?? Anyway, I am from Holland and although in spite of our anti-gun legislation we had our first ever mall shooting (a disturbed young man who owned a registered gun for target shooting). It baffles me why people should own guns other than for hunting purposes.

 

[skiny]

No one "requires" it, it's a choice (hence the "free" part). What's sad is when the government employees own them and then prohibit the citizens to do the same.

The government employees that have weapons have them for a reason. The police and military are in place to protect me. They are supposed to be armed, civilians are not. Civilians are not judges, juries or executioners. There may be rare occasions where an armed civilian may be useful. There are endless occasions when it is not. It is not ok for civilians to start deciding when it's ok to shoot other civilians. Put guns in civilian hands and that decision will have to be made. I trust the police to know when a gun should be fired. I don't trust an angry neighbour or a scared shop keeper. I have no fear of guns. I've never owned one but fired them many times. Letting average citizens collect and store guns in their home is too great of a risk just so I can go out and pop off a few targets once in a while. Guns made specifically for hunting is a different story. Guns stored properly until hunting season is hardly the same thing as people keeping hand guns or assault weapons around the house for "protection."

Very few civilians own actual assault rifles. What the media calls "assault rifles" are actually just plain ol' semi-auto rifles that look mean. I own them, and I own handguns, and I'm Canadian, and they are legal, and they are not for killing. How do you feel about that?

I am just glad that the majority of Canadians don't feel the need to keep guns in their home for protection. But I suppose there's one in every crowd.

 

[Westland Bowl]

From USA Today. Column: Gun-free zones provide false sense of security
Killers aren't stopped by these policies.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Additional article on the changing story of the 2nd shooter:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[skiny]

From USA Today. Column: Gun-free zones provide false sense of security
Killers aren't stopped by these policies.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Additional article on the changing story of the 2nd shooter:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Did you really expect to change anything by making a very small area "gun free" for a very short period of time?

You can't make a school or a mall or movie theater gun free if you can easily get one around the corner.

You can't make one state gun free if you can just drive down the highway and bring one back.

Any "journalist" who claims that gun control doesn't work because someone brought a gun into a gun free zone shouldn't be writing in the first place. They obviously don't have enough common sense to have their words published.

From the above article -- There are a lot of problems with this approach, but one of the most significant is this one: It doesn't work. One of the interesting characteristics of mass shootings is that they generally occur in places where firearms are banned: malls, schools, etc.

That doesn't mean we need to have school teachers carrying guns around in class or we need to tuck an assualt rifle under the counter for the BoosterJuice girl in the food court. It means the person on the rampage shouldn't have had access to these guns in the first place.

It amazes me how many people can't see the forest for the trees.

 

[just play]

Skiny, Like I said earlier, I think it depends where you come from and how you were raised etc.

Your opinion isn't the right one, and my opinion isn't the right one. Everyone differs in their thinking. And to say something like

It amazes me how many people can't see the forest for the trees.

makes me a bit sad that you think your opinion is that much better than anyone elses.

I am for our right to own guns, even though I will never ever buy one.




I asked one of my friends tonight what he thought of all this....his reply......


"Why don't they do something about mental illness?"

 

[PNEFOREVER2]

Skiny, Like I said earlier, I think it depends where you come from and how you were raised etc.

Your opinion isn't the right one, and my opinion isn't the right one. Everyone differs in their thinking. And to say something like makes me a bit sad that you think your opinion is that much better than anyone elses.

I am for our right to own guns, even though I will never ever buy one.




I asked one of my friends tonight what he thought of all this....his reply......


"Why don't they do something about mental illness?"

You cannot prevent mental illness.By the same token you cannot prevent every gun death but you can do your upmost to prevent them.

A person can say "I feel (or must have the right to) the need to defend myself",but the majority of the threat they feel they need to defend themselves from comes from the same gun laws that enables themselves to keep a gun.

Its a vicious circle.

 

[skiny]

Skiny, Like I said earlier, I think it depends where you come from and how you were raised etc.

I agree entirely. It does depend on where you live an how you are raised. The question is, why do people in some places want to raise their children with the idea that they need to be armed? Why raise children with the impression that owning a weapon is a good thing?

I remember a couple of stories from when I was a teenager. I remember a couple of young teens that lived in a building near the mall I used to frequent. Apparently one of them borrowed a cassette tape from the other and refused to give it back. The boy who wanted his cassette tape back took the girl's necklace as some sort of ransom. The offer was simple. Give him back the cassette and get your necklace back. Instead of making the trade she went and told her boyfriend who came back and shot him. Where do you think the gun came from?

I know another teenager who stole some hand guns his father had "locked" away and traded them for drugs in the same building complex. This was after the first shooting so they weren't the same guns but the origin of the first gun was probably similar.

The fact is, the more people there are who are allowed to own guns the more guns there will be. That's just common sense.

And the more guns there are in general, the more likely they will fall into the hands of criminals and killers.

Small time crooks are not likely going to go out and buy their weapons legally in a gun shop. They're going to buy guns that have been stolen from people who bought the legally. Mass murders may go out and buy their own weapons but they're purchasing guns that shouldn't be for sale to the general public in the first place.



According to one news article, this is one of the guns recovered. Why does a civilian need to own this gun?

 

[kauphy]

yes i do think they should be able to carry.