US shoppers killed in gun rampage

[Helen]

If someone wants to commit a massacre gun control won't help.

It certainly helps prevent them doing it using a legal gun as are used in most of these massacres

Since the ban in the U.K after Dunblane their has not been another massacre and judging buy the gap between Hungerford were well over due one!!
Seems the gun ban has worked! What a surprised

 

[Indy500]

It certainly helps prevent them doing it using a legal gun as are used in most of these massacres

Prove it. As has been said by the police, the gun used in this massacre was stolen.

Since the ban in the U.K after Dunblane their has not been another massacre and judging buy the gap between Hungerford were well over due one

An unstable person was allowed guns because the police didn't do their job. That is not good enough reason for a gun ban.

 

[Mephisto]

It certainly helps prevent them doing it using a legal gun as are used in most of these massacres

Since the ban in the U.K after Dunblane their has not been another massacre and judging buy the gap between Hungerford were well over due one!!
Seems the gun ban has worked! What a surprised

WHAT GUN BAN YOU IGNORANT FOOL?! THERE ARE STILL GUNS IN THE UK. ONLY HANDGUNS WERE BANNED. Jesus christ.

The handgun ban did nothing, absolutely nothing.

And we are 'due' a massacre? Ahahaha...you are ridiculous. How many massacres were there before Hungerford? None. But all variety of guns were readily avaliable for decades before then. How do you explain that?

 

[RDM]

It certainly helps prevent them doing it using a legal gun as are used in most of these massacres

Since the ban in the U.K after Dunblane their has not been another massacre and judging buy the gap between Hungerford were well over due one!!
Seems the gun ban has worked! What a surprised

Prior to Dunblane how many masscres were there using handguns?

 

[RDM]

A better prison/mental home system?

Better how?

That isn't a solution, it is a soundbite.

 

[Indy500]

We'd had firearms in this country since the 16th century, its only really in the 20th that we've had mass gun control legislation.

 

[Gackt]

The "if they're going to kill, they'll kill" argument is rather amusing. It seems the people using this statement are trying to say "well, we might as well let them have guns, they'll do it anyway" - what sense is there in giving these people who are "likely to kill" the methods to do it? Utter idiocy. How do you commit a massacre in a school by shooting students if you don't have a gun to shoot them? You can't.

I'd hate to see a society where we have to live not knowing whether the person next to you is carrying a gun. True, it's almost impossible to know that now - but with the current restrictions, it's unlikely - however, allowing it to be freely attainable is detestable.

Guns should only be carried by people who are authorised to use them. Police. Army. Whatever. Not by average joe number 23331.

You all go on about "we should allow people to have guns" in order to protect ourselves from others who have guns. We wouldn't need to if they didn't have guns at all! If they weren't available to civilians, we wouldn't be able to!

The pro-gun lobby are doing the same thing the Cold War did. "If you're gonna have nukes, then we'll have nukes." "Nuke us and we'll nuke you." As some sort of crazy deterrent. How about getting rid of all nukes? That's a much sensible path.

You people pride yourselves in logic. I suggest you start using it.

Either that or go die, don't ruin this world for my children.

 

[Stiff_Cookie]

The "if they're going to kill, they'll kill" argument is rather amusing. It seems the people using this statement are trying to say "well, we might as well let them have guns, they'll do it anyway" - what sense is there in giving these people who are "likely to kill" the methods to do it? Utter idiocy. How do you commit a massacre in a school by shooting students if you don't have a gun to shoot them? You can't.

I'd hate to see a society where we have to live not knowing whether the person next to you is carrying a gun. True, it's almost impossible to know that now - but with the current restrictions, it's unlikely - however, allowing it to be freely attainable is detestable.

Guns should only be carried by people who are authorised to use them. Police. Army. Whatever. Not by average joe number 23331.

You all go on about "we should allow people to have guns" in order to protect ourselves from others who have guns. We wouldn't need to if they didn't have guns at all! If they weren't available to civilians, we wouldn't be able to!

The pro-gun lobby are doing the same thing the Cold War did. "If you're gonna have nukes, then we'll have nukes." "Nuke us and we'll nuke you." As some sort of crazy deterrent. How about getting rid of all nukes? That's a much sensible path.

You people pride yourselves in logic. I suggest you start using it.

Either that or go die, don't ruin this world for my children.

You have completely missed the point of that arguement. No one is saying that if their going to kill people anyways might as well let them have a gun. What we are saying is that banning everyone from having a gun is not going to stop someone going out there any killing someone. There are thousands, if not millions of people in the US who legally own handguns and NEVER have an incident with them. Why on earth would you want to deprive someone of something they enjoy using just because some loonies get hold of the guns and kill people?

People have been murdered with cars, do you propose banning peoplefrom driving cars?

People have been murdered with knives, how about banning knives and we can just tear the food apart with our hands.



You cant simply go around banning things because a few nutjobs misuse them. It reminds me of the movie equilebrium where emotions were banned because they were considered the cause of wars and violence.

 

[AdladUK]

What we are saying is that banning everyone from having a gun is not going to stop someone going out there any killing someone.

I totally disagree. And it's because of that mentality that the US has some of the worst gun related crimes (if not the worst) in the world. How many fatal school shootings do you hear about in European countries? I can't even think of one.

The problem is having a GUN CULTURE. People get use to guns. They become relatively easy for complete nut jobs to get hold of.

But alas, this is a very very old arguement.

What makes me laugh is when people defend guns by turning to amendment rights. It seems as though they're prepared to give up 15 other crucial rights because the Bush administration says so, but hey, take away our guns and there will be real trouble to pay!!!

 

[Stiff_Cookie]

I am guessing 15 is a random number.

Either way, you keep your laws and Ill keep mine. I enjoy shooting and like hell will I let some 18 year old nutjobs actions take that away from me.

banning something because someone is doing something that is already illegal is a dumb ass move.

 

[AdladUK]

I am guessing 15 is a random number.

Either way, you keep your laws and Ill keep mine. I enjoy shooting and like hell will I let some 18 year old nutjobs actions take that away from me.

banning something because someone is doing something that is already illegal is a dumb ass move.

And it's that sort of closed minded thinking that's got America in the **** it's in today.

At some point you have to start asking questions. Why has the US had so many more fatal school shootings than other westernised countries?

 

[Mephisto]

I totally disagree. And it's because of that mentality that the US has some of the worst gun related crimes (if not the worst) in the world. How many fatal school shootings do you hear about in European countries? I can't even think of one.

Er, lol? Jokela? That was about er, a month ago or so? The Erfurt massacre? Second worst school shooting in history?

 

[Azagoth]

How many fatal school shootings do you hear about in European countries? I can't even think of one.

Conveniently forgotten about Finland's last month then? Or weren't you watching the World wide blanket news coverage of Beslan when that happened in Russia? That's only two, but there's plenty more, although I bet you conveniently forgot about them too!

 

[Gackt]

You have completely missed the point of that arguement. No one is saying that if their going to kill people anyways might as well let them have a gun. What we are saying is that banning everyone from having a gun is not going to stop someone going out there any killing someone. There are thousands, if not millions of people in the US who legally own handguns and NEVER have an incident with them. Why on earth would you want to deprive someone of something they enjoy using just because some loonies get hold of the guns and kill people?

People have been murdered with cars, do you propose banning peoplefrom driving cars? The purpose of a car is transportation, not to kill.

People have been murdered with knives, how about banning knives and we can just tear the food apart with our hands. The purpose of a knife is not kill.

A gun's only purpose is to kill or immobilise. Why deprive lots who do use them sensibly? Because some don't. I would glady take away your 'fun' with guns, if it meant a few more people didn't die.

See, I care about life. You obviously don't. You just want some 'fun'. Which is fine, until you get a hole in your head. And we'll be "told you so."

 

[Mephisto]

See, I care about life. You obviously don't. You just want some 'fun'. Which is fine, until you get a hole in your head. And we'll be "told you so."

LOL.

 

[Azagoth]

At some point you have to start asking questions. Why has the US had so many more fatal school shootings than other westernised countries?

What do you mean by "Westernised"? Do you mean us Countries in the West or Westernised Countries around the World?

 

[AdladUK]

Beslan when that happened in Russia? That's only two, but there's plenty more

Beslan was a terrorist attack, not a school shooting.

You may as well compare it with 9/11

When was the last school shooting in the UK or France or Spain?

 

[AdladUK]

What do you mean by "Westernised"? Do you mean us Countries in the West or Westernised Countries around the World?

If I'd meant countries in the west I would have said western countries.

Westernisation - assimilation of Western culture; the social process of becoming familiar with or converting to the customs and practices of Western civilization

 

[Deleted User 234324]

Problem I see with US gun laws, besides being way to slack is that any tom dick or harry can get a gun with little to no trouble, while the availability of firearms through gun stores in the US isn't as easy due to the regulations (have to wait xxxx time from application) because of the huge number of firearms in circulation anyone can take five steps out of the shop and find someone selling dodgy weapons.

The US needs to put tight restrictions on its guns, preferably the same as we have here in the UK, I knifes will most likely take over from the weapon of choice to kill with but to kill with a knife you need to be in close (arms length) which isn't easy to do specially if you know someone is coming at you with a knife, the will to survive kicks in you will more often not (strength) permiting fight for your life.

The availability of high power weapons in the US needs to change ASAP, regardless of how much people do not like change in the states it has got to change. Hell my father in florida has a high power rifle that can punch through concrete and a .45 magnum, no idea what he needs it for as he lives on a boat.

 

[Azagoth]

Beslan was a terrorist attack, not a school shooting.

You may as well compare it with 9/11

When was the last school shooting in the UK or France or Spain?

Beslan was a school shooting, People went into a school and shot people! Just because they did it under the idiotic muslim banner is neither here nor there! As for Europe, will Emsdetten School in Germany last year do?