knives and bats were the killing tools before guns were conveniently available. Take guns away, and we're back to stuff like that. . . . .
Another shooting... California Disability Centre
- Thread starter The Midnight
- Start date
knives and bats were the killing tools before guns were conveniently available. Take guns away, and we're back to stuff like that. . . . .
knives and bats were the killing tools before guns were conveniently available. Take guns away, and we're back to stuff like that. . . . .
Jamezz
Well-Known Member
Nice to have more people around that see the bigger picture.
It would take much more effort for a muslim couple to kill as many as 14 and wound 17 fully grown adults with knives and bats though...
If guns never existed then sure a gun never would have killed someone. Guns do exist though, and if you think you are going to take them out of criminals hands, I'd like to hear your logic on other things. Ban magazines that hold over 6 rounds. I assure you, you can switch magazines in a gun in a second and start firing again. Ban assault weapons, you can modify weapons that will still be available and the parts needed to assemble assault style weapons will still be around.
Although I understand your nuclear analogy I don't agree with it. This is a strategic method of slowly chipping away at guns in America. We can use these small laws to make those who want gun laws to feel better, but it's not going to yield any results. So then criminals will continue getting their hands on what they need necessary to carry out their sick actions and more regulation will be called for. People obeying the law today will obey the law tomorrow, and those who want to use guns to kill people will find a way to do it, no matter what law they don't care about you put in their way. Murdering people is illegal and they seem to have no problem disregarding that law, I'm sure a ban on magazines and assault weapons is going to stop these sick individuals from doing what they want.
The British when first landed in NZ in 1800's used guns/rifles to go to war with the natives (Maori people who are indigenous to NZ). The Maori people fighting a losing battle later traded all the land they owned to the British for guns/rifles.... til this day the NZ Government is still required to pay billions back to the Maoris to compensate for those 'stolen' lands.
There is no evidence to support this claim, and some evidence(Australia) to contradict it.
FalseFlagg K
Well-Known Member
oooh oooooh those government people are gonna come kill us all ... lol you rednecks are funny ...
I don't fear the government, it doesn't matter what arms you have if they want to impose their will they can. Protecting myself against the government is not my concern. No one really has a chance against the government if they ever did decide to carry out a conspiracy theory action. I'm not someone who is going to take the argument as far as saying I have a right to have whatever gun I want to protect myself against a government that's going to turn on me, could it happen? I guess, but I won't be able to stop it if it does even if I am loaded to the teeth.
My concerns with protection is every day protection. What will you do if someone who disregards these laws and "gun laws" if they were put into affect came into your home, or a crowded area you were in and started firing away? You sit their hopeless like a wrag doll waiting to be pelted with a bullet because the best defense against a gun is another gun. Police don't stop crime, they show up to deal with a crime currently underway or to clean up once it's over. I love that we have good police officers to come to our rescue when needed but when someone is unloading or killing people with any type of weapon, the 2 minutes it takes the police to arrive can mean the difference between life and death.
Another use for my firearms is hunting. If you would like to call that a redneck action, or don't agree with hunting and believe that firearm use is not warranted for it either. Then we'll have a seperate discussion of the hypocrisy of those who eat meat and ignore the death involved and who pays to ensure wildlife, wild places, and open space have a bright future.
If they want to put in legislation that limits magazine to 4-5 bullets and outlaw assault style weapons.... Go ahead. I'll turn mine in and obey the law, but it's not going to change anything and we will just end up with this same old media stories of how we need even more legislation limiting firearms. Put background checks on ammunition, if they're a fellon and already got the gun illegally, something tells me they'll find a way to get the ammunition author passing a background check.
Last edited:
Hey you are from Aus right? What has been your experience following the gun ban? Has there been a backlash or has it been pretty well received?
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
...good point! Nice illustration that fits material!
How about the fact we already have background checks and felons still have guns? How about many of these shooters wouldn't have been able to legally purchase or own a firearm, yet they did anyway? So let's just continue throwing laws at it so those who obey laws will obey them and those who don't care about the law will continue to ignore it. America has 325 million people and nearly 300 million registered firearms. America is vastly different than the other countries statistics you want to sit in a chart next to and compare us with. I hope you can ensure me that if I turn in my firearms you're going to get all 300 million other guns off the streets so they don't fall into some psychos hands, because taking them from me and not the psychos is not going to accomplish anything. As soon as you get cocaine, meth, and all the illegal drugs off the street then you might can convince me the wrong people won't end up with guns in their hands and we can actually carry out such a task. Until then keep talking about throwing laws at people who don't care about them and expecting regulations written on paper to stop criminals from committing crimes.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Lol
Easily countered with the fact that they're largely available still. If they're not available for sale, or in their neighbors garage, they're not available for stealing.
Goes with above. But I'll sweeten the pot.. 82% of weapons used in mass shootings have been legally purchased.
https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/most-guns-mass-shootings-obtained-legally
I'm glad you brought up drugs actually. Drugs are addictions. Tougher laws on drugs mean exactly nothing, as no one thinks about harsher penalties, just if they're not going to have the shakes when they wake up tomorrow. Guns are not addictions. Tougher laws would work, just like they do, and have done with the harsh penalties of killing a cop.
But also; look at the stats of what we have already. 133 mass shootings, 11 private citizens stepped up to combat. Less than one in ten will do something about it. So you say more Americans should arm themselves. You're giving to both sides there, so at best it's a net neutral. And In this day and age, are you really so naive as to say every American should always be carrying around a weapon?
Just out of interest, has any of you (or somebody you know) who currently have guns been able to stop a robber or a perpetrator from harming you or your family using YOUR own guns?
Your addiction argument is one of the weakest I've heard. So you think someone with the mindset of walking into a crowded room and opening fire gives two ****s what the penalties are? Most of them walk in planning to kill themselves at the end, they don't care what penalty awaits them when they plan on dying during the process. You act as though these people are walking around with a worry they might get thrown in prison. Someone who will senselessly kill human beings is in no better state of mind that someone who is on drugs.
As for armed citizens, in every case, every gun class you take, your job is to get you and your family home safe. No classes teach you to act like the police and go head first towards the danger. If you can get out, you're supposed to get yourself out alive not be a hero or go after the shooter. You use your weapon when you can't avoid the threat, so its no suprise only 11 private citizens stepped up.
And no if you don't want to own a gun, can't own a gun, or don't know how to operate a gun safely I don't want you to have a gun. If it interested you, you can legally own one, and take courses to show you how to operate one sure, but no I don't want everyone owning a gun.
Havent ever had the need at this point, but it's there if I need it. At my workplace they don't hang fire extinguishers on the wall because a fire starts every day, they hang them there so when there is a fire they are available. However I use my guns often for hunting, and I carry one on me almost every day. A gun doesn't have to be fired or used every day to have a legitimate use, period.
How would you use it when it does come to that? Would you shoot them first? What if they fired first, would you be able to draw your gun in time? What if they dispossess your gun?
What if it's a housewife vs an experienced gunman? How would she win in that situation? Just because you have a gun it doesn't mean you're completely safe.
I've always been told, try to avoid violence as much as you can, do not confront. A friend of mine who has a black belt in karate told me the best move in a fight is to run away. Avoid confrontation.
FalseFlagg K
Well-Known Member
It was pretty much well received apart from a small minority, but as it followed an awful mass shooting carried out with an automatic assault weapon by a very mentally deficient person it wasn't a real contentious issue. The fact that the government bought back any such weapons softened the blow for those involved. The overwhelming majority of people were happy to accept that the average person has no need for an automatic or semi automatic assault type weapon.
Lo and behold since that time which is coming up on 20 years no such mass shootings .... and people with legitimate reason to own a firearm - sporting/hunting or those on farms etc still can gain permits to own appropriate weapons.
I just can't see any way to deal with it there tho, there's just waaaaay too many weapons in circulation.
FalseFlagg K
Well-Known Member
hunting is fine, i have no issue with that at all, and those here wanting to hunt recreationally can obtain a permit to do so. As far as criminals still getting guns, sure of course that's gonna happen, because they have the motives and knowledge of how to access them. But that is different to a mentally disturbed person who can so easily obtain a gun there to go on a mass shooting.
I can certainly identify with the instinct of wanting to be able to defend one's family, but i just don't see that a culture of everyone having reasonably easy access to weapons doesn't lead to a lot more deaths that wouldn't be the case otherwise. As far as mass shootings go, has there been any documented cases of an armed member of the public intervening and stopping a rampaging shooter from killing even more people than they otherwise would have ? (serious q btw, i actually don't know ?? )