Please show me link of nerds trying to buy guns and being turned down. How is your post based on real life if you have nothing to base it off of?
this is not 'post a link to back up everything' forum... its for debate.
my real life experiences so far have enabled me to have the opinion that 2 geeky kids from an affluent suburb in Colorado would not have the first fucking clue where to get an array of guns to shoot their school up if it hadn't been for their 'law-abiding' parents owning and keeping them in the house... they would have simply just festered away in their own wee world probably masturbating at videos on youtube of people dressed as Warlocks or something.
that doesnt need a link... it's based on real life... just as i know i don't need a link to prove that licking a hot iron will hurt... it's common sense.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Please show me link of nerds trying to buy guns and being turned down. How is your post based on real life if you have nothing to base it off of?
this is not 'post a link to back up everything' forum... its for debate.
my real life experiences so far have enabled me to have the opinion that 2 geeky kids from an affluent suburb in Colorado would not have the first fucking clue where to get an array of guns to shoot their school up if it hadn't been for their 'law-abiding' parents owning and keeping them in the house... they would have simply just festered away in their own wee world probably masturbating at videos on youtube of people dressed as Warlocks or something.
that doesnt need a link... it's based on real life... just as i know i don't need a link to prove that licking a hot iron will hurt... it's common sense.
Its not based on real life if its never happened... You have no idea how to get a gun illegaly, so how would you know that nerdy kids would not have a clue??? You are just making shit up. You do realize that people are friends with people who know other people that can get guns for them... Its not a hard concept to realize that if people want to obtain guns illegaly they can and most likly will if their intentions are murder then suicide.
Well you can certainly buy everything legally to make a b word.
And you can not take away someones rights because some people are stupid or crazy ...this, in the case of guns.
It is our basic right to protect ourselves and should remain so.
a basic right? a basic right should be that you can always get drinking water, or food... not own a gun based on a 300 year old law... i suppose as a new country you have to hang on to any thread of history you might have.
and whilst its legal to buy the ingredients to make a bomb... with the current threat of terrorism so high you'd be on the FBI's radar if you were to order 14 litres of calcium sulphate instead of just buying a nice new 30 round pistol.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
I agree that it does still boil down to the person but restricting access to thinks that have no benefit to society is a good thing. I wrote this in another place. just because people might use bombs if guns are not available doesn't mean that we should allow people to carry bombs around.
Well you can certainly buy everything legally to make a b word.
And you can not take away someones rights because some people are stupid or crazy ...this, in the case of guns.
It is our basic right to protect ourselves and should remain so.
OK enough of this, to carry a fully armed explosive around with you IS illegal, there are a number of tough laws and regualtions in place to stop this from happening, which is at polar opposites to your view on the control of guns. - a very redundant example.
Also - "And you can not take away someones rights because some people are stupid or crazy" - yes you can, it happens all the time - hospital, prison, power of attorney etc...
Fact is, according to the current system of acquiring firearms in Arizona, this guy was deemed to be a "responsible" gun owner, hind sight has proven otherwise - the horse has bolted. So my question is - who would benefit from stricter / tighter gun laws? (the answer I should hope is self evident)
Who would not benefit from tighter gun controls? Surely one side would out wiegh the other?
This guy purchased a firearm legally, that would suggest to me that there is a problem with the law.
You do realize that people are friends with people who know other people that can get guns for them... Its not a hard concept to realize that if people want to obtain guns illegaly they can and most likly will if their intentions are murder then suicide.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Well you can certainly buy everything legally to make a b word.
And you can not take away someones rights because some people are stupid or crazy ...this, in the case of guns.
It is our basic right to protect ourselves and should remain so.
a basic right? a basic right should be that you can always get drinking water, or food... not own a gun based on a 300 year old law... i suppose as a new country you have to hang on to any thread of history you might have.
and whilst its legal to buy the ingredients to make a bomb... with the current threat of terrorism so high you'd be on the FBI's radar if you were to order 14 litres of calcium sulphate instead of just buying a nice new 30 round pistol.
Yup your right the only reason people buy guns is to murder...
Please show me link of nerds trying to buy guns and being turned down. How is your post based on real life if you have nothing to base it off of?
this is not 'post a link to back up everything' forum... its for debate.
my real life experiences so far have enabled me to have the opinion that 2 geeky kids from an affluent suburb in Colorado would not have the first fucking clue where to get an array of guns to shoot their school up if it hadn't been for their 'law-abiding' parents owning and keeping them in the house... they would have simply just festered away in their own wee world probably masturbating at videos on youtube of people dressed as Warlocks or something.
that doesnt need a link... it's based on real life... just as i know i don't need a link to prove that licking a hot iron will hurt... it's common sense.
Its not based on real life if its never happened... You have no idea how to get a gun illegaly, so how would you know that nerdy kids would not have a clue??? You are just making shit up. You do realize that people are friends with people who know other people that can get guns for them... Its not a hard concept to realize that if people want to obtain guns illegaly they can and most likly will if their intentions are murder then suicide.
take the blinkers off man... real-life is what our life experiences make it... i wouldn't know how to get a gun illegally... thats my point... handguns are so fucking rare in this country that very very very few people would know someone who knew someone that could get them a gun. thats been my whole point throughout... its very hard to get something that barely exists.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
You do realize that people are friends with people who know other people that can get guns for them... Its not a hard concept to realize that if people want to obtain guns illegaly they can and most likly will if their intentions are murder then suicide.
Paul.. do you really think that if those 2 kids from Columbine lived in a nice leafy suburb of say England, France or Japan where gun control is strictly regulated they would know people who knew people who could get them guns?
Criminals must have more honour in the US than they do here... If the police came knocking at a guys door here saying that "you told this 22 year old guy who has just killed 6 people including a 9 year old girl where to buy a gun illegally did you?" then the guy would shit a ton... probably tell the police where he directed the maniac shooter to go get a gun and would then hope he wasnt an accomplice to murder.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
your also assuming that if he didn't have east access to guns he would have used something else. if as someone said that he wanted to kill as many people as possible why didn't he use a bomb? why did he choose a gun? could it be because it was very easy for him to get as compared to a bomb.
evil will find away...can't stop that and shouldn't try by taking others peoples rights away
let me just state for the record that as anti-gun as I am, I have no issue with someone owning a rifle if they go out and hunt, as deplorable a behaviour as I think that even is (unless they eat the meat, not just kill for trophies). I just can't agree with owning a handgun.
I recognize a person's right to own one. That is the current law, and I won't deny that.
But I also can't say I think that tighter rules, AT THIS STAGE IN THE GAME, is realistic. I think we've gone too far in the other direction to make it plausible for that to be the actual solution. Making guns illegal doesn't make it any harder for criminals to get them than it does for a pot smoker to get weed. I don't know the solution, I just wish there was one.
If gun control would have worked, I think it would have had to be instituted in the early 1900's. There are just too many out there. Unless humans have a ridiculous leap in evolution and learn that violence is wrong, guns will always be around.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
You do realize that people are friends with people who know other people that can get guns for them... Its not a hard concept to realize that if people want to obtain guns illegaly they can and most likly will if their intentions are murder then suicide.
Paul.. do you really think that if those 2 kids from Columbine lived in a nice leafy suburb of say England, France or Japan where gun control is strictly regulated they would know people who knew people who could get them guns?
Criminals must have more honour in the US than they do here... If the police came knocking at a guys door here saying that "you told this 22 year old guy who has just killed 6 people including a 9 year old girl where to buy a gun illegally did you?" then the guy would shit a ton... probably tell the police where he directed the maniac shooter to go get a gun and would then hope he wasnt an accomplice to murder.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
your also assuming that if he didn't have east access to guns he would have used something else. if as someone said that he wanted to kill as many people as possible why didn't he use a bomb? why did he choose a gun? could it be because it was very easy for him to get as compared to a bomb.
evil will find away...can't stop that and shouldn't try by taking others peoples rights away
it used to be a right to own a slave didnt it? it also used to be a mans right that he could beat his wife didnt it?
took them fuckers away... why not rise up against that!!!!
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Fact is, according to the current system of acquiring firearms in Arizona, this guy was deemed to be a "responsible" gun owner, hind sight has proven otherwise - the horse has bolted. So my question is - who would benefit from stricter / tighter gun laws? (the answer I should hope is self evident)
Who would not benefit from tighter gun controls? Surely one side would out wiegh the other?
This guy purchased a firearm legally, that would suggest to me that there is a problem with the law.
WOW I did not know someone could be this stupid an illogical...
If you take away gun from everybody and make it illegal, law abiding citizens (the majority) will not have guns for fear of breaking the law. Now criminals will get all the guns (blackmarket) and make it much easier for them to commit crimes especially breaking into houses/violent crimes, because they will know that most everybody will not have a gun to protect them selves. How many people will fight back with a gun to their head???
i disagree but then you are from Canada.. guns are just below you
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Fact is, according to the current system of acquiring firearms in Arizona, this guy was deemed to be a "responsible" gun owner, hind sight has proven otherwise - the horse has bolted. So my question is - who would benefit from stricter / tighter gun laws? (the answer I should hope is self evident)
Who would not benefit from tighter gun controls? Surely one side would out wiegh the other?
This guy purchased a firearm legally, that would suggest to me that there is a problem with the law.
WOW I did not know someone could be this stupid an illogical...
If you take away gun from everybody and make it illegal, law abiding citizens (the majority) will not have guns for fear of breaking the law. Now criminals will get all the guns (blackmarket) and make it much easier for them to commit crimes especially breaking into houses/violent crimes, because they will know that most everybody will not have a gun to protect them selves. How many people will fight back with a gun to their head???
How long after tighter gun laws would you predict that this happens - a day? a week? (try answer without the insults, it negates the point you are trying to make by making you look infantile)
I agree that it does still boil down to the person but restricting access to thinks that have no benefit to society is a good thing. I wrote this in another place. just because people might use bombs if guns are not available doesn't mean that we should allow people to carry bombs around.
Well you can certainly buy everything legally to make a b word.
And you can not take away someones rights because some people are stupid or crazy ...this, in the case of guns.
It is our basic right to protect ourselves and should remain so.
OK enough of this, to carry a fully armed explosive around with you IS illegal, there are a number of tough laws and regualtions in place to stop this from happening, which is at polar opposites to your view on the control of guns. - a very redundant example.
Also - "And you can not take away someones rights because some people are stupid or crazy" - yes you can, it happens all the time - hospital, prison, power of attorney etc...
Fact is, according to the current system of acquiring firearms in Arizona, this guy was deemed to be a "responsible" gun owner, hind sight has proven otherwise - the horse has bolted. So my question is - who would benefit from stricter / tighter gun laws? (the answer I should hope is self evident)
Who would not benefit from tighter gun controls? Surely one side would out wiegh the other?
This guy purchased a firearm legally, that would suggest to me that there is a problem with the law.
I meant and I think you knew I meant you can't take away the rights of the sane to have guns because someone insane used one for evil purposes...your examples you gave were for the mentally impaired or those that gave up their rights for whatever reason, not on topic.
Tighter gun laws are unnecessary because the only people following the law are the sane and law abiding. If this kid couldn't get a gun legally damn straight he would have found one another way or planned something even more devastating. You can not stop evil/hate by taking away a means for evil/hate. It prevails.
Fact is, according to the current system of acquiring firearms in Arizona, this guy was deemed to be a "responsible" gun owner, hind sight has proven otherwise - the horse has bolted. So my question is - who would benefit from stricter / tighter gun laws? (the answer I should hope is self evident)
Who would not benefit from tighter gun controls? Surely one side would out wiegh the other?
This guy purchased a firearm legally, that would suggest to me that there is a problem with the law.
WOW I did not know someone could be this stupid an illogical...
If you take away gun from everybody and make it illegal, law abiding citizens (the majority) will not have guns for fear of breaking the law. Now criminals will get all the guns (blackmarket) and make it much easier for them to commit crimes especially breaking into houses/violent crimes, because they will know that most everybody will not have a gun to protect them selves. How many people will fight back with a gun to their head???
but alas, it still comes down to fear... fear of a criminal... and i believe your beloved 'right' was for guns to be held in order to form a militia NOT to shoot a guy entering your home for your X-Box.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Fact is, according to the current system of acquiring firearms in Arizona, this guy was deemed to be a "responsible" gun owner, hind sight has proven otherwise - the horse has bolted. So my question is - who would benefit from stricter / tighter gun laws? (the answer I should hope is self evident)
Who would not benefit from tighter gun controls? Surely one side would out wiegh the other?
This guy purchased a firearm legally, that would suggest to me that there is a problem with the law.
WOW I did not know someone could be this stupid an illogical...
If you take away gun from everybody and make it illegal, law abiding citizens (the majority) will not have guns for fear of breaking the law. Now criminals will get all the guns (blackmarket) and make it much easier for them to commit crimes especially breaking into houses/violent crimes, because they will know that most everybody will not have a gun to protect them selves. How many people will fight back with a gun to their head???
How long after tighter gun laws would you predict that this happens - a day? a week? (try answer without the insults, it negates the point you are trying to make by making you look infantile)
Point is guns will always be available. Are you wanting all the gun companies to quit making guns, Thats alot of people losing their jobs. If you make owning a gun illegal it will only affect LAW ABIDING CITIZENS... How hard is that to understand. Criminal don't care what is illegal. You can't just erase guns from the world.
What is your plan, how do you go about getting rid of all the guns???
[/quote]I meant and I think you knew I meant you can't take away the rights of the sane to have guns because someone insane used one for evil purposes...your examples you gave were for the mentally impaired or those that gave up their rights for whatever reason, not on topic.
Tighter gun laws are unnecessary because the only people following the law are the sane and law abiding. If this kid couldn't get a gun legally damn straight he would have found one another way or planned something even more devastating. You can not stop evil/hate by taking away a means for evil/hate. It prevails.[/quote]
But he did get it legally - what does that suggest about the current legislation on purchasing a firearm?
some of the same people that would do away with guns are the same people that want to legalize drugs,
I can tell you that Drugs and guns are just about one in the same when we talk about death caused by drugs and crimes committed for drugs with guns or even with out guns.
a person can be responsible with a gun but you can't say the same about drugs in general.
everybody wants issues to be resolved in their own way with their own idea of how it should be done but they fail to see the big picture,meaning violence across the board or the end result of their ideas and opinions, there is no common ground for most people they believe that their idea is the only creditable solution, if you want a perfect world or country for that matter all these things need to be taken into consideration along with a persons rights..that 300 year old piece of paper signed by the forefathers of our country. :shock:
Godfather.
your also assuming that if he didn't have east access to guns he would have used something else. if as someone said that he wanted to kill as many people as possible why didn't he use a bomb? why did he choose a gun? could it be because it was very easy for him to get as compared to a bomb.
evil will find away...can't stop that and shouldn't try by taking others peoples rights away
Yes Evil will find a way but do we have to make it easy for people to find a way? but you didn't answer my question, WHY did he Choose a GUN? do you think it's a surprise that in Az. where it's legal to have concealed firearms that he choose to use a gun? why is it important that guns be hidden? if they are for protection why not have it in the open?
your also assuming that if he didn't have east access to guns he would have used something else. if as someone said that he wanted to kill as many people as possible why didn't he use a bomb? why did he choose a gun? could it be because it was very easy for him to get as compared to a bomb.
evil will find away...can't stop that and shouldn't try by taking others peoples rights away
it used to be a right to own a slave didnt it? it also used to be a mans right that he could beat his wife didnt it?
took them fuckers away... why not rise up against that!!!!
Well now those points are totally invalid..... I'm sure you see that.
Because a perfectly normal, loving, intelligent, peaceful person uses his right to safely own a gun has nothing to do with oppressing others, owning them as slaves or abusing others, both evil acts.
Gun owners are not evil but this is the basis for your criticism and bias of them. You will not attempt to see them any other way.
but alas, it still comes down to fear... fear of a criminal... and i believe your beloved 'right' was for guns to be held in order to form a militia NOT to shoot a guy entering your home for your X-Box.
What you call Fear, I call being pro-active... I have a wife and daughters my job is to protect them, why not take it to the fullest. You act as if home invasions don't happen everysingle second of the day??? They do and people do irrational things when they commit crimes, like killing or raping because they get addicted to the power they have in their criminal act. Why should you not shoot a stranger entering your house where your family is at??? You have no idea why they are there, but they shouldn't be. Is there any father/mother in here that would not attack some stranger that entered your house?
I agree that it does still boil down to the person but restricting access to thinks that have no benefit to society is a good thing. I wrote this in another place. just because people might use bombs if guns are not available doesn't mean that we should allow people to carry bombs around.
Well you can certainly buy everything legally to make a b word.
And you can not take away someones rights because some people are stupid or crazy ...this, in the case of guns.
It is our basic right to protect ourselves and should remain so.
OK enough of this, to carry a fully armed explosive around with you IS illegal, there are a number of tough laws and regualtions in place to stop this from happening, which is at polar opposites to your view on the control of guns. - a very redundant example.
Also - "And you can not take away someones rights because some people are stupid or crazy" - yes you can, it happens all the time - hospital, prison, power of attorney etc...
Fact is, according to the current system of acquiring firearms in Arizona, this guy was deemed to be a "responsible" gun owner, hind sight has proven otherwise - the horse has bolted. So my question is - who would benefit from stricter / tighter gun laws? (the answer I should hope is self evident)
Who would not benefit from tighter gun controls? Surely one side would out wiegh the other?
This guy purchased a firearm legally, that would suggest to me that there is a problem with the law.
Excellent post. There is a problem. 6 people died including a nine year old girl. To the gun advocates, do you at least think there is a problem with the current laws about obtaining a firearm?
evil will find away...can't stop that and shouldn't try by taking others peoples rights away
it used to be a right to own a slave didnt it? it also used to be a mans right that he could beat his wife didnt it?
took them fuckers away... why not rise up against that!!!!
Well now those points are totally invalid..... I'm sure you see that.
Because a perfectly normal, loving, intelligent, peaceful person uses his right to safely own a gun has nothing to do with oppressing others, owning them as slaves or abusing others, both evil acts.
Gun owners are not evil but this is the basis for your criticism and bias of them. You will not attempt to see them any other way.
it was Jared Loughner's right to own a gun also... but he used that 'right' to kill 6 people. which is an evil act is it not? but those last two rights are gone...
your last line is not true... and it should read "ALL Gun owners are not evil, some might be, but this is the basis for your criticism and bias of them. You will not attempt to see them any other way" ... then we would be getting somewhere.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Fact is, according to the current system of acquiring firearms in Arizona, this guy was deemed to be a "responsible" gun owner, hind sight has proven otherwise - the horse has bolted. So my question is - who would benefit from stricter / tighter gun laws? (the answer I should hope is self evident)
Who would not benefit from tighter gun controls? Surely one side would out wiegh the other?
This guy purchased a firearm legally, that would suggest to me that there is a problem with the law.
WOW I did not know someone could be this stupid an illogical...
If you take away gun from everybody and make it illegal, law abiding citizens (the majority) will not have guns for fear of breaking the law. Now criminals will get all the guns (blackmarket) and make it much easier for them to commit crimes especially breaking into houses/violent crimes, because they will know that most everybody will not have a gun to protect them selves. How many people will fight back with a gun to their head???
[/quote]
America has the same issues as that of other countries in the western world - and yet the majority of the populace does not feel the need to arm themselves - why is that do you think? And enough of this argument that they take it up the ass from their governments, I really do think you would be suprised at peoples ability to question their governments (the only difference is, not have have a paranoid, irrational fear government agents are going to come get them in the dead of night).
The country I am from has a bloody history when it comes to guns and indeed bombs. Fact is, as a progressive step forward, those involved in the violence sat down, worked out an agreement (not perfect, but it's a start) and then you nkow what they did - put their guns into a hole and poured cement over it. This sides have been fueding for centuries, some said it was in our blood, and yet now these same people who grew up killing eachother dit side by side sharing power (to some extent).
There is such a thing as life with out guns, it's not a them and us for godsake, your fear is an irrational one.
But please just explain to me how other countries manage it - take Canada for instance, what is the difference there???
But he did get it legally - what does that suggest about the current legislation on purchasing a firearm?
Got it legally yes.
No previous mentally ill issues or criminal record that would keep him from getting it legally as far as I know.
I don't know AZ laws but usually there is a waiting period etc.
The laws in place keep the insane and temporarily insane from getting a gun.
You can not change the laws to an if situation
that would be absurd.
and again if he couldn't get it legally he would have found another way. His mission was in place whatever the means. This is going to happen no matter the law.
some of the same people that would do away with guns are the same people that want to legalize drugs,
I can tell you that Drugs and guns are just about one in the same when we talk about death caused by drugs and crimes committed for drugs with guns or even with out guns.
a person can be responsible with a gun but you can't say the same about drugs in general.
everybody wants issues to be resolved in their own way with their own idea of how it should be done but they fail to see the big picture,meaning violence across the board or the end result of their ideas and opinions, there is no common ground for most people they believe that their idea is the only creditable solution, if you want a perfect world or country for that matter all these things need to be taken into consideration along with a persons rights..that 300 year old piece of paper signed by the forefathers of our country. :shock:
Godfather.
I don't know, I know a lot of people who drink wine and are responsible. FFS, half the people I know smoke pot, and whether or not they do is not (IMO) an indication of whether or not they are responsible. Many do so while still doing well in school/good jobs.
Speaking of 'home invasions' I have a funny story that could've been not so funny if a gun was involved. My family was sitting around the dinner table and we saw someone jump over our fence and into our backyard (coming near our back sliding glass door). Guy was about 19 or 20, and he was running. Now, if I was ''proactive', should I have taken out a weapon? Maybe... We just asked 'what the fuck are you doing?'.. Apparently he was a friend of the neighbour and a little kid across the street thought it would be funny to chase him with a watergun/water balloons. When we walked him out, we saw the little shit with a water gun. What is now a funny story could've been a tragedy with guns involved.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
and people who own or carry guns don't do so to feel powerful, this I know because I know people who do. Clear headed, loving, intelligent, peaceful people.
i'm glad you know people like that, but that is the tiny little sliver of the popluation of gun owners that you are familiar with in your personal life. It has no weight here. I've known handfuls of people who are quiute the opposite and they make me nervous knowing they own a gun.
But at the same time I know responsible people too. I dont want their guns taken away. I just think that whackos like this kid in Az, the kids in Columbine, and Va, could have possibly been thwarted with different laws. Maybe you're right, their eveil determination made it so no obstacle would come between them and a gun, but with tougher laws, maybe they'd be turned down once or twice and before they got their hands on a gun the third try, someone notices their thrail of whacko emails, youtubes and threats. the current laws are a travesty and its despicable that these folks and that 9 yr old girl died because its so easy to get a gun.
it was Jared Loughner's right to own a gun also... but he used that 'right' to kill 6 people. which is an evil act is it not? but those last two rights are gone...
your last line is not true... and it should read "ALL Gun owners are not evil, some might be, but this is the basis for your criticism and bias of them. You will not attempt to see them any other way" ... then we would be getting somewhere.
But you would take away the right of someone not evil and treat them the same as someone evil
that makes no sense
you are indeed lumping together all gun owners
Comments
this is not 'post a link to back up everything' forum... its for debate.
my real life experiences so far have enabled me to have the opinion that 2 geeky kids from an affluent suburb in Colorado would not have the first fucking clue where to get an array of guns to shoot their school up if it hadn't been for their 'law-abiding' parents owning and keeping them in the house... they would have simply just festered away in their own wee world probably masturbating at videos on youtube of people dressed as Warlocks or something.
that doesnt need a link... it's based on real life... just as i know i don't need a link to prove that licking a hot iron will hurt... it's common sense.
a basic right? a basic right should be that you can always get drinking water, or food... not own a gun based on a 300 year old law... i suppose as a new country you have to hang on to any thread of history you might have.
and whilst its legal to buy the ingredients to make a bomb... with the current threat of terrorism so high you'd be on the FBI's radar if you were to order 14 litres of calcium sulphate instead of just buying a nice new 30 round pistol.
OK enough of this, to carry a fully armed explosive around with you IS illegal, there are a number of tough laws and regualtions in place to stop this from happening, which is at polar opposites to your view on the control of guns. - a very redundant example.
Also - "And you can not take away someones rights because some people are stupid or crazy" - yes you can, it happens all the time - hospital, prison, power of attorney etc...
Fact is, according to the current system of acquiring firearms in Arizona, this guy was deemed to be a "responsible" gun owner, hind sight has proven otherwise - the horse has bolted. So my question is - who would benefit from stricter / tighter gun laws? (the answer I should hope is self evident)
Who would not benefit from tighter gun controls? Surely one side would out wiegh the other?
This guy purchased a firearm legally, that would suggest to me that there is a problem with the law.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
take the blinkers off man... real-life is what our life experiences make it... i wouldn't know how to get a gun illegally... thats my point... handguns are so fucking rare in this country that very very very few people would know someone who knew someone that could get them a gun. thats been my whole point throughout... its very hard to get something that barely exists.
Paul.. do you really think that if those 2 kids from Columbine lived in a nice leafy suburb of say England, France or Japan where gun control is strictly regulated they would know people who knew people who could get them guns?
Criminals must have more honour in the US than they do here... If the police came knocking at a guys door here saying that "you told this 22 year old guy who has just killed 6 people including a 9 year old girl where to buy a gun illegally did you?" then the guy would shit a ton... probably tell the police where he directed the maniac shooter to go get a gun and would then hope he wasnt an accomplice to murder.
I recognize a person's right to own one. That is the current law, and I won't deny that.
But I also can't say I think that tighter rules, AT THIS STAGE IN THE GAME, is realistic. I think we've gone too far in the other direction to make it plausible for that to be the actual solution. Making guns illegal doesn't make it any harder for criminals to get them than it does for a pot smoker to get weed. I don't know the solution, I just wish there was one.
If gun control would have worked, I think it would have had to be instituted in the early 1900's. There are just too many out there. Unless humans have a ridiculous leap in evolution and learn that violence is wrong, guns will always be around.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
it used to be a right to own a slave didnt it? it also used to be a mans right that he could beat his wife didnt it?
took them fuckers away... why not rise up against that!!!!
If you take away gun from everybody and make it illegal, law abiding citizens (the majority) will not have guns for fear of breaking the law. Now criminals will get all the guns (blackmarket) and make it much easier for them to commit crimes especially breaking into houses/violent crimes, because they will know that most everybody will not have a gun to protect them selves. How many people will fight back with a gun to their head???
i disagree but then you are from Canada.. guns are just below you
How long after tighter gun laws would you predict that this happens - a day? a week? (try answer without the insults, it negates the point you are trying to make by making you look infantile)
Tighter gun laws are unnecessary because the only people following the law are the sane and law abiding. If this kid couldn't get a gun legally damn straight he would have found one another way or planned something even more devastating. You can not stop evil/hate by taking away a means for evil/hate. It prevails.
but alas, it still comes down to fear... fear of a criminal... and i believe your beloved 'right' was for guns to be held in order to form a militia NOT to shoot a guy entering your home for your X-Box.
What is your plan, how do you go about getting rid of all the guns???
Tighter gun laws are unnecessary because the only people following the law are the sane and law abiding. If this kid couldn't get a gun legally damn straight he would have found one another way or planned something even more devastating. You can not stop evil/hate by taking away a means for evil/hate. It prevails.[/quote]
But he did get it legally - what does that suggest about the current legislation on purchasing a firearm?
I can tell you that Drugs and guns are just about one in the same when we talk about death caused by drugs and crimes committed for drugs with guns or even with out guns.
a person can be responsible with a gun but you can't say the same about drugs in general.
everybody wants issues to be resolved in their own way with their own idea of how it should be done but they fail to see the big picture,meaning violence across the board or the end result of their ideas and opinions, there is no common ground for most people they believe that their idea is the only creditable solution, if you want a perfect world or country for that matter all these things need to be taken into consideration along with a persons rights..that 300 year old piece of paper signed by the forefathers of our country. :shock:
Godfather.
Because a perfectly normal, loving, intelligent, peaceful person uses his right to safely own a gun has nothing to do with oppressing others, owning them as slaves or abusing others, both evil acts.
Gun owners are not evil but this is the basis for your criticism and bias of them. You will not attempt to see them any other way.
Excellent post. There is a problem. 6 people died including a nine year old girl. To the gun advocates, do you at least think there is a problem with the current laws about obtaining a firearm?
it was Jared Loughner's right to own a gun also... but he used that 'right' to kill 6 people. which is an evil act is it not? but those last two rights are gone...
your last line is not true... and it should read "ALL Gun owners are not evil, some might be, but this is the basis for your criticism and bias of them. You will not attempt to see them any other way" ... then we would be getting somewhere.
America has the same issues as that of other countries in the western world - and yet the majority of the populace does not feel the need to arm themselves - why is that do you think? And enough of this argument that they take it up the ass from their governments, I really do think you would be suprised at peoples ability to question their governments (the only difference is, not have have a paranoid, irrational fear government agents are going to come get them in the dead of night).
The country I am from has a bloody history when it comes to guns and indeed bombs. Fact is, as a progressive step forward, those involved in the violence sat down, worked out an agreement (not perfect, but it's a start) and then you nkow what they did - put their guns into a hole and poured cement over it. This sides have been fueding for centuries, some said it was in our blood, and yet now these same people who grew up killing eachother dit side by side sharing power (to some extent).
There is such a thing as life with out guns, it's not a them and us for godsake, your fear is an irrational one.
But please just explain to me how other countries manage it - take Canada for instance, what is the difference there???
Got it legally yes.
No previous mentally ill issues or criminal record that would keep him from getting it legally as far as I know.
I don't know AZ laws but usually there is a waiting period etc.
The laws in place keep the insane and temporarily insane from getting a gun.
You can not change the laws to an if situation
that would be absurd.
and again if he couldn't get it legally he would have found another way. His mission was in place whatever the means. This is going to happen no matter the law.
Speaking of 'home invasions' I have a funny story that could've been not so funny if a gun was involved. My family was sitting around the dinner table and we saw someone jump over our fence and into our backyard (coming near our back sliding glass door). Guy was about 19 or 20, and he was running. Now, if I was ''proactive', should I have taken out a weapon? Maybe... We just asked 'what the fuck are you doing?'.. Apparently he was a friend of the neighbour and a little kid across the street thought it would be funny to chase him with a watergun/water balloons. When we walked him out, we saw the little shit with a water gun. What is now a funny story could've been a tragedy with guns involved.
i'm glad you know people like that, but that is the tiny little sliver of the popluation of gun owners that you are familiar with in your personal life. It has no weight here. I've known handfuls of people who are quiute the opposite and they make me nervous knowing they own a gun.
But at the same time I know responsible people too. I dont want their guns taken away. I just think that whackos like this kid in Az, the kids in Columbine, and Va, could have possibly been thwarted with different laws. Maybe you're right, their eveil determination made it so no obstacle would come between them and a gun, but with tougher laws, maybe they'd be turned down once or twice and before they got their hands on a gun the third try, someone notices their thrail of whacko emails, youtubes and threats. the current laws are a travesty and its despicable that these folks and that 9 yr old girl died because its so easy to get a gun.
But you would take away the right of someone not evil and treat them the same as someone evil
that makes no sense
you are indeed lumping together all gun owners