I noticed that a lot of these gunmen / culprits behind the shootings are between 18-30. You never see 40 year old, 50 year olds and so on go around shooting schools up or public places. It's the very young adults whom don't care about themselves and want to hurt others for the sake of 'feeling' something or wanting attention.
Yeah, but, I think that mostly have to do with hormone levels though? Similarly when testosterone levels drop so do felony rates. It are almost never the 40+ that gets incarcerated(espescially for violent crime).
Testosterone plays a large role in aggressive behavior and espescially impulse control. There is a reason why it are almost never women or older men engaged in killing sprees or rampages(or any kind of violent behavior really) and that all has to do with that hormone. High levels of testosterone might have been advantageous at some point in our evolutionary history, but nowadays in our organized societies it's more of a disadvantage if anything. Espescially with the combination of a disturbed personality.
Anyways my opinion is that guns shouldn't be in the hands of ordinary civilians. Espescially not in a civilized society. Idealistic I know. Ofcourse I know guns are part of America's cultural and historic tradition, but you'd think after all the harm they've done(and continue to do) more people would reconsider. I'm amazed how these tragedies just continue to happen and even the slightest initiatives for gun control immediately gets shot down(no pun intended).
Testosterone plays a large role in aggressive behavior and espescially impulse control. There is a reason why it are almost never women or older men engaged in killing sprees or rampages(or any kind of violent behavior really)
I'm led to believe there has been a substantial increase in teen girls committing violent crimes in the US over the last few years, though.
Just came across this. Terrible article though, sticks facts in between dragging out one account:
http://articles.philly.com/1992-02-23/news/26039610_1_troubled-girls-violent-crimes-melissa-h-sickmund
As an outside observer of your country from the north, I find this to be completely insane. I cannot remember where I heard this first but it is not original.
"The United States is the only country in the world where someone can walk into a school and kill a bunch of children with something, and the next week nobody talks about outlawing that thing."
Recently there was a church shot up with many many deaths if im up to date on my current events, and somehow nobody blames this on guns, it must be that piece of cloth blowing in the wind. My mouth was literally agape when i read about that, i pinched myself.
Take this with a grain of salt as I heard it in the insane aftermath but apparently, a professor stated that guns are verboten on campus and not even the campus rent-a-cops have guns.
I went to the school. I'm aware that the security guards did not carry guns. I am aware that most people don't carry them there. That's mostly because most people don't carry in the area, I've never seen someone with a gun here outside of when they are going on a hunting trip or something like that and I've lived here for fifteen years. Legally, he could have owned a gun and brought it to the campus, provided he had a permit.
Looked at the laws, and you're right. Campus carry was legal in this case, with someone on the other side of campus holding a classroom during this shooting. If nothing else, I admit when I am wrong. I however maintain that campus carry is overall a positive for colleges because it barely costs the school anything and there is simply little reason to not allow it.
Fun fact, I agree. My desires in terms of gun control have nothing to do with banning concealed carry. I just want registration, licensing, and mandatory background checks on all sales and exchanges. In my mind, using a gun in any circumstances is a public act like driving a car on a road, and is something that ought to be restricted similarly.
I disagree with gun use being a public act. Its only public when used in public such as with concealed carry which I think should come with a required amount of training and licensing. The purchase of harms however, I believe is a private matter. It is not the business of the government or society what I am doing that does not effect them. I am in favor of the NICS checks on gun sales, but honestly it doesn't stop much considering the inability to control private sales whether or not they're legal.
I particularly have an issue with Registration because quite honestly, thats the step before confiscating them, such as in the UK after the Dunblane massacre.
For the vast majority of gun users, any time they are using their guns at all, there is a chance they harm someone else. Most people do not live in the middle of nowhere. Most people live in towns, suburbs, or cities. And any accidental discharge of a weapon (which can easily occur at any time especially if you are not careful) could easily harm some else. Registration should absolutely be done because of how often crimes are committed with guns that come from the same small number of outlets. Registration would also help us to track illegal transactions like those you mentioned, and punish those who commit them. The only harm comes from paranoia like that which you express here, and that is nowhere near as important as the lives that could be saved or the crimes that could be prevented.
I mean, the politics and the gun nuts made it quite clear, that it's starting to become something that is just going to happen at this point, because they don't wanna touch that one sentence on this over 200 years old paper
Throw the constitution out then, none of it applies now, right?
or because some people still believe that a gun in a home makes for better security then lets say two big dogs, despite the fact that your kids can even play with the dogs without redecorating the walls with innards.
Because a gun is far better for defending a home. I'm not getting two big dogs or even one to match my other and having assholes poison them to break in later and I'm certainly not using them to defend my home because that is my job. In the event of a break in, all pets go into the bedroom with all other living creatures be they pets or humans. What you suggest, I find pretty sick to be honest.
As for redecoration, you're talking about two large dogs who are trained to tear the shit out of intruders. Shooting someone would actually be far cleaner.
At this point, all cares towards shootings from many people have run more dry then well in California during summer.
"Oh, it's free! They just take some of my money to pay for it!"
No snark intended, but, if that's "free", then half of what I own is free, after paying rent and bills out of my paycheck.
No. I mean you're not free and prefer to cling a piece of metal than allow people to live. How are you free? I don't own a gun but even given the option to own one, I wouldn't. I don't need one. You're only free to be scared.
It's not in my will whether people live or not. That is up to other people. I'd want everyone to live and be happy but this is not that kind of world.
I don't really feel scared in general outside of still having a hilarious fear of actual darkness, though that might be from random animal attacks or seeing some weird stuff at night.
Yeah you would be destroying your home, unless you're an expert shot and can know where each shot is going.
They already did untold damage to my house. A bit more damage to ensure the hostile entity within my home will not do further damage or harm me or my loved ones, is pretty worth it. I'd be more worried about overpenetration of my walls but that's part of why shotguns can be quite useful in such a situation.
To put a final point on it, I think if you own a gun, you're part of the problem with all gun violence.
I'd actually like to see America flooded with guns, gun racks in class rooms, armed guards all over the place, two guns for every person. See how it works out, so far you have loads of guns and things are crazy ...
Well, if we're getting REALLY technical, isn't that the point if you're using it for defense? Or are we including people going out in the middle of nowhere to fire because that is far more on the mark.
Most people do not live in the middle of nowhere. Most people live in towns, suburbs, or cities.
Depends where it is but people often take a small trip to proper locations in the middle of nowhere, and those that don't either set up a proper area on their property or go to a range.
And any accidental discharge of a weapon (which can easily occur at any time especially if you are not careful) could easily harm some else.
Are we referring to accidental discharges, or negligent discharges? The difference being one is the malfunction of the firearm, the other being the malfunction of the operator of the firearm. Actual accidental discharges are incredibly rare, provided the firearm is properly taken care of, and even then it is rare.
Registration should absolutely be done because of how often crimes are committed with guns that come from the same small number of outlets.
Registration would also help us to track illegal transactions like those you mentioned, and punish those who commit them. The only harm comes from paranoia like that which you express here, and that is nowhere near as important as the lives that could be saved or the crimes that could be prevented.
Paranoia that has been proven to be with good cause after what he mentioned there. The lives that can be negatively affected by registration and confiscation is often brushed over.
I do not trust any form of registration particularly after our president made a statement that basically said "you see the UK and Australia? We need their gun system".
Really? I care more for life and I think the world would be a lot better with less people in it. What has been done about gun crime in America? Fuck all, not even talking about gun restrictions, nothing has been done. So you can't care that much.
The constitution needs to be modernised, it's not like it can't be changed. Though, you guys need to realize, the constitution isn't a big deal ... as a guy from the UK, I know yours better than mine!
It basically is free, you can get all kinds of medical treatment that costs WAY more then you'd pay in America for nothing.
It is the world we live in, it's not the world YOU live in. There is a big difference, Nobody I know owns a gun, of any kind and not one of them has had anything bad happen to them ... but no, it is the worlds problem.
Again with harming you or your family. If somebody came to your home to kill you, you need to be a nicer person 'cos it takes a fair bit of provoking for somebody to want to kill you! Secondly, if they come to your house to rob you, the last thing they want to do is increase there potential prison time by harming you or anybody. Think about it, they want money for drugs or whatever, what do they get for hurting or killing you?
Not really an opinion, you own and support guns for Joe Public, Joe public is the one doing all the school shootings and gun crime. By arguing against gun control, you're letting this happen. You're an accomplice to it all.
I'd love for American's to realize how they look to outside world.
Well, if we're getting REALLY technical, isn't that the point if you're using it for defense? Or are we including people going out in the middle of nowhere to fire because that is far more on the mark.
Most people do not live in the middle of nowhere. Most people live in towns, suburbs, or cities.
Depends where it is but people often take a small trip to proper locations in the middle of nowhere, and those that don't either set up a proper area on their property or go to a range.
And any accidental discharge of a weapon (which can easily occur at any time especially if you are not careful) could easily harm some else.
Are we referring to accidental discharges, or negligent discharges? The difference being one is the malfunction of the firearm, the other being the malfunction of the operator of the firearm. Actual accidental discharges are incredibly rare, provided the firearm is properly taken care of, and even then it is rare.
Registration should absolutely be done because of how often crimes are committed with guns that come from the same small number of outlets.
Registration would also help us to track illegal transactions like those you mentioned, and punish those who commit them. The only harm comes from paranoia like that which you express here, and that is nowhere near as important as the lives that could be saved or the crimes that could be prevented.
Paranoia that has been proven to be with good cause after what he mentioned there. The lives that can be negatively affected by registration and confiscation is often brushed over.
I do not trust any form of registration particularly after our president made a statement that basically said "you see the UK and Australia? We need their gun system".
Just use a numbered list if you're not going to put in line breaks. I'm on my fucking phone. I have no time to hunt down where your comments end.
1. I'm including cleaning, moving, securing... any time where you even move them. And a lot of people are just collectors, hunts, or shoot for fun. The vast majority of the time a gun is fired, it is not to kill another human being.
2. And you're still handling those guns in a space where you could accidentally shoot someone while you are packing them up. A huge number of gun deaths are accidents or suicides. Far more than spree shootings like these.
3. Stop being so damn technical. They're accidents that could have been prevented were it not for the negligence of the individual handling the gun. Your dull semantics are meaningless.
4. It's not like it's one single chain or anything. I remember a study a while back that found that the vast majority of crimes had come from some small fraction of stores or distributors.
EDIT- an article covering this http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html
5. Still trivial compared to actual lives and actual crimes. Your paranoia means nothing to me. I don't care.
Well, we care about crime. We don't particularly focus on extremely specific kinds of crimes, like crimes that have some relation to firearms being used, because it'd translate to the UK with knives being used, or even guns still because you guys still have guns floating about, just not as often used.
The constitution needs to be modernised, it's not like it can't be changed. Though, you guys need to realize, the constitution isn't a big deal ... as a guy from the UK, I know yours better than mine!
Actually it is a big deal. Plus, sure, it can be "modernized"(whatever that means), and we as a people have amended and added to it, and we still have left the majority of it unchanged, because we see no reason to change it.
It basically is free, you can get all kinds of medical treatment that costs WAY more then you'd pay in America for nothing.
So, it's health insurance. That's basically what you're saying. That you pay for in a different way.
It is the world we live in, it's not the world YOU live in. There is a big difference, Nobody I know owns a gun, of any kind and not one of them has had anything bad happen to them ... but no, it is the worlds problem.
No, with all due respect, it's the literal island you live on and you're quite lucky knowing nobody who has not had anything happen to them, because many more are not that lucky, in your own country. You quite possibly live on an island, on an island.
Again with harming you or your family. If somebody came to your home to kill you, you need to be a nicer person 'cos it takes a fair bit of provoking for somebody to want to kill you!
Not being caught if they do it fast enough? I don't know the logic of someone who disrespects my own rights just so they can get a fix so I wouldn't be able to tell you. But if they want help, they can knock on my door in the daytime and I can help them when I don't have bags in my eyes.
Not really an opinion, you own and support guns for Joe Public, Joe public is the one doing all the school shootings and gun crime. By arguing against gun control, you're letting this happen. You're an accomplice to it all.
Because Joe Public is everybody so that would of course overlap. People die, that's because individual Joe Public decided to kill people, not the piece of metal/wood/plastic he used to do it. Personal responsibility is a big thing here, and I do not believe you actually believe in it, contrary to what you have said.
I'd love for American's to realize how they look to outside world.
The difference is, we as a country, really do not care what the rest of the world thinks of us. If anything it is flattering that the US seems to be the center of attention of the world whenever something happens, that so many other countries put so much effort into discussing us for any reason. We're just us. We don't look down upon other countries for their choices in managing their patches of dirt, don't look down on us for how we manage ours. Because in the end, you're bringing so much focus on to us, when you should be worrying about yourselves and your own issues, which is what I thought came first in every country.
Revnak said:
Just use a numbered list if you're not going to put in line breaks. I'm on my fucking phone. I have no time to hunt down where your comments end.
1. I'm including cleaning, moving, securing... any time where you even move them. And a lot of people are just collectors, hunts, or shoot for fun. The vast majority of the time a gun is fired, it is not to kill another human being.
2. And you're still handling those guns in a space where you could accidentally shoot someone while you are packing them up. A huge number of gun deaths are accidents or suicides. Far more than spree shootings like these.
3. Stop being so damn technical. They're accidents that could have been prevented were it not for the negligence of the individual handling the gun. Your dull semantics are meaningless.
4. It's not like it's one single chain or anything. I remember a study a while back that found that the vast majority of crimes had come from some small fraction of stores or distributors.
5. Still trivial compared to actual lives and actual crimes. Your paranoia means nothing to me. I don't care.
1. And people that clean, move and secure them tend to follow the basic safety rules of firearms when doing so. If someone is a collector or hunts, they are insanely likely to know these rules and follow them religiously. As for fun, well, most know them but there are... thoooosssee people, that are the source of most of the "accidents".
2. Yes, and that is the fault of the person using the firearm. In one case someone is being stupid, the other someone is using a firearm to end their life. Both are choices of the person. Again, very rarely are unwilling discharges of a firearm actually the fault of the firearm.
3. ...Didn't I just say this? Isn't this my argument?
4. Well then deal with those stores and distributors as most of the time, they know what is going on but want dat phat green.
5. You may not care but the people have spoken. No registration, no touching of our rights by the government. Freedom is not trivial.
He's just wrong anyway, women commit loads of violent crimes. It used to be that attitude led to criminologists ignoring female serial offenders. Now we all know better. The motives and means might be different, but humans are violent animals.
That's why I said in combination with a disturbed personality. There is never just one reason as otherwise every man between 18 to 30 would be a violent criminal. However given that the dominant demographic for violent crime is post-puberty men till about hormone levels start to drop(or atleast stabilize) indicates there is quite clearly an undeniable link.
Just use a numbered list if you're not going to put in line breaks. I'm on my fucking phone. I have no time to hunt down where your comments end.
1. I'm including cleaning, moving, securing... any time where you even move them. And a lot of people are just collectors, hunts, or shoot for fun. The vast majority of the time a gun is fired, it is not to kill another human being.
2. And you're still handling those guns in a space where you could accidentally shoot someone while you are packing them up. A huge number of gun deaths are accidents or suicides. Far more than spree shootings like these.
3. Stop being so damn technical. They're accidents that could have been prevented were it not for the negligence of the individual handling the gun. Your dull semantics are meaningless.
4. It's not like it's one single chain or anything. I remember a study a while back that found that the vast majority of crimes had come from some small fraction of stores or distributors.
5. Still trivial compared to actual lives and actual crimes. Your paranoia means nothing to me. I don't care.
1. And people that clean, move and secure them tend to follow the basic safety rules of firearms when doing so. If someone is a collector or hunts, they are insanely likely to know these rules and follow them religiously. As for fun, well, most know them but there are... thoooosssee people, that are the source of most of the "accidents".
2. Yes, and that is the fault of the person using the firearm. In one case someone is being stupid, the other someone is using a firearm to end their life. Both are choices of the person. Again, very rarely are unwilling discharges of a firearm actually the fault of the firearm.
3. ...Didn't I just say this? Isn't this my argument?
4. Well then deal with those stores and distributors as most of the time, they know what is going on but want dat phat green.
5. You may not care but the people have spoken. No registration, no touching of our rights by the government. Freedom is not trivial.
1. And yet so many die while this occurs, these people may not even be on the gun owner's property, so the use of a gun in any way is a public act, like driving. And like driving, we should ensure that the only people who carry out this public and dangerous act are verified to be responsible. So require licenses and some form of registration, like we do with cars.
2. So we should make sure that anyone who owns a firearm is knowledgable about gun safety.
3. No it's mine, and I think you missed it.
4. Requiring registration for all guns would make this easier. All transactions would document the weapons registration, etc. To a degree this is already done, but a more robust system would simplify the process
Recently there was a church shot up with many many deaths if im up to date on my current events, and somehow nobody blames this on guns, it must be that piece of cloth blowing in the wind. My mouth was literally agape when i read about that, i pinched myself.
Not true. While a lot of people continued to oppose a racist symbol being used on official state buildings, that's not to say that all of them, and others, blamed the shooting solely on it. Lots of people call for gun control in the US after each shooting.
stroopwafel said:
That's why I said in combination with a disturbed personality. There is never just one reason as otherwise every man between 18 to 30 would be a violent criminal. However given that the dominant demographic for violent crime is post-puberty men till about hormone levels start to drop(or atleast stabilize) indicates there is quite clearly an undeniable link.
Clearly an undeniable correlation. That's not necessarily the same thing. There could be any number of reasons why the 18-30 year old demographic is different to older ones.
Just use a numbered list if you're not going to put in line breaks. I'm on my fucking phone. I have no time to hunt down where your comments end.
1. I'm including cleaning, moving, securing... any time where you even move them. And a lot of people are just collectors, hunts, or shoot for fun. The vast majority of the time a gun is fired, it is not to kill another human being.
2. And you're still handling those guns in a space where you could accidentally shoot someone while you are packing them up. A huge number of gun deaths are accidents or suicides. Far more than spree shootings like these.
3. Stop being so damn technical. They're accidents that could have been prevented were it not for the negligence of the individual handling the gun. Your dull semantics are meaningless.
4. It's not like it's one single chain or anything. I remember a study a while back that found that the vast majority of crimes had come from some small fraction of stores or distributors.
5. Still trivial compared to actual lives and actual crimes. Your paranoia means nothing to me. I don't care.
1. And people that clean, move and secure them tend to follow the basic safety rules of firearms when doing so. If someone is a collector or hunts, they are insanely likely to know these rules and follow them religiously. As for fun, well, most know them but there are... thoooosssee people, that are the source of most of the "accidents".
2. Yes, and that is the fault of the person using the firearm. In one case someone is being stupid, the other someone is using a firearm to end their life. Both are choices of the person. Again, very rarely are unwilling discharges of a firearm actually the fault of the firearm.
3. ...Didn't I just say this? Isn't this my argument?
4. Well then deal with those stores and distributors as most of the time, they know what is going on but want dat phat green.
5. You may not care but the people have spoken. No registration, no touching of our rights by the government. Freedom is not trivial.
1. And yet so many die while this occurs, these people may not even be on the gun owner's property, so the use of a gun in any way is a public act, like driving. And like driving, we should ensure that the only people who carry out this public and dangerous act are verified to be responsible. So require licenses and some form of registration, like we do with cars.
2. So we should make sure that anyone who owns a firearm is knowledgable about gun safety.
3. No it's mine, and I think you missed it.
4. Requiring registration for all guns would make this easier. All transactions would document the weapons registration, etc. To a degree this is already done, but a more robust system would simplify the process
1. Driving itself is not actually a public act. The act of driving on public roads, makes it so. You can buy a car and not need shit to use it on your property.
Quite a few things can effect people when moved be it just on private property or private to public, but we do not declare it a public act.
2. I would hope someone would be generally care enough to know the basic safety rules and many if not most gun shops have posters plastered everywhere about the rules. Plus, many shops actually won't sell to someone who seems particularly ignorant of the safety rules and clearly has no desire to follow them.
3. Maybe we both have the same argument in that regard.
4. It would also not affect arms currently floating around and make confiscation of any sort easier by several orders of magnitude. California is a shining example where none of this actually stops people from using firearms for illegal purposes.
Just use a numbered list if you're not going to put in line breaks. I'm on my fucking phone. I have no time to hunt down where your comments end.
1. I'm including cleaning, moving, securing... any time where you even move them. And a lot of people are just collectors, hunts, or shoot for fun. The vast majority of the time a gun is fired, it is not to kill another human being.
2. And you're still handling those guns in a space where you could accidentally shoot someone while you are packing them up. A huge number of gun deaths are accidents or suicides. Far more than spree shootings like these.
3. Stop being so damn technical. They're accidents that could have been prevented were it not for the negligence of the individual handling the gun. Your dull semantics are meaningless.
4. It's not like it's one single chain or anything. I remember a study a while back that found that the vast majority of crimes had come from some small fraction of stores or distributors.
5. Still trivial compared to actual lives and actual crimes. Your paranoia means nothing to me. I don't care.
1. And people that clean, move and secure them tend to follow the basic safety rules of firearms when doing so. If someone is a collector or hunts, they are insanely likely to know these rules and follow them religiously. As for fun, well, most know them but there are... thoooosssee people, that are the source of most of the "accidents".
2. Yes, and that is the fault of the person using the firearm. In one case someone is being stupid, the other someone is using a firearm to end their life. Both are choices of the person. Again, very rarely are unwilling discharges of a firearm actually the fault of the firearm.
3. ...Didn't I just say this? Isn't this my argument?
4. Well then deal with those stores and distributors as most of the time, they know what is going on but want dat phat green.
5. You may not care but the people have spoken. No registration, no touching of our rights by the government. Freedom is not trivial.
1. And yet so many die while this occurs, these people may not even be on the gun owner's property, so the use of a gun in any way is a public act, like driving. And like driving, we should ensure that the only people who carry out this public and dangerous act are verified to be responsible. So require licenses and some form of registration, like we do with cars.
2. So we should make sure that anyone who owns a firearm is knowledgable about gun safety.
3. No it's mine, and I think you missed it.
4. Requiring registration for all guns would make this easier. All transactions would document the weapons registration, etc. To a degree this is already done, but a more robust system would simplify the process
1. Driving itself is not actually a public act. The act of driving on public roads, makes it so. You can buy a car and not need shit to use it on your property.
Quite a few things can effect people when moved be it just on private property or private to public, but we do not declare it a public act.
2. I would hope someone would be generally care enough to know the basic safety rules and many if not most gun shops have posters plastered everywhere about the rules. Plus, many shops actually won't sell to someone who seems particularly ignorant of the safety rules and clearly has no desire to follow them.
3. Maybe we both have the same argument in that regard.
4. It would also not affect arms currently floating around and make confiscation of any sort easier by several orders of magnitude. California is a shining example where none of this actually stops people from using firearms for illegal purposes.
1. If I drive on my private track, I cannot run over my neighbor on his property. If I shoot on my private range, I can still shoot my neighbor on his property. Any use of a gun is a public act.
2. I would say the same for cars, but I would never expect it.
4. So we should not make an effort at all? Bullshit. Guns used in crimes will be confiscated, and new guns will have to go through registration. This will put a dent in the supply of illegal guns.
5. The concession of a man with no argument to make. The people are wrong. They have no more "right" to endanger their fellow man than 19th century plantation owners had to own their fellow man. I would say the same thing in both times. The people are fucking wrong.
5. The concession of a man with no argument to make. The people are wrong. They have no more "right" to endanger their fellow man than 19th century plantation owners had to own their fellow man. I would say the same thing in both times. The people are fucking wrong.
As an aside, I'm not sure how well we can tell that "the people" have spoken on issues such as this in the US. Gun owners are the minority of the population, but they are politically very powerful, and so is the NRA and arms industry.
To be perfectly honest, I just googled if an assault weapon has ever been used in a shooting and it said sandy hook had a bushmaster.
Wasn't obfuscating anything, it's not like I was listening to American news, heard it was never removed from the trunk but thought I would lie to try and make a point, that wont actually mean shit in the grand scheme of things.
Look at your continued verbiage and tell me you didn't want to believe it was true because it supported your bias. I live in "crazy land", I own guns, I own an "assault weapon" (not an AK or AR so good luck guessing what it is), and somehow I have no intentions of shooting up a school. How about you take your holier art thou attitude and stow it. Europe has plenty of gun violence too ya know. Why do we want them? They're fun to shoot. Why do you need anything more than food and water? Perhaps because you enjoy it?
Lense-Thirring said:
Fun fact: Gold can be kept in a vault, without air, without food, without being let out to play, without schooling or museums or malls or parks. You can keep all of the gold that's ever been mined in human history in one place if you wanted to.
Now, tell me how that is in any way similar to humans.
They're both high value targets for unscrupulous folks. Except we care enough about the gold to provide armed security, and we tell kids to hide under desks. If deasks are so safe why not just leave gold lying under them, cut a lot of manpower costs. I mean, desks are an amazing thing, they protect from gunmen AND nuclear explosion.
Take this with a grain of salt as I heard it in the insane aftermath but apparently, a professor stated that guns are verboten on campus and not even the campus rent-a-cops have guns.
I went to the school. I'm aware that the security guards did not carry guns. I am aware that most people don't carry them there. That's mostly because most people don't carry in the area, I've never seen someone with a gun here outside of when they are going on a hunting trip or something like that and I've lived here for fifteen years. Legally, he could have owned a gun and brought it to the campus, provided he had a permit.
Looked at the laws, and you're right. Campus carry was legal in this case, with someone on the other side of campus holding a classroom during this shooting. If nothing else, I admit when I am wrong. I however maintain that campus carry is overall a positive for colleges because it barely costs the school anything and there is simply little reason to not allow it.
Fun fact, I agree. My desires in terms of gun control have nothing to do with banning concealed carry. I just want registration, licensing, and mandatory background checks on all sales and exchanges. In my mind, using a gun in any circumstances is a public act like driving a car on a road, and is something that ought to be restricted similarly.
I disagree with gun use being a public act. Its only public when used in public such as with concealed carry which I think should come with a required amount of training and licensing. The purchase of harms however, I believe is a private matter. It is not the business of the government or society what I am doing that does not effect them. I am in favor of the NICS checks on gun sales, but honestly it doesn't stop much considering the inability to control private sales whether or not they're legal.
I particularly have an issue with Registration because quite honestly, thats the step before confiscating them, such as in the UK after the Dunblane massacre.
For the vast majority of gun users, any time they are using their guns at all, there is a chance they harm someone else. Most people do not live in the middle of nowhere. Most people live in towns, suburbs, or cities. And any accidental discharge of a weapon (which can easily occur at any time especially if you are not careful) could easily harm some else. Registration should absolutely be done because of how often crimes are committed with guns that come from the same small number of outlets. Registration would also help us to track illegal transactions like those you mentioned, and punish those who commit them. The only harm comes from paranoia like that which you express here, and that is nowhere near as important as the lives that could be saved or the crimes that could be prevented.
Its not paranoia, its literally what has happened repeatedly in other countries and almost in this one a few times. We've had people like Dianne Feinstein go on national media and openly state that they'd confiscate "assault weapons" if they could get the votes in Congress.
1. If I drive on my private track, I cannot run over my neighbor on his property. If I shoot on my private range, I can still shoot my neighbor on his property. Any use of a gun is a public act.
2. I would say the same for cars, but I would never expect it.
4. So we should not make an effort at all? Bullshit. Guns used in crimes will be confiscated, and new guns will have to go through registration. This will put a dent in the supply of illegal guns.
5. The concession of a man with no argument to make. The people are wrong. They have no more "right" to endanger their fellow man than 19th century plantation owners had to own their fellow man. I would say the same thing in both times. The people are fucking wrong.
1. You seriously underestimate the stupidity/ability of people. The odds would actually be the same of running over your neighbor and shooting him provided in both situations the person operating the device follows safety procedure.
2. I would expect it.
4. Guns used in crimes are already confiscated if the person is caught. You can't confiscate a straw purchase and virtually no one uses firearms they personally bought legally, for crimes, because it is an incredibly stupid idea.
5. Nope. You're right now stating someone is wrong, which is subjective. It is an opinion. Opinions vary, and right or wrong(which is still opinion) The People have spoken.
You're comparing firearms ownership to slavery. Funny enough, gun control initially started to keep guns out of the hands of blacks. Funny how that works.
If we're talking about the endangerment argument, a mother who is drinking or using drugs during pregnancy and might cause birth defects to the child is still legally allowed to do so and is far more a danger to someone that someone using a firearm on their property, responsibly. In both cases, it is the woman's right to do what she wishes with her body and it is the right of that person to keep and bear arms. You look down upon the firearm owner in a sense, I look down upon the woman. Neither I would take rights from.
Its not paranoia, its literally what has happened repeatedly in other countries and almost in this one a few times. We've had people like Dianne Feinstein go on national media and openly state that they'd confiscate "assault weapons" if they could get the votes in Congress.
Not even going into her stances on the First Amendment, including limiting who can be a Journalist and having the first only apply to them. And then being totally fine with NSA surveillance until she found out they were monitoring her as well.
1. If I drive on my private track, I cannot run over my neighbor on his property. If I shoot on my private range, I can still shoot my neighbor on his property. Any use of a gun is a public act.
2. I would say the same for cars, but I would never expect it.
4. So we should not make an effort at all? Bullshit. Guns used in crimes will be confiscated, and new guns will have to go through registration. This will put a dent in the supply of illegal guns.
5. The concession of a man with no argument to make. The people are wrong. They have no more "right" to endanger their fellow man than 19th century plantation owners had to own their fellow man. I would say the same thing in both times. The people are fucking wrong.
1. You seriously underestimate the stupidity/ability of people. The odds would actually be the same of running over your neighbor and shooting him provided in both situations the person operating the device follows safety procedure.
2. I would expect it.
4. Guns used in crimes are already confiscated if the person is caught. You can't confiscate a straw purchase and virtually no one uses firearms they personally bought legally, for crimes, because it is an incredibly stupid idea.
5. Nope. You're right now stating someone is wrong, which is subjective. It is an opinion. Opinions vary, and right or wrong(which is still opinion) The People have spoken.
You're comparing firearms ownership to slavery. Funny enough, gun control initially started to keep guns out of the hands of blacks. Funny how that works.
If we're talking about the endangerment argument, a mother who is drinking or using drugs during pregnancy and might cause birth defects to the child is still legally allowed to do so and is far more a danger to someone that someone using a firearm on their property, responsibly. In both cases, it is the woman's right to do what she wishes with her body and it is the right of that person to keep and bear arms. You look down upon the firearm owner in a sense, I look down upon the woman. Neither I would take rights from.
1. I doubt that they could do so without leaving their property at some point, without some local breakdown of reality.
2. And you say I'm the one who is underestimating people's stupidity. I do not expect people to be competent drivers or to only want to drive if they are competent, so I am for requiring driver's licenses. I do not expect people to be competent gun owners or to only want to use guns if they are competent, so I am for requiring gun licenses.
4. You could arrest the person who performed the straw purchase, provided they were required to register the gun when they purchased it. Which is why I am for registering guns.
5. Either all arguments about right and wrong are "just opinions" and therefore arbitrary, or none are. I am in the latter camp. If you're in the former, consider this conversation over. I have no interest in arguing with a 3 edgy 5 me nihilist. It's a waste of all effort.
Whoopidy doo. The Greeks who invented Democracy loved slavery, real politic, and rape. Doesn't make me anti-democracy. I don't fucking care.
Endangering her own child, not her neighbor's, and I believe that once that child is born protective services definitely ought to take it away from her. Perhaps they should force her to pay for some of the healthcare costs related to the child's upbringing if it was caused by her irresponsible actions. Just like if someone was routinely firing their gun at a pole in front of their neighbor's window they ought to have their gun taken away from them and their license to own or carry guns revoked. I am quite fine with being consistent here.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Ofcourse I know guns are part of America's cultural and historic tradition, but you'd think after all the harm they've done(and continue to do) more people would reconsider. I'm amazed how these tragedies just continue to happen and even the slightest initiatives for gun control immediately gets shot down(no pun intended).
