Another school shooting in the US

Here comes the gun control nuts.

Finland has strict gun control laws and the amount of multiple victim shootings is the same as Washington (which has a similar population). The problem isn't the guns, guns will always be available illegally. The problem is that most of the people who commit these shootings are mentally ill and have usually showed signs beforehand and no-one does anything.

This is exactly the attitude that will ensure many more hundreds of men, women and so much worse toddlers will die in America to join the hundreds this year.

Intresting that people who are trying to do something to prevent, or more likely lessen the amount of massacres are described as 'nuts'.

Obviously the best thing is to do nothing and buy yourself an AK47. Another sad fact is after these events the sale of guns soars in the states it happens.
 
Last edited:
Just seen Obama doing his press conference. He nearly broke down crying - I don't even think it was a publicity stand, he was generally disappointed and upset about what happened.
 
People consistently ignore the argument that changes all research done that is either pro or against guns.

If guns were never legal in the US, and no one had guns, all those graphs would be the same, and all the arguments would be the same, except people would be asking for bans on whatever the most common weapon used was if guns weren't available. If guns weren't available and gangs were running around with bows, everyone would be asking for them to be banned, if they were both banned and gangs were running around with axes, or baseball bats, etc, etc.

If this guy couldn't get hold of a gun, he could have driven a car full of extra petrol in cans into the school and set fire to the whole place, he may have killed several times as many people as he did.

Most murders would still be committed, gang culture in the states is responsible for a huge majority of murders in cities... do gangs exist because guns exist? No, would gang members still kill each other without guns, yes, would most murders happen anyway, yes.

Like I said, people like to talk about guns and violence because it makes us feel more comfortable thinking in a country with widespread gun control that it isn't as violent here and that we're "safe", because everyone wants to feel safe.

Almost all the arguments are illogical and stupid, with a huge portion of arguments resting on guns being easier to kill people with than other weapons, which is both horse**** and not even logical.
Ultimately when you CHOOSE to kill someone, that is the difficult part, the choice, not the trigger or the knife, or the fire, or the car, or the bat, or poison.

Fire and poison are ridiculously easy ways to kill en masse, and with more chance of getting away, both are also WIDELY available around the globe and need no training to implement at all. As much as people think Call of Duty makes you a great aim in real life, running targets, reloading, theres a reason why in most shootings most shots miss.

Is it really easier to go into a school and shoot everyone, than to get a job in the local supermarket and put poison into all the milk cartons, or set fire to a building, run people over, really?

The world is FULL of crappy people willing to do crappy things for whatever reason, guns don't make those people crappy, or make it easier to kill large numbers of people. The sobering, horrible reality is just about anyone you've ever met is fully capable of killing hundreds of people pretty easily if they really wanted to, very few people choose to do so, because while so many people are pretty crappy some of the time, most people aren't THAT crap.

Tragedies, mass murders are just something that happen, always have, always will, no matter what measures we think will prevent them, they won't.

Your posts are usually pretty good, if rambling. However you're miles off the mark here. Your suggestion that murders would be by and large the same if guns were illegal over there (and always were) is nonsense. Guns take away the personification, if you will, of murder. It's a lot more to stand in front of someone and drive a knife, repeatedly, into them compared to standing across the road or sitting in a car and shooting at the person.

It's a lot easier to kill someone with a gun than it is with a "face to face" weapon because your able to distant (both logistically and emotionally) yourself from the victim.

As for your poison thing, it's a lot easier getting a gun that dangerous poison.
 
What so they cant use it for hunting, or target shooting or recreational sports. OK.

Ever heard of Tesco? They sell meat and you don't have to dress up like a nob and spend days on end sitting in a bush waiting for a deer to come along so you can feed your family.

In a first world country no one 'needs' to hunt, they do it for fun not because it's the only source of food they have.
 
Ever heard of Tesco? They sell meat and you don't have to dress up like a nob and spend days on end sitting in a bush waiting for a deer to come along so you can feed your family.

In a first world country no one 'needs' to hunt, they do it for fun not because it's the only source of food they have.

Your point? There is no need to do a lot of things but people still enjoy them.
 
with a huge portion of arguments resting on guns being easier to kill people with than other weapons, which is both horse**** and not even logical. Ultimately when you CHOOSE to kill someone, that is the difficult part, the choice, not the trigger or the knife, or the fire, or the car, or the bat, or poison.

Not to wade in with the argument, but that's a bit of a silly point. The point is I don't think the gunman would have been able to kill as many so quickly if he didn't have a gun.

This is such a horrific story though.
 
Apparently the media got it wrong, and it wasn't Ryan Lanza, in fact, Ryan is on Facebook defending himself right now.

If I was him, I'd be hiring some serious legal advice right now.
 
What so they cant use it for hunting, or target shooting or recreational sports. OK.

So what is the sporting/hunting/recreational value of an assault rifle/machine gun?

You can buy and own a gun for those very needs in the UK under licence. However you can't buy something that was solely designed for military use. It has no sporting value at all.

However you dress it up it is like a teenage/child desire for a mine is bigger and better than yours showing off tool.

Some people are still buying these things over there because they are convinced their will be a doomsday event or zombie Apocalypse. Cuckoo!!!
 
I have never once said in this thread what guns people should be allowed, just that banning all guns is reactionary and a bit silly.

So you are arguing a strawman basically. It sounds like you are defending their gun laws/attitudes from your posts.

Given we don't have a complete blanket ban in the UK and that people can legally own firearms here for sports/hunting I don't get your point. I would suspect most of the anti-gun posters here are actually advocating very strict gun restrictions not a total and complete ban.
 
Figures from 2009.

UK Population 56.1 million, total murders 550 and 39 by firearm.
USA, Population 311.5 million, murders 13,756 by Firearm 9,203.

Not only have the USA got a problem with guns they just have a general problem in that as a first world leading nation they seem to just wat to kill each other regardless.

I mean 6 times the population but 20+ times the rate.
 
When I hear about people who have no link to the shooting crying etc it makes me think ive got no soul... Sure it's a sad/tragic event but I've got no actual personal emotions over it. I'll be going to fabric later and getting wrecked and will forget all about it and then go about tomorrow like every other day. And yet I see people on other forums with no relations to the victims saying they will be mourning the loss of life.

Am I broken or do people just have a habit of faking/talking up their emotions because its something they feel they should do after an event like this ?
 
So you are arguing a strawman basically. It sounds like you are defending their gun laws/attitudes from your posts.

Given we don't have a complete blanket ban in the UK and that people can legally own firearms here for sports/hunting I don't get your point. I would suspect most of the anti-gun posters here are actually advocating very strict gun restrictions not a total and complete ban.

My position is that I agree with the gun laws in the USA, I can understand and see the against people be allowed military grade weapons though.
 
Back
Top Bottom