Gunman opens fire at U.S. church, kills two

[Colpy]

And BTW, it is now very clear.....want strict gun control in the USA? Start working on a constitutional amendment. Yes, Americans have a right to arms.

Oh, BTW, the amendment?

Good luck with that.

 

[EagleSmack]

And BTW, it is now very clear.....want strict gun control in the USA? Start working on a constitutional amendment. Yes, Americans have a right to arms.

Oh, BTW, the amendment?

Good luck with that.

Well this is the part of the debate over Constitutional Rights where liberals and the anti-gun lobby ignore. It is OK to wave the Constitution when it comes to tapping phones but tuck it away when guns come into play.

It is a Constitutional Right to bear Arms and that is that.

 

[Zzarchov]

And shrugging your shoulders and just accepting it as a way of life sure is a great solution.... but hey, so long as you don't see a problem, who am I to argue? :-?



Base this:

Statistics: Gun Violence in Our Communities
http://www.neahin.org/programs/schoolsafety/gunsafety/statistics.htm

[/size][/font]
[/list]So more then 80 Americans die each day.... so it's even worse then previously generalized.

That's worse then living in Iraq.... no wonder why you guys don't think it's that bad over there.... gezuz.

My further question on that is would is the need of the word gun.

the rate of say, suicide by gun, is higher in the US.

That is only a problem, if the rate of suicide is also higher in the US.

Because if you shoot yourself with a gun or hang yourself with a rope, it doesn't really matter. What matters is your dead.

The same can be said of all of those stats. If guns weren't there, would knives and bats be used instead? Or is the problem specifically with guns.

The problem to me would be homicide, not "homocide with a gun", unless it is clear that more homocides take place because of the guns.

If its worse than Iraq than only 3-4 people die a day in Iraq. If thats the case, Iraq isn't so bad.

 

[Praxius]

So, why is that when there are lots of countries with firearms laws as loose as those in the USA?

Perhaps because of their screwed up mentality that the availability of weapons prevent crimes..... that perhaps the majority of the States in the US will hand you out a gun so long as you can show them a driver's license showing your age and that you live in the country.... never mind any knowlege on how to use a firearm properly or that you might be mentally unstable to be qualified owning a firearm.

And where does Canada place on the list?

Way in the distance.

The point is you can't make life safe......and to try and do so by restricting peoples' freedom to a ridiculous degree is very dangerous....

You can make life "Safer"..... and yes... the Freedom to take other people's Freedom away.... that should be protected? I can think of a lot more important things to protect then someone's right to own an assult rifle because the fear everybody is out to shoot them.

BTW, any idea how many of those 80 per day are suicides? I bet almost half.

Irrelevent... a death by a gun is a death by a gun, and if the availability of those guns was reduced, so too would the suicides relating to guns, just like any other gun related crime.

Any idea how many are justifiable shootings? Probably not that many, as in most defensive situations no shots are fired....

So what are you trying to say? That people use guns as a symbol or some "Stop Sign" to prevent crimes? Sorry, last I checked... their original design is to kill, not direct traffic.

And the majority of those "Justified Shootings" in Canada would have probably been robbery or petty assault crimes where nobody was seriously injured and eventually the person was caught later on by police..... where as in the US, you have millions of people trying to "Solve" their problems by sticking guns into them.... and when you have a weapon designed to kill shoved in your face, that completely changes the situation from a petty crime, to a life and death situation in an instant..... and in every case, chances are, someone's going to be dead over something stupid.

But hey, I guess protecting your fancy watch was worth taking a life for.... a beacon of a materialistic society I suppose.

And the 120 killed a day in vehicles?

Piss poor drivers ed.

 

[Praxius]

THAT is a HUGE point. On our nations highways and byways it is an absolute slaughter with car accidents. But it is not so glamorous because everyone has to drive. It is just that anti-gun lobby that gets into peoples minds.

Strangulation, stabbings, beatings are all fine and good...but when a gun is used...

BAN GUNS!

Four people died and three are missing in separate incidents over the past week off New York beaches...maybe we should ban Ocean Swimming.

You can't always protect people from their own stupidity..... but you can try and protect people from other people's violent actions.

 

[Zzarchov]

Irrelevent... a death by a gun is a death by a gun, and if the availability of those guns was reduced, so too would the suicides relating to guns, just like any other gun related crime.

To me "death by gun" is irreleveant.

A death is a death.

If taking away the gun merely means he slits his wrist, or jumps off his balcony, or takes sleeping pills, or hangs himself (etc)

Then all you have done is decided that people aren't capable of responsibley owning a gun for them. I have no problem with needing a gun license in the same way as a drivers license (which is far more dangerous to yourself and others, a car is far deadlier than a gun)

But the idea that I personally was given an assault rifle and was considered responsible enough for it, but now despite being older and more mature, I can now no longer be trusted with it?

Doesn't equate, and it doesn't seem to give any kind of benefit. In my case, the chance of me using the assault rifle to harm someone is infinately less than the (albeit very rare and unlikely) event that I would use it to save someone.

So the question is: Does remove guns lower deaths or just turn "Death by gun" into "Death by Knife". A death is a death.

 

[Zzarchov]

You can't always protect people from their own stupidity..... but you can try and protect people from other people's violent actions.

Again, that directly relates to cars. Cars kill more people than guns do, in the same manner (intentionally, accidentally and negligently)

Perhaps Cars should be banned and people forced to use government run public transport.

 

[EagleSmack]

You can't always protect people from their own stupidity..... but you can try and protect people from other people's violent actions.

So if these violent people didn't have guns then they would be good people? They would not try to kill/maim in other ways?

It is a Constitutional Right to bear arms. The carnage in urban areas are mostly perpetrated by illegal gun owners.

 

[darkbeaver]

I think Americans should have more guns especially when they're younger and free ammunition.

 

[scratch]

I think Americans should have more guns especially when they're younger and free ammunition.

So.......get them when they are young so even more havoc can ensue.

 

[Risus]

So if these violent people didn't have guns then they would be good people? They would not try to kill/maim in other ways?

It is a Constitutional Right to bear arms. The carnage in urban areas are mostly perpetrated by illegal gun owners.

Maybe that stupid right should be changed? You know it dates back to the civil war times for an entirely different reason that suggested today (self defence and protecting personal property during those tough times).

 

[Praxius]

So if these violent people didn't have guns then they would be good people? They would not try to kill/maim in other ways?

It would reduce the amount, yes. You can't even debate that, because it's just common sense. I know form personal experience from my own teenaged years and suicidal moments around that time, and what I would have done to those around me, if I had the resources available to me. I didn't, a knife wasn't going to get me very far in what I wanted to do, so I learned to get through that crap and deal with it.... moved on, people in my school are laid off from the steel mill, married their high school sl*ts, 4.5 kids, and never got anywhere.... it all works out in the end.

Case in point:

Situation #1 -
Guy A gets angry at Guy B for whatever reason.... enough that he lost control of his emotions. Guy A grabs his gun which is readily available and shoots Guy B. Guy B dies. Guy A is now a criminal and goes to jail.

Situation #2 -
Guy A gets angry at Guy B for whatever reason.... enough that he lost control of his emotions. Guy A looks for a gun to shoot the guy. No gun available or locked away back home and has to go home, open the gun cabinet, assemble his gun..... frig that, by the time Guy A got home, he probably has enough time to think through his actions and decide not to do it.

Situation #3 -
Guy A gets angry at Guy B for whatever reason.... enough that he lost control of his emotions. Guy A Beats the hell out of Guy B and they both go at it like the good old times. Guy A and Guy B are tired, sore and forgot why they were fighting in the first place and decide to goto the bar and have some more drinks.

It is a Constitutional Right to bear arms.

Still doesn't make it right.... a centuries old mistake is still a mistake. Just an old one.

The carnage in urban areas are mostly perpetrated by illegal gun owners.

Not from the information I've read in many cases..... V-Tech for example.

And sorry, but doesn't your statement contradict your belief all together when you say it's a right to own firearms, and then blame the violence on illegal gun owners? How can they be illegal if it's a right? :roll:

 

[Zzarchov]

Maybe that stupid right should be changed? You know it dates back to the civil war times for an entirely different reason that suggested today (self defence and protecting personal property during those tough times).

Maybe, but I've yet to hear a good reason why anyone you entrust with a vote shouldn't be entrusted with a gun or vice versa.

If they are too stupid to own a gun for the betterment of society, they are too stupid to vote. They also shouldn't have a car.

 

[Zzarchov]

It would reduce the amount, yes. You can't even debate that, because it's just common sense. I know form personal experience from my own teenaged years and suicidal moments around that time, and what I would have done to those around me, if I had the resources available to me. I didn't, a knife wasn't going to get me very far in what I wanted to do, so I learned to get through that crap and deal with it.... moved on, people in my school are laid off from the steel mill, married their high school sl*ts, 4.5 kids, and never got anywhere.... it all works out in the end.

Case in point:

Situation #1 -
Guy A gets angry at Guy B for whatever reason.... enough that he lost control of his emotions. Guy A grabs his gun which is readily available and shoots Guy B. Guy B dies. Guy A is now a criminal and goes to jail.

Situation #2 -
Guy A gets angry at Guy B for whatever reason.... enough that he lost control of his emotions. Guy A looks for a gun to shoot the guy. No gun available or locked away back home and instead stabs the guy with a knife from his steak special.
Situation #3 -
Guy A gets angry at Guy B for whatever reason.... enough that he lost control of his emotions. Guy A Beats the hell out of Guy B and they both go at it like the good old times. Guy A and Guy B are tired, sore and forgot why they were fighting in the first place and decide to goto the bar and have some more drinks. Neither ever got the gun from their car which each owned.



Still doesn't make it right.... a centuries old mistake is still a mistake. Just an old one.



Not from the information I've read in many cases..... V-Tech for example.

And sorry, but doesn't your statement contradict your belief all together when you say it's a right to own firearms, and then blame the violence on illegal gun owners? How can they be illegal if it's a right? :roll:

The fact still remains, Cars are worse than guns.

 

[Praxius]

The fact still remains, Cars are worse than guns.

I only have to worry about cars on the roads and highways... they don't break into my house, kill my family, rob people on the street, etc.... I'll take my chances on the roads with everybody else.

But the driving training in the US is much much worse too I might add. It's not the requirement of banning cars that is needed.... more and better training is needed. Just look at last winter, where they'd get smacked with a snow storm and thousands would be in crashes on highways, downtown streets, off the roads, in ditches.... and multiple fatalities.

Now look at when those same storms hit Central Canada..... Multiple crashes, people off the roads, pretty much the same thing..... oh, but less collisions, and no deaths.... perhaps I might remember there being one.... but nothing to the extent of what happened in the US.

So that problem now has a solution.... but has nothing to do with the topic of firearms.

 

[Zzarchov]

Cars on the Roads and Highways?

And the Roads, and the Cafes, and any store thats roadside, and parking lots.

Quite frankly, you have to worry about them everywhere you worry about legal guns. Cause if your worrying about guns in your home, that means someone is already breaking the law to bust in, and they have the intent to harm you because they are armed.


And the question is very much the same. Do you restrict peoples freedom to own useful tools on the basis that you assume they are by default, incompetant. And if they are incompetant by default, why do you let them vote.

 

[darkbeaver]

So.......get them when they are young so even more havoc can ensue.

They're the most corrupt nation the planet has ever seen. Who cares what happens to them, I'm sick of hearing reading seeing thinking and hateing them. They should have more pools and traffic as well. Thier tiny silly little spats are of interest to no one. They'll be killing each other in greater numbers soon enough for food and water ,then it'll be newsworthy, just barely.

 

[Risus]

The fact still remains, Cars are worse than guns.

Thats silly, you are comparing apples with grapes.....

 

[gopher]

This news was reported differently here: the gunman spewed hatred against liberals for being too beneficent in society. Yet, he was supposedly angry because his food stamps (a product of liberal social thinking) were taken away from him. Quite ironic.

 

[Colpy]

This news was reported differently here: the gunman spewed hatred against liberals for being too beneficent in society. Yet, he was supposedly angry because his food stamps (a product of liberal social thinking) were taken away from him. Quite ironic.

Linear thinking seems to be out of fashion these days..........