Austria mass shooting
- Thread starter Bluebozzy
- Start date
Hasn't changed the US attitude yet...I wonder if that will now become 'HAD liberal gun laws...
Horrendous
They're a lost cause though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,869
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 11,276
This sort of comment boggles my mind, people use legality as some sort of evidence that its somehow ok. Legality isn't a guide to if something is sane/moral/sensible.
No one who's a civilian needs a gun, you just dont, there is no use for one (if you like target practice they should be held at licensed gun range)
No one who lives in a "normal" society has a use for a gun, not even farmers, if they must kill random animals, trap them or just use an air rifle.
Fully expecting a gun loving reply with lots of pseudo random reasons why its "needed" or its a "right" or something bonkers like that.
Last edited:
If we use that kind of logic why not ban pets which are at all dangerous as well? if someone really likes animals they can visit a zoo.
There is only so far we should restrict things just because of the actions of a small number of crazy people.
Excellent method of arguing. You get to say your OPINION (as that's all it is) then preemptively rubbish any views that challenge or are different from yours before they have even been said.
10/10 troll-ness right there
It does?! I don't actually know of any until today...
The Austrian news article I was reading had a list of events since the 90s, but actually looking up the details of them most of them were "shootings at schools" rather than this kind of mass shooting. A man walking into a school with a gun, taking his 7 and 8 year old children out and murdering his own son to get back at his wife is still horrifying, of course, but not quite the same thing.
I heard about that one, I know what you mean - more like a specific murder that happened to take place in a school rather than what we'd term a "school shooting"
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 5,403
- Location
- Bristol
Well for what it's worth I think rifles and pistols should be banned.
They are a tool designed to kill, and shouldn't be in the hands of the general public.
Just government authorities IMO.
I was in army cadets and live fired several rifles, got my skill at arms badges. I did lots of air rifle hunting in my youth. But, even though I still enjoy target shooting, I think all rifles and pistols should be banned.
The public just can't be trusted with them.
They are a tool designed to kill, and shouldn't be in the hands of the general public.
Just government authorities IMO.
I was in army cadets and live fired several rifles, got my skill at arms badges. I did lots of air rifle hunting in my youth. But, even though I still enjoy target shooting, I think all rifles and pistols should be banned.
The public just can't be trusted with them.
Disagree. It depends if you think people are allowed to go hunting or not. In Austria many do, and so need guns to do it.
An air rifle won't kill a deer.
Last edited:
If we're saying people can't be trusted at all with things that kill, then that means an awful lots of things should be banned.
All vehicles, every type of knife, bows and arrows, screwdrivers, scissors, baseball bats.. The list is endless.
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 9,494
- Location
- Southampton, hopefully not too hot, or too cold
Sure, there's lots of things that can be used to kill people, including a hand sized rock. I'm looking around my room and there's plenty of everyday things in here that could be used with deadly force.
But a gun's primary purpose is to kill and it can easily be hidden under a loose shirt in the back of your trousers... Not so easy for a rifle or bow.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,087
I don't recall many mass dog attacks at schools to be honest.
Only one or two of these could be used to carry out a mass killing spree with ease, i.e. a vehicle in an unprotected outdoor space and certain knives. However, it would take considerable skill, strength and luck to avoid being stopped with the latter.
I mean I guess someone well trained with a bow and arrow could knock a few off but they'd have to be an excellent shot against likely moving targets and it leaves you exposed as you reload and draw. Same with melee weapons i.e. someone tackling you while you were doing it, as people are much more likely to engage with someone using melee weapons than a firearm.
I'm not calling for a ban, but I do think there are limits to the types of things that can be used to carry out attacks of this scale.
Last edited:
No but add up deaths and injuries from dangerous dogs Vs the same committed by legal firearms owners.
Because a firearms aren’t lovable furry companions that are safe the vast majority of the time. They are weapons designed to kill people.
Firearms are also safe the vast majority of the time and largely used for recreational purposes, most dangerous pets originate from an animal with features optimised to kill.
In countries with reasonable firearms restrictions mass shootings are exceedingly rare.
Quite a few people get seriously injured or killed by dangerous pets each year, not uncommonly younger relatives of irresponsible pet owners, but dangerous animals are just one potential example used to illustrate the logic, you could apply the same to baseball bats, etc. (and an emerging interesting situation with drones).
Last edited: