Do you know anyone who has used a gun for self defense?

[shoelyesses]

No no no my bad on phrasing it like that, definitely didn't mean to make it seem like mass shootings are more significant than single incidents.....I just meant a lot of gang violence and things I bet use more illegal weapons or use straw purchases and stuff than a person who has no "criminal background" would in obtaining a gun I think.....
And you're right, I'm from Philly where there's a lot of gun violence in the city with young teenaged kids and adults....I honestly have NO idea how to curb that type of situation...I know radio stations do gun for money or ticket drives to help get some of the weapons off the street but really the imprint that's making is insignificant in the grand scheme of things (but things like that should still go on because one less illegal weapon on the street is a GREAT thing). But I was more so talking about these mass shootings that tend to be done by non-gang or affiliated people with criminal records...I'd be willing to say (don't have facts to back it up) but more gun violence in inner cities or in lower income areas tends to be from people with records (juvenile or whatever)...but all lives are equal, if making tighter regulations makes one of these "suburban killings" then thats more lives spared from senseless violence....I just think its a process that seems to be easier to limit the potential for these types of shootings from happening than random acts of violence that happen due to human nature and society having evil....but that illegal gun problem is so convoluted and complex I dunno even how to address it, tbh thats much more of a pressing issue than these types of mass shootings since like you said that happens everyday. This world is sick

yea it is a very complex situation.... and to elaborate.. making stricter gun laws means less once in a blue moon murders in lets say a wyoming.... but does nothing for a place like a nyc, philly, dc, la...

for as sad.. as these isolated incidents are including the school shooting today.... compare it to lets say chicago.... i mean more ppl are being killed in hell a week then this... let alone a month a year etc... Tighter gun laws would have absolutely no effects on events like this.

making it hard to obtain guns in areas where deaths because of gun violence is minut at best will have little to no impact on gun violence... making it tougher to get a gun in south dakota where at best 30 gun deaths a year happen will do what exactly? Not if getting a gun in detroit is easier then a high school diploma, where you may have 50 gun deaths in a summer.

 

[ar guy]

Mental issues are undoubtedly at the cause of all of this. No one in their right mind kills 27 people, with 20 of them being children.
Personally, I've always been of the opinion that video games play a significant role in situations like this. A video game might not be related to this particular case, but I think it's high time we evaluated the type of game material we're exposing children and young adults to.
Remember, there are numerous studies that have shown that the brain is still developing well into the teenage years, still maturing. But from an early age, kids are playing these violent games, first person shooters, that ultimately desensitizes them to violence. The violence of a gun, and the act of killing--taking a human life--is trivialized as fiction, with little to no real world consequence. Worse, it's advertised as "fun" and heroic. (Think of VR Training missions from the Metal Gear Solid series). You combine this lack of real world awareness, lax gun controls, experimentation with psychoactive drugs (another favorite pastime of the "young" generation), and a still developing brain, and you have a recipe for distaster.
This is a multi pronged issue, it's not just a "gun control" issue.
We need to evaluate gun laws; we need to evaluate drug laws; we need to evaluate entertainment geared towards children and young adults; hell, we need to evaluate American society as a whole, from revisiting certain portions of the Bill of rights to our bloated military industrial complex. All these things are in concert and interrelated. To address one, we must address them all.
The killer may very well have been sick (mentally), but chose to abandon a treatment course because of the stigma associated with mentally ill people. Likewise, in my opinion, America is very sick and it behooves us as a nation to seek treatment. The naysayers (see the NRA, the military industry apologists, Americans holding on to archaic conservative traditions, etc) will plead otherwise because they fear the stigma associated with progressive change, the stigma of getting better, but if we continue this farce that everything is fine, then things will only get worse--like today. Things seriously need to change when children aren't safe anymore and the school-ground isn't a sacred place/space anymore.
...

You say lax gun laws, I want to know what laws would have stopped what happened today. Obviously from you calling them lax you have expansive knowledge on the subject right?

Someone determined to commit violence will, whether it be a machete, a bomb or a gun they will find a way. Evil exists in this world and there is no way legislate them out of existence.

 

[shoelyesses]

Kennesaw is also an affluent suburb. Trying to compare any small sample size to a country as large and heterogeneous as the US is ridiculous.

exactly im from ga... atlanta to be exact... applying that same reasoning to lets say... the bluff, adamsville etc... would not have the same results.

 

[lyonbc1]

if you ban guns, people will find other ways of killing each other.

automobiles kill people in great numbers every year too. do we ban automobiles also? if we banned everything in the world, people would just kill each other with their bare hands. so then do we ban people too?

if anything, we should ENCOURAGE gun ownership. Like you're going to think TWICE about going into mall or other public place to shoot people when you know everyone else has a gun too.

No disrespect but I can't grasp this logic at all, like how can you equate cars and auto accidents to guns? What other purpose does a gun have besides killing a living thing??

-Knives can be used practically to open boxes, skin trees, cut food, etc....what other purpose does a gun have besides KILLING? Cars are used primarily to transport people from point A to B....these people who commit mass killings are not afraid of dying, they've reached that level where they are resigned to the fact that death would be welcome in their lives, their souls and hearts are empty to even think to do something like that....all that having more guns would do is cause more confusion in a situation...how the hell do you know who the initial assailant is and who the people firing to stop the act? Mass hysteria plays with your mind, somebody yells out "he's got a gun" then people with guns start firing at other people and before you know it the # of wounded and killed rises way over what it would have been initially.

Why exist as a species then? In countries that have banned guns (I am not advocating this be the case in America due to our unique circumstance and the constitutional rights we have) but just for sake of argument, they have faaaaaaar less criminal activity than we do, a society with more weapons and guns. Less homicide in any capacity in those places, even on a pure percentage ratio so that claim about people killing with bare hands is really exaggerating and a far reach imo.

 

[Grine]

exactly im from ga... atlanta to be exact... applying that same reasoning to lets say... the bluff, adamsville etc... would not have the same results.

You can't compare regular civilians to criminal infested areas. Criminal attacks on honest folks are the third largest block of murders/assaults/rapes/etc.
You also have to look at the mindset (how, I don't know) of the offender of a crime against a law abiding citizen.

Criminals are like wolves, they prey on the weakest/dumbest of the herd, and if they don't know who the weakest one is i.e. a non concealed carrying citizen they will move on to the dumbest one.

 

[lyonbc1]

No no no my bad on phrasing it like that, definitely didn't mean to make it seem like mass shootings are more significant than single incidents.....I just meant a lot of gang violence and things I bet use more illegal weapons or use straw purchases and stuff than a person who has no "criminal background" would in obtaining a gun I think.....

And you're right, I'm from Philly where there's a lot of gun violence in the city with young teenaged kids and adults....I honestly have NO idea how to curb that type of situation...I know radio stations do gun for money or ticket drives to help get some of the weapons off the street but really the imprint that's making is insignificant in the grand scheme of things (but things like that should still go on because one less illegal weapon on the street is a GREAT thing). But I was more so talking about these mass shootings that tend to be done by non-gang or affiliated people with criminal records...I'd be willing to say (don't have facts to back it up) but more gun violence in inner cities or in lower income areas tends to be from people with records (juvenile or whatever)...but all lives are equal, if making tighter regulations makes one of these "suburban killings" then thats more lives spared from senseless violence....I just think its a process that seems to be easier to limit the potential for these types of shootings from happening than random acts of violence that happen due to human nature and society having evil....but that illegal gun problem is so convoluted and complex I dunno even how to address it, tbh thats much more of a pressing issue than these types of mass shootings since like you said that happens everyday. This world is sick

yea it is a very complex situation.... and to elaborate.. making stricter gun laws means less once in a blue moon murders in lets say a wyoming.... but does nothing for a place like a nyc, philly, dc, la...

for as sad.. as these isolated incidents are including the school shooting today.... compare it to lets say chicago.... i mean more ppl are being killed in hell a week then this... let alone a month a year etc... Tighter gun laws would have absolutely no effects on events like this.

making it hard to obtain guns in areas where deaths because of gun violence is minut at best will have little to no impact on gun violence... making it tougher to get a gun in south dakota where at best 30 gun deaths a year happen will do what exactly? Not if getting a gun in detroit is easier then a high school diploma, where you may have 50 gun deaths in a summer.

Repped, I definitely see your point, but there's still some gun violence in major metro areas due to legal gun violence too. But all lives are equal, simply because its more rare in a certain area doesn't mean that it should not be explored as an option is all I'm saying. In places like the Chi where like 40 people got killed in a weekend in the summer I have no idea how to curb that sort of thing, its societal, its cultural, its just engrained, its a product of people not having adequate resources to food or money even....most importantly though it tends to be in lower income areas and places with lower quality educational opportunities....just speaking for myself, in Philly there are sooooo many poorly performing high schools, elementary schools, etc. and they keep closing schools too, so those kids grow up with less opportunity for a strong education and their families may be struggling financially and they may be being raised by young adults or teens or kids themselves....I just feel like there's soooo many issues wrapped up in that dynamic...what would you propose as a possible solution? Cuz honestly making it more difficult to access guns legally, and having a firm process that is closely monitored is the only option I can see, and the impact of that is limited like you said....its just sad all around.

 

[ecruteakcityboy]

[h3]How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting...[/h3]

http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/

this would be ideal but we live in two entirely different cultures

 

[mplsdunk]

Yes. A friend recently had to shoot a dude a few times in the chest for trying to car jack him with his little sister in the car when he still was living in pr. He did what he had to do. He's lucky he had his gun on him.

I know a few other guys but this is the most clear cut example of self defense.

 

[shoelyesses]

You can't compare regular civilians to criminal infested areas. Criminal attacks on honest folks are the third largest block of murders/assaults/rapes/etc.
You also have to look at the mindset (how, I don't know) of the offender of a crime against a law abiding citizen.
Criminals are like wolves, they prey on the weakest/dumbest of the herd, and if they don't know who the weakest one is i.e. a non concealed carrying citizen they will move on to the dumbest one.

how so... so a driveby in la meant to shoot one particular opposite gang member but 10/20 others that are innocent bystanders.. is somehow different then a guy in north dakota who took a breakup from his g/f to heart and goes out to shoot her and kills 10/20 other ppl is different how....?

Just because of the neighborhood they live in. Or the reason behind the shooting... A death is a death... Whether its a bank robbery and 20 ppl get shot in houston... or if its a kid who got tired of being bullied in a small town in nebraska and shoots up the school dance and kill 20 ppl. End of the day 20 ppl are dead... I dont think either party would care or grieve a little less/differently depending on the mindset of the shooter, or the reason behind the shooting.

 

[Grine]

...

 

[samx562]

i know gangsters that use guns for self defense if that counts

 

[superantigen]

Mental issues are undoubtedly at the cause of all of this. No one in their right mind kills 27 people, with 20 of them being children.
Personally, I've always been of the opinion that video games play a significant role in situations like this. A video game might not be related to this particular case, but I think it's high time we evaluated the type of game material we're exposing children and young adults to.
Remember, there are numerous studies that have shown that the brain is still developing well into the teenage years, still maturing. But from an early age, kids are playing these violent games, first person shooters, that ultimately desensitizes them to violence. The violence of a gun, and the act of killing--taking a human life--is trivialized as fiction, with little to no real world consequence. Worse, it's advertised as "fun" and heroic. (Think of VR Training missions from the Metal Gear Solid series). You combine this lack of real world awareness, lax gun controls, experimentation with psychoactive drugs (another favorite pastime of the "young" generation), and a still developing brain, and you have a recipe for distaster.
This is a multi pronged issue, it's not just a "gun control" issue.
We need to evaluate gun laws; we need to evaluate drug laws; we need to evaluate entertainment geared towards children and young adults; hell, we need to evaluate American society as a whole, from revisiting certain portions of the Bill of rights to our bloated military industrial complex. All these things are in concert and interrelated. To address one, we must address them all.
The killer may very well have been sick (mentally), but chose to abandon a treatment course because of the stigma associated with mentally ill people. Likewise, in my opinion, America is very sick and it behooves us as a nation to seek treatment. The naysayers (see the NRA, the military industry apologists, Americans holding on to archaic conservative traditions, etc) will plead otherwise because they fear the stigma associated with progressive change, the stigma of getting better, but if we continue this farce that everything is fine, then things will only get worse--like today. Things seriously need to change when children aren't safe anymore and the school-ground isn't a sacred place/space anymore.
...

You say lax gun laws, I want to know what laws would have stopped what happened today. Obviously from you calling them lax you have expansive knowledge on the subject right?

Someone determined to commit violence will, whether it be a machete, a bomb or a gun they will find a way. Evil exists in this world and there is no way legislate them out of existence.

By lax gun laws, I mean the law that allows anyone to purchase a gun. I will always be against gun ownership, but i realize that you can't prevent citizens from attaining guns-- that's fine.

It's a whole 'nother ball game when people are allowed to purchase "COMBAT RIFLES" and the like. This is what I mean by lax gun laws. I mean, really, what good reason could you possibly have for needing a combat rifle? Are the Nazi's invading? The Russian perhaps? Or maybe the Martians are? Ohh wait, lemme guess, the stag you're hunting has a bullet proof hide?

You can't give me one good reason why any decent, peace loving citizen, would want to own a combat rifle.

You need it for protection? A load of crap. If we're going to take protection into our own hands, then why are we wasting tax dollars on local and national law enforcement agencies? Better yet, why have we given our trust to these local and national law enforcement agencies if we don't believe that we'll be protected?

The right to bear arms is an outdated and archaic provision. In the past, it mattered because the threat of invasion was very real. The need to protect one's self and family was very real. There wasn't an established agency geared toward the defense and the protection of citizens, thus it behooved citizens to arm and defend themselves. We don't live in those times anymore, so why must we hold on to a right that is out of context in the modern era? Worse yet, why are we making available weapons that are far more lethal than necessary for situations that are few and far between, to damn near nonexistent?

If you allow citizens to freely access weapons, then you give psychopaths the freedom to use them to hurt everyone. Why? Because all psychopaths were, at one point in time, normal law-abiding citizens themselves.

Violence will happen--i'll give you that--but you exacerbate the violence when you allow guns to be added to the equation. With a gun, the degree of violence is easily amplified in terms of fatalities. Worse, with a gun, you can do more violence in less time. That the real danger of guns, especially combat rifles. You think Adam Lanza would've been able to kill 27 people, himself included, in the time he did with a machete? I doubt it.





...

 

[shoelyesses]

Repped, I definitely see your point, but there's still some gun violence in major metro areas due to legal gun violence too. But all lives are equal, simply because its more rare in a certain area doesn't mean that it should not be explored as an option is all I'm saying. In places like the Chi where like 40 people got killed in a weekend in the summer I have no idea how to curb that sort of thing, its societal, its cultural, its just engrained, its a product of people not having adequate resources to food or money even....most importantly though it tends to be in lower income areas and places with lower quality educational opportunities....just speaking for myself, in Philly there are sooooo many poorly performing high schools, elementary schools, etc. and they keep closing schools too, so those kids grow up with less opportunity for a strong education and their families may be struggling financially and they may be being raised by young adults or teens or kids themselves....I just feel like there's soooo many issues wrapped up in that dynamic...what would you propose as a possible solution? Cuz honestly making it more difficult to access guns legally, and having a firm process that is closely monitored is the only option I can see, and the impact of that is limited like you said....its just sad all around.

i said it in the other thread with the school shooting... it may sound harsh etc..... but the govt can curb and slow it down... They allowed, turned and look the other way in terms of guns illegally comming to our country as well as drugs amongst other things... they infact even i believe help ushered and helped in the distribution of said things in certain targeted areas...

For most part so long as it stayed in those intended areas...all was good, now that these things and elements have in a sense backfired and widespread in areas outside of what they were intended to be... all of a sudden america has a problem and we get knee jerk reactions and comments etc... to tame the savage beast.

It reminds me of the so called border patrol and crackdown on illegal immigrants... america and a vast amount of citizens had no real issue with it so long as it served its intended purpose...to make the rich richer... and eliminate certain sectors/markets and certain areas and groups of ppl jobs... It is only a problem if you will the fire spreads farther then it was intended to spread. It becomes an issue when the very ppl who had no problem and encouraged it and lowkey help aided in it are effected and it becomes a problem for them.

The black market while i think it cannot be completly stopped, they easily can cripple it, and give it a massive blow... problem is in doing so what are they gonna do about the areas/markets etc... that the black market was intended to effect in the first place?

 

[girlslovewaffles]

Mental issues are undoubtedly at the cause of all of this. No one in their right mind kills 27 people, with 20 of them being children.
Personally, I've always been of the opinion that video games play a significant role in situations like this. A video game might not be related to this particular case, but I think it's high time we evaluated the type of game material we're exposing children and young adults to.
Remember, there are numerous studies that have shown that the brain is still developing well into the teenage years, still maturing. But from an early age, kids are playing these violent games, first person shooters, that ultimately desensitizes them to violence. The violence of a gun, and the act of killing--taking a human life--is trivialized as fiction, with little to no real world consequence. Worse, it's advertised as "fun" and heroic. (Think of VR Training missions from the Metal Gear Solid series). You combine this lack of real world awareness, lax gun controls, experimentation with psychoactive drugs (another favorite pastime of the "young" generation), and a still developing brain, and you have a recipe for distaster.
This is a multi pronged issue, it's not just a "gun control" issue.
We need to evaluate gun laws; we need to evaluate drug laws; we need to evaluate entertainment geared towards children and young adults; hell, we need to evaluate American society as a whole, from revisiting certain portions of the Bill of rights to our bloated military industrial complex. All these things are in concert and interrelated. To address one, we must address them all.
The killer may very well have been sick (mentally), but chose to abandon a treatment course because of the stigma associated with mentally ill people. Likewise, in my opinion, America is very sick and it behooves us as a nation to seek treatment. The naysayers (see the NRA, the military industry apologists, Americans holding on to archaic conservative traditions, etc) will plead otherwise because they fear the stigma associated with progressive change, the stigma of getting better, but if we continue this farce that everything is fine, then things will only get worse--like today. Things seriously need to change when children aren't safe anymore and the school-ground isn't a sacred place/space anymore.
...

You say lax gun laws, I want to know what laws would have stopped what happened today. Obviously from you calling them lax you have expansive knowledge on the subject right?

Someone determined to commit violence will, whether it be a machete, a bomb or a gun they will find a way. Evil exists in this world and there is no way legislate them out of existence.

By lax gun laws, I mean the law that allows anyone to purchase a gun. I will always be against gun ownership, but i realize that you can't prevent citizens from attaining guns. Ok that's fine.

It's a whole 'nother ball game when people are allowed to purchase "COMBAT RIFLES" and the like. I mean, really, what good reason could you possibly have for needing a combat rifle? Are the Nazi's invading? The Russian perhaps? Or maybe the Martians are? Ohh wait, lemme guess, the stag you're hunting has a bullet proof hide?

You can't give me one good reason why any decent, peace loving citizen, would want to own a combat rifle.

You need it for protection? A load of crap. If we're going to take protection into our own hands, then why are we wasting tax dollars on local and national law enforcement agencies? Better yet, why have we given our trust to these local and national law enforcement agencies if we don't believe that we'll be protected.

The right to bear arms is an outdated and archaic provision. In the past, it mattered because the threat of invasion was very real. The need to protect one's self and family was very real. There wasn't an established agency geared toward the defense and the protection of citizens, thus it behooved citizens to arm and defend themselves. We don't live in those times anymore, so why must we hold on to a right that is out of context in the modern era? Worse yet, why are we making available weapons that are far more lethal than necessary for situations that are few and far between, to damn near nonexistent?

If you allow citizens to freely access weapons, then you give psychopaths the freedom to use them to hurt everyone. Why? Because all psychopaths were, at one point in time, normal law-abiding citizens themselves.





...

Tyrannical government.

 

[superantigen]

Mental issues are undoubtedly at the cause of all of this. No one in their right mind kills 27 people, with 20 of them being children.
Personally, I've always been of the opinion that video games play a significant role in situations like this. A video game might not be related to this particular case, but I think it's high time we evaluated the type of game material we're exposing children and young adults to.
Remember, there are numerous studies that have shown that the brain is still developing well into the teenage years, still maturing. But from an early age, kids are playing these violent games, first person shooters, that ultimately desensitizes them to violence. The violence of a gun, and the act of killing--taking a human life--is trivialized as fiction, with little to no real world consequence. Worse, it's advertised as "fun" and heroic. (Think of VR Training missions from the Metal Gear Solid series). You combine this lack of real world awareness, lax gun controls, experimentation with psychoactive drugs (another favorite pastime of the "young" generation), and a still developing brain, and you have a recipe for distaster.
This is a multi pronged issue, it's not just a "gun control" issue.
We need to evaluate gun laws; we need to evaluate drug laws; we need to evaluate entertainment geared towards children and young adults; hell, we need to evaluate American society as a whole, from revisiting certain portions of the Bill of rights to our bloated military industrial complex. All these things are in concert and interrelated. To address one, we must address them all.
The killer may very well have been sick (mentally), but chose to abandon a treatment course because of the stigma associated with mentally ill people. Likewise, in my opinion, America is very sick and it behooves us as a nation to seek treatment. The naysayers (see the NRA, the military industry apologists, Americans holding on to archaic conservative traditions, etc) will plead otherwise because they fear the stigma associated with progressive change, the stigma of getting better, but if we continue this farce that everything is fine, then things will only get worse--like today. Things seriously need to change when children aren't safe anymore and the school-ground isn't a sacred place/space anymore.
...

You say lax gun laws, I want to know what laws would have stopped what happened today. Obviously from you calling them lax you have expansive knowledge on the subject right?

Someone determined to commit violence will, whether it be a machete, a bomb or a gun they will find a way. Evil exists in this world and there is no way legislate them out of existence.

By lax gun laws, I mean the law that allows anyone to purchase a gun. I will always be against gun ownership, but i realize that you can't prevent citizens from attaining guns. Ok that's fine.

It's a whole 'nother ball game when people are allowed to purchase "COMBAT RIFLES" and the like. I mean, really, what good reason could you possibly have for needing a combat rifle? Are the Nazi's invading? The Russian perhaps? Or maybe the Martians are? Ohh wait, lemme guess, the stag you're hunting has a bullet proof hide?

You can't give me one good reason why any decent, peace loving citizen, would want to own a combat rifle.

You need it for protection? A load of crap. If we're going to take protection into our own hands, then why are we wasting tax dollars on local and national law enforcement agencies? Better yet, why have we given our trust to these local and national law enforcement agencies if we don't believe that we'll be protected.

The right to bear arms is an outdated and archaic provision. In the past, it mattered because the threat of invasion was very real. The need to protect one's self and family was very real. There wasn't an established agency geared toward the defense and the protection of citizens, thus it behooved citizens to arm and defend themselves. We don't live in those times anymore, so why must we hold on to a right that is out of context in the modern era? Worse yet, why are we making available weapons that are far more lethal than necessary for situations that are few and far between, to damn near nonexistent?

If you allow citizens to freely access weapons, then you give psychopaths the freedom to use them to hurt everyone. Why? Because all psychopaths were, at one point in time, normal law-abiding citizens themselves.





...

Tyrannical government.

Ahh yes, that literally old argument.

The government will one day order american soldiers to go and oppress their own friends and families.

Yeah I see that one working out really well...

Fear truly is a powerful emotion. Just sprinkle a bit and marvel as the populace destroys itself from within.

Trust, a tyrannical government in this day and age wouldn't resort to violence to oppress you. Thus to combat with gun violence would accomplish very little.



...

 

[bandit country]

Ahh yes, that literally old argument.
The government will one day order american soldiers to go and oppress their own friends and families.
Yeah I see that one working out really well...
Fear truly is a powerful emotion. Just sprinkle a bit and marvel as the populace destroys itself from within.
Trust, a tyrannical government in this day and age wouldn't resort to violence to oppress you. Thus to combat with gun violence would accomplish very little.
...

The irony of you saying this while railing against firearms is a thing of beauty.

 

[SoleByThePound]

Guns sole job is the kill living beings .If I go out and buy I gun I live with knowing I bought a weapon for fatal intent.Banning guns or making them hard to get for civilians is dumb trust me y'all don't want a world where only Militias got access to rifles and criminals got access to high powered rifles you don't.Guns being readily avialable to buy in America is important I'm not trying to live in a world where only the government is armed .As a black man I know the history of my people being unarmed and helpless and the tragedies that resulted due to that.Aint no amount of boxing mma .bjj can save you from a well placed shot from a glock nothing.I put that to your face ain't no reflexes in the world can stop me from putting your brains out on the cement and your wallet your sneakers ,your woman in my arms.A gun only stops another gun .Keep playing pretend

Exactly how I feel about this topic. For the record I am for stricter gun control, but I fully support our 2nd amendment. I wonder if there are any statistics tracking the use of a gun in self-defense. That would probably shed a better light for those who are anti-gun.

 

[bandit country]

You need it for protection? A load of crap. If we're going to take protection into our own hands, then why are we wasting tax dollars on local and national law enforcement agencies? Better yet, why have we given our trust to these local and national law enforcement agencies if we don't believe that we'll be protected?

...

Allow me to quote an NTer from the Walmart Shooting thread:

Anyone with the least bit of common sense can spot the inconsistencies in the Sherriff's office side of the story. And we all know law enforcement agencies often say whatever needs to be said to circumvent the burden of responsibility that comes with blame in situations like this.

...

Which is it? Are they trust worthy or opportunists who lie to their own benefit?

What kind of fool would stand idly by and allow crooks and liars to monopolize something as crucial as defense?

 

[ar guy]

By lax gun laws, I mean the law that allows anyone to purchase a gun. I will always be against gun ownership, but i realize that you can't prevent citizens from attaining guns. Ok that's fine.
It's a whole 'nother ball game when people are allowed to purchase "COMBAT RIFLES" and the like. I mean, really, what good reason could you possibly have for needing a combat rifle? Are the Nazi's invading? The Russian perhaps? Or maybe the Martians are? Ohh wait, lemme guess, the stag you're hunting has a bullet proof hide?
You can't give me one good reason why any decent, peace loving citizen, would want to own a combat rifle.
You need it for protection? A load of crap. If we're going to take protection into our own hands, then why are we wasting tax dollars on local and national law enforcement agencies? Better yet, why have we given our trust to these local and national law enforcement agencies if we don't believe that we'll be protected.
The right to bear arms is an outdated and archaic provision. In the past, it mattered because the threat of invasion was very real. The need to protect one's self and family was very real. There wasn't an established agency geared toward the defense and the protection of citizens, thus it behooved citizens to arm and defend themselves. We don't live in those times anymore, so why must we hold on to a right that is out of context in the modern era? Worse yet, why are we making available weapons that are far more lethal than necessary for situations that are few and far between, to damn near nonexistent?
If you allow citizens to freely access weapons, then you give psychopaths the freedom to use them to hurt everyone. Why? Because all psychopaths were, at one point in time, normal law-abiding citizens themselves.
...

Seeing has how you're not a gun owner and by your comments I can tell that you're ignorant to some things in regards to firearms, let me educate you.

Do you know what you have to do to purchase a firearm? Do you know about the NICS

Do you consider this a combat rifle?

View media item 171353
Do you considered it deadlier than this?

View media item 171354
If so why? Both are semi-auto except one fires much larger rounds than the other.

Also as you can probably tell by my name I do in fact own an AR15 rifle. Why? Because it's a great rifle. It's lightweight, accurate, reliable, modular and ergonomic. Yes I use it to protect my home because I rifle is always superior to a shotgun or a pistol and if I happen to miss my target the 5.56x45 round will actually penetrate less than shotgun or handgun rounds because it's fast and lightweight. Another huge benifit to is my GF can shoot it if need be.

I don't live in a fantasy world were if I call the cops they'll be there instantly. I realize I may need to protect myself. If someone breaks in your home and wishes to do your loved ones harm who do you plan on protecting them?

The 2nd Amendment as an ultimate check on an out of control, tyrannical government you know kind of like the ones or founding fathers fought against. I still don't understand why you think the military rifles are more deadly than say a hunting rifle?

That's the thing about freedom, it's kind of dangerous.

 

[shoelyesses]

Allow me to quote an NTer from the Walmart Shooting thread:
Which is it? Are they trust worthy or opportunists who lie to their own benefit?
What kind of fool would stand idly by and allow crooks and liars to monopolize something as crucial as defense?

is that a retorical question/statement?

 

[bandit country]

is that a retorical question/statement?

It is not. I'm interested in how SuperAntigen reconciles his diametrically opposed views on law enforcement.

 

[girlslovewaffles]

Mental issues are undoubtedly at the cause of all of this. No one in their right mind kills 27 people, with 20 of them being children.
Personally, I've always been of the opinion that video games play a significant role in situations like this. A video game might not be related to this particular case, but I think it's high time we evaluated the type of game material we're exposing children and young adults to.
Remember, there are numerous studies that have shown that the brain is still developing well into the teenage years, still maturing. But from an early age, kids are playing these violent games, first person shooters, that ultimately desensitizes them to violence. The violence of a gun, and the act of killing--taking a human life--is trivialized as fiction, with little to no real world consequence. Worse, it's advertised as "fun" and heroic. (Think of VR Training missions from the Metal Gear Solid series). You combine this lack of real world awareness, lax gun controls, experimentation with psychoactive drugs (another favorite pastime of the "young" generation), and a still developing brain, and you have a recipe for distaster.
This is a multi pronged issue, it's not just a "gun control" issue.
We need to evaluate gun laws; we need to evaluate drug laws; we need to evaluate entertainment geared towards children and young adults; hell, we need to evaluate American society as a whole, from revisiting certain portions of the Bill of rights to our bloated military industrial complex. All these things are in concert and interrelated. To address one, we must address them all.
The killer may very well have been sick (mentally), but chose to abandon a treatment course because of the stigma associated with mentally ill people. Likewise, in my opinion, America is very sick and it behooves us as a nation to seek treatment. The naysayers (see the NRA, the military industry apologists, Americans holding on to archaic conservative traditions, etc) will plead otherwise because they fear the stigma associated with progressive change, the stigma of getting better, but if we continue this farce that everything is fine, then things will only get worse--like today. Things seriously need to change when children aren't safe anymore and the school-ground isn't a sacred place/space anymore.
...

You say lax gun laws, I want to know what laws would have stopped what happened today. Obviously from you calling them lax you have expansive knowledge on the subject right?

Someone determined to commit violence will, whether it be a machete, a bomb or a gun they will find a way. Evil exists in this world and there is no way legislate them out of existence.

By lax gun laws, I mean the law that allows anyone to purchase a gun. I will always be against gun ownership, but i realize that you can't prevent citizens from attaining guns. Ok that's fine.

It's a whole 'nother ball game when people are allowed to purchase "COMBAT RIFLES" and the like. I mean, really, what good reason could you possibly have for needing a combat rifle? Are the Nazi's invading? The Russian perhaps? Or maybe the Martians are? Ohh wait, lemme guess, the stag you're hunting has a bullet proof hide?

You can't give me one good reason why any decent, peace loving citizen, would want to own a combat rifle.

You need it for protection? A load of crap. If we're going to take protection into our own hands, then why are we wasting tax dollars on local and national law enforcement agencies? Better yet, why have we given our trust to these local and national law enforcement agencies if we don't believe that we'll be protected.

The right to bear arms is an outdated and archaic provision. In the past, it mattered because the threat of invasion was very real. The need to protect one's self and family was very real. There wasn't an established agency geared toward the defense and the protection of citizens, thus it behooved citizens to arm and defend themselves. We don't live in those times anymore, so why must we hold on to a right that is out of context in the modern era? Worse yet, why are we making available weapons that are far more lethal than necessary for situations that are few and far between, to damn near nonexistent?

If you allow citizens to freely access weapons, then you give psychopaths the freedom to use them to hurt everyone. Why? Because all psychopaths were, at one point in time, normal law-abiding citizens themselves.





...

Tyrannical government.

Ahh yes, that literally old argument.

The government will one day order american soldiers to go and oppress their own friends and families.

Yeah I see that one working out really well...

Fear truly is a powerful emotion. Just sprinkle a bit and marvel as the populace destroys itself from within.

Trust, a tyrannical government in this day and age wouldn't resort to violence to oppress you. Thus to combat with gun violence would accomplish very little.



...

What do you think you're doing now? You're against guns because you fear them. You fear what they can do to innocent people, so you want to ban them.

If anything, this stance on banning weapons is destruction from within itself. Instead of the government swooping in and having to force its citizens to give up their right to bear arms, the fear surrounding weapons is actually making the job much easier because individuals like yourself are actually more than happy to give up that right.

The right that our founding fathers fought for.

 

[superantigen]

Ahh yes, that literally old argument.
The government will one day order american soldiers to go and oppress their own friends and families.
Yeah I see that one working out really well...
Fear truly is a powerful emotion. Just sprinkle a bit and marvel as the populace destroys itself from within.
Trust, a tyrannical government in this day and age wouldn't resort to violence to oppress you. Thus to combat with gun violence would accomplish very little.
...

The irony of you saying this while railing against firearms is a thing of beauty.

Irony? Please don't be credulous enough to think that you know me.

Even so, if the news of kindergarten children being massacred while at school isn't enough to put fear into your heart, then perhaps this operation to salvage American consciousness is hopeless cause.


...

 

[superantigen]

You need it for protection? A load of crap. If we're going to take protection into our own hands, then why are we wasting tax dollars on local and national law enforcement agencies? Better yet, why have we given our trust to these local and national law enforcement agencies if we don't believe that we'll be protected?

...

Allow me to quote an NTer from the Walmart Shooting thread:

Anyone with the least bit of common sense can spot the inconsistencies in the Sherriff's office side of the story. And we all know law enforcement agencies often say whatever needs to be said to circumvent the burden of responsibility that comes with blame in situations like this.

...

Which is it? Are they trust worthy or opportunists who lie to their own benefit?

What kind of fool would stand idly by and allow crooks and liars to monopolize something as crucial as defense?

Notice that I was asking questions, and not making statements/assertions.

And great job taking something out of context to create a different meaning...

In my original post, I'm chastising those particular law enforcement agencies and personal that circumvent blame and responsibility in very specific cases and incidents (the supposedly fear induced murder of a woman, etc). The key phrase: "in situations like this".

Nice try in trying to frame my observation of that incident and others like it as a sweeping generalization of ALL law enforcement...



...

 

[frank mucus]

Seeing has how you're not a gun owner and by your comments I can tell that you're ignorant to some things in regards to firearms, let me educate you.
Do you know what you have to do to purchase a firearm? Do you know about the NICS
Do you consider this a combat rifle?
View media item 171353Do you considered it deadlier than this?
View media item 171354If so why? Both are semi-auto except one fires much larger rounds than the other.
Also as you can probably tell by my name I do in fact own an AR15 rifle. Why? Because it's a great rifle. It's lightweight, accurate, reliable, modular and ergonomic. Yes I use it to protect my home because I rifle is always superior to a shotgun or a pistol and if I happen to miss my target the 5.56x45 round will actually penetrate less than shotgun or handgun rounds because it's fast and lightweight. Another huge benifit to is my GF can shoot it if need be.
I don't live in a fantasy world were if I call the cops they'll be there instantly. I realize I may need to protect myself. If someone breaks in your home and wishes to do your loved ones harm who do you plan on protecting them?
The 2nd Amendment as an ultimate check on an out of control, tyrannical government you know kind of like the ones or founding fathers fought against. I still don't understand why you think the military rifles are more deadly than say a hunting rifle?
That's the thing about freedom, it's kind of dangerous.

+1