Less access to guns, less murder. It won't stop gun violence, nothing will. But I'm of the opinion that it will curtail it. Walking around with a gun is a pretty outdated concept.

I'm not proposing anything earth-shattering, you've heard it before. So you can cut the flabbergasted bullshit.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 12:45 PM. Reason : Let's be big boys here and not hid behind foolishness. You can do that.]

7/24/2012 12:44:06 PM

didn't an armed robber shoot and kill a guy outside an Old Navy in Greensboro sometime in the last year?

not that an armed citizen would've necessarily been able to prevent it, but apparently shit can happen anywhere

7/24/2012 12:46:18 PM

Something like that

Quote :

" but apparently shit can happen anywhere"

It definitely can, but as you've mentioned there's a very low chance of any of us encountering gun violence. Knowing that, I feel like you've gotta be sort of fuzzy to walk around with a gun for personal protection.

Quote :

"Let me briefly restate what I recall you saying/implying: 1) Fuck the police 2) Guns should be banned and melted down 3) People shouldn't be allowed to own/carry firearms"

Yes.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 12:49 PM. Reason : ]

7/24/2012 12:46:47 PM

Less access to guns [for law abiding citizens]

less murder [unknown effect on murder because]

1) self defense is pretty much gone in many instances

2) creates a larger black market for guns, which would likely be worse than the black market for drugs (which is horribly violent)

3) could result in a new federal war, "the war on guns" because the "war on drugs" has been so successful (note the sarcasm on the surface, but metaphor as well - the feds love the war on drugs. mo money, mo gear, mo power.

It won't stop gun violence, nothing will. But I'm of the opinion that it will curtail it not have much of an effect.

Walking around with a gun is a pretty outdated concept. personal choice and right for law abiding citizens.

I'm not proposing anything earth-shattering, you've heard it before. So you can cut the flabbergasted bullshit.



[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 12:51 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2012 12:48:43 PM

I can't make heads or tails of that post, Bill.

7/24/2012 12:50:03 PM

Guns aren't the problem. Dumb Americans who are willing to fight over stupid shit like this are the problem

Im krallum and i approved this message

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 12:51 PM. Reason : this phone is the problem]

7/24/2012 12:50:36 PM

OK, I get it now

I think the problem here is that you keep stating opinions as facts.

This is boring. I'm going to leave. You can say you won and post the Does Equis guy if that makes you feel good.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM. Reason : ]

7/24/2012 12:51:50 PM

Quote :

""I'd rather die of being shot than spend my entire life worrying about the possibility of being shot. Does that make sense? It's hard to articulate.""

and that is your choice and your freedom. we are a free county so please, by all means, no one is forcing you to have and carry a gun. but some other people feel differently and should have the freedom to do as they choose.

this argument is as dumb as banning gay marriage.

7/24/2012 12:52:50 PM

^^No, I didn't say all of that was fact. It's opinion, I openly admit that. It's the same as your post, but edited with my opinions. You think disarming law abiding people will curb violent criminals from their acts; I don't. And you have yet to explain how to disarm the public, which is another major issue in your idea.


[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 12:54 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2012 12:53:12 PM

Gay marriage is banned. Guns like gay marriage are an abomination and have no place in the world.

7/24/2012 12:53:54 PM

/thread

7/24/2012 12:54:48 PM

Im krallum and i approved this message

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 12:57 PM. Reason : well y'all bitch real fast ]

7/24/2012 12:56:51 PM

All these wasted arguments about guns.

1. Guns are made to kill.

2. Guns kill people.

3. Killing is illegal.

Yes there are other ways to kill, but guns are the easiest way to inflict mass casualties. So a gun ban would make AMERICA safer.

7/24/2012 12:58:12 PM

nah, bombs are the easiest way.

Also, none of you have yet to explain how disarming the law abiding will happen, nor how it will impact criminals. Please tell.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 12:59 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2012 12:58:42 PM

I think I see where part of the confusion.

Can someone please explain how having a gun on you can keep you from getting shot?

7/24/2012 12:59:38 PM

here comes something from the outfield.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:00 PM. Reason : Can't; but who said it could?]

7/24/2012 1:00:24 PM

I feel safer if wdprice3 has a gun

Im krallum and i approved this message

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:02 PM. Reason : ]

7/24/2012 1:01:15 PM

thats why i said if i was paranoid about getting shot i'd wear a vest

like the rappers do

7/24/2012 1:01:25 PM

Quote :

"BOMBS ARE ALREADY BANNED"

A retard can take a AR-15 into a theater and shoot 58 people. You gotta be somewhat intelligent to go blow shit up.

7/24/2012 1:01:32 PM

jihadist martyrs are so intelligent

7/24/2012 1:02:39 PM

Quote :

"All these wasted arguments about guns. 1. Guns are made to kill. 2. Guns kill people ANIMALS. 3. Killing ANIMALS is illegal LEGAL. Yes there are other ways to kill, but guns are the easiest way to inflict mass casualties HUNT. So a gun ban would make AMERICA safer OVERRUN WITH WILD ANIMALS STARVING AND DYING OF DESEASE. "

FIXED IT FOR YA!!

7/24/2012 1:03:34 PM

Yes they are. Before 9/11 did you view a 747 as a weapon? NOPE

^People are animals. Primates to be exact.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:04 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2012 1:03:47 PM

Quote :

"I think I see where part of the confusion. Can someone please explain how having a gun on you can keep you from getting shot? "

EASY...YOU SHOOT HIM BEFORE HE SHOOTS YOU

7/24/2012 1:04:20 PM

^^so a retard goes to a gun shop. completes the ATF form, passes a background check, is OK'd by the dealer, purchases a $1,500 rifle, purchases 100 rounds of ammo, drives back home (not institution?), loads the firearm, takes a few practice shots, drives to a movie theater, and shoots the place up? isn't as hard as mixing 2 or 3 household chemicals in a bucket?

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:07 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2012 1:05:06 PM

Quote :

"People kill people. Some people use different tools to accomplish that goal. We never hear you complaining about knives, poisons, rocks, etc."

Guns are designed to kill quickly and effeciently. It only takes a split second, and impulsive twitch of the finger. That's not the case with other weapons. The reason this guy stormed a movie theatre with a gun, and not knives, is because he could kill many more people much easier with guns. It's plain and simple, guns are for killing.

With that said, I'm certainly not for banning guns. i own guns. I think all responsible citizens should own guns. But the above argument is totally disengenious and weak.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:08 PM. Reason : ]

7/24/2012 1:05:15 PM

If he was serious about MASS murder and destruction, he would have bombed it.

The point is, the tool doesn't matter.

If he did use bombs, the ban "____" debate wouldn't come up, because the tool doesn't matter. The person and their actions do.

If he used gas, the ban "____" debate wouldn't come up, because the tool doesn't matter. The person and their actions do.

If he used bronies, the ban "____" debate wouldn't come up, because the tool doesn't matter. The person and their actions do.

Whenever we hear of a murder, or multiple murders, typically the only time the tool comes up for debate is when the tool is a firearm. Other times, we only care about the victim and murderer. We don't care what tool he used. We didn't say the knife/gas/ammonia/pillow killed the victim. We said the killer used a ____ to kill. If it's a gun, then its "GUNS KILL PEOPLE".


[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:14 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2012 1:07:20 PM

If bombs were easy, isn't it reasonable to assume that our joker would have set off a bomb in that theater instead of using a gun?



[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:08 PM. Reason : Jihadist would have bombed the theater.]

7/24/2012 1:08:03 PM

If you don't think bombs are easy to make then do some googling. Too damn easy. Basic household chemicals can make bombs. Gasoline, fertilizer make huge bombs (ol' Timmy, right?).

aww, my entertainment has gone.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:14 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2012 1:09:21 PM

taking an assault rifle into the theatre would be easier

7/24/2012 1:14:37 PM

Nitromethane isnt gas.

7/24/2012 1:15:57 PM

Nah. Not if you consider the totality of all input/decisions/outcomes/possibilities. Loading up a van with a drum of chemicals and walking away is "easier". He obviously wanted to see the carnage instead of inflicting as much pain and death as possible.

Most of the "legendary" mass murderers/terrorists didn't use guns. They used bombs or their cousin... a missile (and in some cases turning planes in to missiles). If you're worried about mass casualty, then worry about bombs. Guns are used in "mass murders" because the killer wants a personal connection, not because it's easier.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:18 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2012 1:16:22 PM

This might seem like a loaded question but what do you guys think the reason is for America to have an intentional homicide rate nearly four times as high as contemporaries such as the UK, Germany, Italy, Japan, Ireland, Canada, etc? And what, if anything, can be done about it.

Are we just a naturally more violent culture?

7/24/2012 1:18:12 PM

Quote :

"If bombs were easy, isn't it reasonable to assume that our joker would have set off a bomb in that theater instead of using a gun?"

^^ IT IS IN FACT MUCH EASIER TO MAKE A BOMB THEN TO ACQUIRE ALL THE HARDWARE HE HAD. IN FACT HE DID MAKE BOMBS AND BOOBY TRAPS AT HIS APARTMENT SO THIS MAKES US

THINK, WHY DIDN'T HE USE A BOMB?

WELL HE MUST HAVE HAD OTHER MOTIVATIONS, LIKE THE SENSATIONALISM THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH SEMI-AUTO RIFLES.

MAYBE HE WAS JUST A VIDEO GAME ROLE PLAYING FANATIC MIMICKING THE VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES THAT HE PLAYED (OH NOSE BAN VIDEO GAMES0

MAYBE HE JUST WANTED TO GO OUT GTA STYLE

WE COULD GO ON AND ON......

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:19 PM. Reason : THREAD MOVES FAST]

7/24/2012 1:18:33 PM

blackjesus isn't black

7/24/2012 1:19:17 PM

^^^Culture plays a huge part. Lax law enforcement, sentencing, punishment, and retention play roles. Loose borders. Obviously the abundance of firearms has contributed to it (I don't believe it is the cause, it is a contributing factor, nor do I think banning firearms is the solution). Socioeconmics play a part.

Too often people look at nation vs nation statistics in a vacuum. There are major differences between populations. Those have to be taken into account. Culture, background, parenting, socioeconmics, etc. all have to be factored in. A poor {insert color} person in country A isn't the same as someone of the same color in country B.


[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:24 PM. Reason : /]

7/24/2012 1:21:18 PM

MisterGreen is green.

7/24/2012 1:22:20 PM

Fucking cruise control for cool

7/24/2012 1:23:21 PM

http://gma.yahoo.com/women-survived-theater-shooting-grieve-hero-boyfriends-215438672--abc-news-topstories.html

Read this and see if you still think everyone having a gun is good.

7/24/2012 1:25:05 PM

my portrait itt

7/24/2012 1:25:22 PM

^^SENSATIONALISM MUCH?

7/24/2012 1:25:55 PM

I cried a lil when I read it

7/24/2012 1:26:45 PM

^^^^who said everyone having a gun is a good idea?

Look, even if guns were "banned", do you think this guy, who was obviously determined, couldn't have pulled off the SAME attack? You don't think guns are easily obtained on the street? Let's say guns were hard to get, but this guy was determined. What would he turn to? Likely bombs, especially as seeing how he filled is apartment with bombs.

The fact is, is that the TOOL doesn't matter. It's not to blame. If the guy wanted to kill 100 people, he'd kill them, gun ban or no gun ban, gun or no gun.

You're thoughts/anger/ideas/whatever are misplaced. Again, if this was a bombing, there'd be little debate about anything, especially the tool used. Why? Because the tool doesn't matter.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 1:30 PM. Reason : .]

7/24/2012 1:28:30 PM

he actually probably wanted to kill 100 people

but couldn't, because he was merely using guns

7/24/2012 1:29:46 PM

if he had used a nuclear missile he could have killed far more

i think pipe bombs should be legal because they aren't as destructive as nuclear missiles

7/24/2012 1:39:40 PM

7/24/2012 1:39:50 PM

Crazy to think that a state with some of the country's most strict gun laws has one of the highest gun homicide rates. Maryland is #2, California is #4

7/24/2012 1:53:31 PM

itt we learn BlackJesus is an idiot who hasn't grown up enough to realize fantasy worlds will never become reality.

Banning guns will reduce murder just like banning drugs has reduced drug abuse.

It would be impossible to ban all guns anyway. How many legally owned guns are out there that have no paperwork trail and would just "disappear" once they're banned? How many people out there could scrounge up the raw materials and put together a working gun? I've never done it but I could do it with the steel I have on hand and my basic tools.

Gunhaters need to wake the fuck up and realize that in the end people died because another person wanted them to die, not because of inanimate objects.

7/24/2012 1:59:55 PM

He killed them with his mind.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 2:03 PM. Reason : Straight up willed them to death.]

7/24/2012 2:03:19 PM

deal with it Ernie, Fumbler's right

also, i should be able to carry grenades if i want to, this is bullshit

7/24/2012 2:06:35 PM

Quote :

" Gunhaters need to wake the fuck up and realize that in the end people died because another person wanted them to die, not because of inanimate objects."

I think all parties can agree this is a gross oversimplification of not only the situatuion at hand, but also all known laws of physics, cause, and effect.

Fumbler, i've seen your posts on here....you're better than that.

[Edited on July 24, 2012 at 2:11 PM. Reason : J]

7/24/2012 2:11:12 PM