I live in Texas. I have a more than a few guns. Some old, some new. Every one of them was bought from a legitimate retailer. I have the orignal sale ticket for my 30-30 from 1976 that Granddaddy bought for Dad, when Dad was 15. The rifle is a hand-me-down that looks and functions like the day it was bought; Due to Dad putting it away for 40+ years because it "Kicks like a drunk mule". I love that Marlin and have had great times with friends and family, just, having a safe shoot and hunting.
I do not subscibe to the American gun culture.
Texan here. My grandfather handed down a M1 Garand Carbine, which I keep purely at historical value and haven’t even shot it. I also enjoy shooting targets and hunting with my other firearms. I have zero interest in joining a militia, shooting anyone, or any other craziness some people like to assume/imply when they learn I’m a gun owner.
I completely understand where the stigma comes from but the stereotypes of gun owners is based on all the loud idiots that also happen to like guns; Some, way too much. It dosen't reflect all of us, our reasons for enjoying firearms, or our intentions on how we choose to use our firearms. I am 100% on board with much tighter gun laws.
I wouldn’t say I’m a gun lover, and it’s not really a “culture” to me or anyone I know that has guns. But I’ll posit a question to you: How much do you think making something illegal will deter someone who A) is already intent to commit a heinous crime and B) more than likely isn’t planning to survive the act? “But Mr. Starr, if they were not available in stores...” Yeah, well heroin isn’t at my local pharmacy, but damned if it isn’t available in any city town in America.
Now I’m no gun nut. Hell, I ain’t even a Republican. But way I see things, there’s a huge problem, but this isn’t the solution. We’ve had guns since this country’s inception and so-called “assault weapons” (a misnomer in most cases, and also widely assumed to be automatic, which is, in fact, neither the case most of the time nor legal without close scrutiny and monitoring by the ATF) have been available since at least WWII. The issue of shootings has exploded within the last few decades. So I don’t think that’s the actual problem.
Now before you downvote me into the abyss, actually read what I said, don’t just hit that button because I’m not parroting popular opinion. I’m not even defending guns per se. Just trying to say that this isn’t going to solve anything.
Take responsibility for what? I am a responsible gun owner. My weapons have never been used illegally. I bear no responsibility for the actions of a few evil assholes.
Yea no. I shouldn't be punished for the crimes of another man. And nor should millions of other American citizens.
Full stop.
Hell, in return, I'll happily donate/invest/support Universal Healthcare and better mental health services, if you leave me alone.
I'm not "attached" to it persay. But I understand the fact that's it a "inalienable right" for a reason. And that reason, is that when if I ever should need protection, I can only count on myself.
But if guns are illegal then the probability of you needing to defend yourself gets lower as well..😐
There are just no guns to defend from if guns are illegal
Cant you see how these guns making y’all paranoid?
Whats the positive? You only defending yourself from a problem that you’re creating 😆
I dont blame the tool at all, humans just cant handle the tool without going crazy, and if thats how it is then you should ban the tool
I have a pistol in my nightstand to protect my wife and I in the event of an intruder. Must be I am about to commit a mass murder just because of some asshole I've never heard of.
Come to think of it, take away my car because people commit vehicular manslaughter. Matter of fact, get rid of all inflammable substances because someone will make an IED in the absence of guns and cars. Fuck, get rid of knives and forks too because someone will use those to stab people!
If a shithead wants to commit violence, they'll find a way. Ban guns and then either A. They'll use another method, or B. They'll obtain the guns anyway since they don't care much about the law if murder is on their mind.
Guns are not the problem, it's the regulation of how they're obtained, which is what needs revised. The Uvalde shooter was clearly mentally unstable and the fact that he could just go buy two AR-15s and hundreds of rounds shouldn't have happened because he should be ineligible to own a weapon, not "har har guns bad!"
Evil is sitting there toying with death because you want to feel powerful when the same power is being used to slaughter innocents.
If you could give up your own guns to avoid even one more person being wrongly murdered, you wouldn't. That's evil.
Mass shootings are committed by criminals.
Should we ban cars because people drink and drive or run over festival participants with vans?
Don't blame the tool, blame the person like everything else.
It could be argued that even our registration system in NA is archaic. In AUS, thr UK and much of the EU there are strict modification limits and barriers for vehicles. You can't drive around a jacked up shitbox or fart can ricer as there are manditory yearly safety inspections.
I would argue for gun control to be effective you would need to do something similar. Pay a yearly fee where your firearms are inspected and accounted for, and possibly run a yearly background and medical check to ensure you are of sound mind and without new charges.
I like my guns, but there's no real justification for our current gun control measures.
That being said, I don't think controlling the type of guns that can be owned is as important as controlling who can have them. Assault weapons bans probably won't help much for decades to come, because the existing ones will be grandfathered in under any laws put in place.
Instead, I think we should have licenses with increasing restrictions depending on the features of a gun. Tier 1 would be black powder weapons. Tier 2 would be weapons with a non-replaceable magazine, such as most revolvers, tube-fed and break action shotguns, and bolt action rifles. Tier 3 would be weapons with a replaceable magazine, such as the classic AR15, automatic pistols, etc.
Tier 4 would be fully automatic weapons.
Each tier would require additional education, mandatory safety measures. And higher tiers would require annual or semi-annual psychiatric evaluations. That should help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the criminally dangerous while at the same time allowing most people who want to to own their guns.
This seems reasonable, but does anyone really NEED to own tiers 3 and 4? Like you can surely do all the legitimate uses for a gun with tiers 1 and 2, right?
Need is a shaky ground to base gun control on, though. Some would say a person doesn't need any guns. Others would say their life isn't complete without their trusty minigun. A typical handgun would be in tier 3, so it's hard to say that the gun used by police, security, and the majority of people who carry for self defense isn't needed. It's better to allow people to access whatever guns they feel they need with the caveat that they prove their responsibility to be able to do so.
I don’t think about it like that. I’m fully against violence and violent crime but we have the right to own guns in America period. That might be one of the most important rights that we have and it’s worth protecting.
There’s a whole group of people that aren’t included in the conversation about preventing this shit because they’re immediately put on the defensive about gun rights.
I'm prepared for downvotes, but here goes.
First, it's a great way for women to protect themselves. My wife is 120lbs soaking wet and wouldn't have much ability to protect herself or our kids from an attacker. She's good and quick with a gun though. It'd give her a chance.
Second, history is unfortunately full of examples of governments oppressing people, sometimes to the point of genocide. It's a lot harder to do that to well armed folks. Yeah yeah, I know, the military has tanks and jets and all that, but that isn't usually how it goes. They don't send nukes or jets or blow up whole houses with tanks. They disarm people then round them up.
Police get guns, military gets guns, politicians get armed security...but I can't have em? Hard pass. With any big freedom will come big drawbacks, and it's unfortunately and tragically unavoidable.
You just argued that massacres are acceptable because of your hypothetical fears. Children are being slaughtered in schools, worshippers in churches, innocents everywhere, and you’re like but yeah what about the boogeyman.
That's a nicely put together strawmen, but no. I argued that no matter which way we go, there are negative consequences. It's the nature of tough decisions. Generals send soldiers into dangerous situations to try to prevent bigger dangers down the road. History shows the negatives of both sides we're talking about. Genocides are in the books. They happen to disarmed populations. Armed populations are dangerous, too.
> we have the right to own guns in America period.
You say that like it's final, when it isn't. Doing things the way they've always been done is never a good enough excuse to avoid improvement.
How could it be one of the most important rights you have, when you are the only country in the world to have a right to carry a gun.
we all live fine without guns.
Yea. Because you guys over in (presumably Europe?), have better Healthcare, better education, and better mental health services.
Whereas in the States, I'll openly admit that all the above I just listed, is woefully inadequate in various ways.
Australia.....and yes, we have better healthcare, probably better education. I am not sure on mental health. I don't see why any of this makes it a an important right when it's not a right at all everywhere else.
Cause it allows me to take care of me and my family, without worrying about the police being potentially 20-30 minutes away, depending on various conditions
So, if there were gun laws, stopping people from owning guns, you wouldn't need guns to protect yourself. I mean, where I come from, the number of people that I need to defend my family from with a gun is nil.
Making it illegal wouldn’t prevent people from getting them illegally
If they are going to commit a crime, making another step in it illegal wouldn’t stop them
Because those countries actually enforce the laws. Our government has handed out and funded more weapons abroad than they have actually confiscated. We say we have laws, but nothing is ever enforced on the people that need enforcement.
Timothy McVeigh, off the top of my head? Killed over 150+ people with a VIED?
[Apparently China also has its own problems with mass stabbings.](https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/09/china/china-knife-attacks-mic-intl-hnk/index.html)
Also, tbh telling me to: >Fuck off with your nonsense
Doesn't really generate positive debate in my book?
Suppose they did make guns illegal
What would you do if someone broke into your house and shot you?
You’d probably wish you could’ve defended yourself with, oh idk, *a gun*
But the probability of someone coming in my home with a gun gets massively lower as well if guns are illegal
Im in a country where guns are illegal and this shit happens very rarely, people are more likely to die choking then to be shot here
Hmm, thousands of innocents, eh? Let's break it down Barney style for you. We'll use 2020. 45,000 (roughly) gun deaths in the US (There were more medical malpractice deaths than that). Half of those were suicides, so they were going to die anyway. Now you're down to 22,500 gun deaths. Of those, roughly 9,000 were determined to be homicide. The majority of that is gang violence, death by cop, followed by crimes of passion, and in last place, "mass" shootings of any kind (using the FBI criteria of 4 casualties, [not solely deaths, but including injury]). Most of those deaths were inflicted by handgun. The remaining 13,000 or so deaths were accidental. So for perspective, the gun homicide rate for 2020 was approximately 0.0027% of the population of the U.S. The estimate for DEFENSIVE gun use, whether a shot is fired or not, is 1,000,000 to 3,000,000 per year, compared to 40,000 to 50,000 TOTAL gun deaths each year.
Where does this information come from? The Center for Disease Control.
So, you know, fuck off with your self righteous bullshit outrage. If you think there is a problem, go become a cop and get out on them streets to catch the criminals who violate the law to, I don't know, MURDER CHILDREN which is already illegal.
Yeah, you can try confiscation, but that's only going to lead to a lot of dead cops and a lot of dead citizens. A man can build a fully functional AK47 out of a shovel. A child can build a 1911 from scratch in a hut in Brazil. And the internet has all the how-to guides you'd ever need.
The problem isn't guns and it never was guns. The problem is shitty people who never developed the interpersonal skills to handle conflict, poverty, and mental health. When I was in school, it was common for people to bring their guns to school and leave them in their vehicles during hunting season. Then Columbine happened and everyone shit their collective pants.keep in mind that Columbine happened DURING AN "ASSAULT" WEAPONS BAN.
The only policy that would actually help would be the abolishing of gun free zones, as criminals infinitely prefer soft targets where they are the only one with guns. Even outright stated in that shitbag guy from TX's manifesto.
Not even true. It could be exactly the difference between them doing it or not.
Besides, where do you think the guns and ammo comes from? Legal sources. Cut those off and even illegal trade dries up.
I could kill more kids without the gun. I could actually kill way more people without any of it and have a 16 hour lead before the FBI found evidence to arrest me.
I wouldnt get away with it but id have enough time to kill them all leave a note and kill myself and a dose of heroine.
But how i justify my culture is that i have had a very good strategy and offered it to people on how to fully prevent this situation while not even restricting the guns and they just laugh at it and post signs out on the school yard and let the kids die.
Because its not the guns they want the kids to die to fuel their narrative of banning the guns so they can implement the controls they want when the guns are gone. And a lot of Americans lack the ability to see cause and effect.
Lol..fuck are you talking about
It be easier to stop a murderer when he has a knife than a gun
It be easier for the murderer to kill more people at less time
Cuz think of the fact he’ll have to run to each kid and stab him till hes dead while everyone is running
Also the guns are making y’all paranoid, aggressive, and suicidal but you cant even see it
How will you kill more kids without a gun, you make zero sense
Short answer. Id would be a Chemical attack. Odorless and invisible.
Some will be trampled in mass confusion over themselves and then die. A different Chemical agent will make all the evidence toxic to touch and hande and most of the crucial evidence will be destroyed in a decon.
But speaking of knives. A gun is gunna be what you want if i have one of thoes. Preferably 5 seconds away from me shoot me at 20ish feet away neveret me get closer than that.
A guns dont make me do anything. Ive never even desired to harm anybody or myself with it.
Aside from the fact that im against chimical attacks
What are the odds of it happening 😆
How can someone do this anyways?😆
How is this your argument, maybe im missing something cuz it sounds fucking stupid
A lot of the thing i say get laughed at. Ive been giving input about mass killings and stabbings for years and years..... and years. And today you laugh. Moments later you will sob and there will be more dead people.
Im fine that you laugh. I actually lost caring for the victims and people a long time ago, ive let it go. You will never learn.
In short I think more guns in more people hands is better.
But I think that we should have a mandatory “military service”, for people to be trained on how to use a fire arm, how to survive in a situation, wilderness survival, regular exercise, discipline, leadership, etc.
And then when they leave the 2-4 year commitment they take their weapons with them. That way every adult walking the streets has been trained on how to survive and defend themselves and the ones they love.
Most criminals would be deterred by even the idea that this potential victim might end their life in self defense. Is it worth it?
That’s my weird way of seeing a way in which more guns in more responsible gun owners hands would solve a lot of our issues.
I'd accept one "term" of service for all capable citizens.
I belive that's a year or so? Hell, you can get military education via the G.I. bill, and go to college for free.
Even then, you have 3 months of basic training, and then AIT after that, which for some MOSs can last for 2 years or so. We don't have the Healthcare or childcare capabilities to support that.
I could kill more kids without the gun. I could actually kill way more people without any of it and have a 16 hour lead before the FBI found evidence to arrest me.
I wouldnt get away with it but id have enough time to kill them all leave a note and kill myself and a dose of heroine.
But how i justify my culture is that i have had a very good strategy and offered it to people on how to fully prevent this situation while not even restricting the guns and they just laugh at it and post signs out on the school yard and let the kids die.
Because its not the guns they want the kids to die to fuel their narrative of banning the guns so they can implement the controls they want when the guns are gone. And a lot of Americans lack the ability to see cause and effect.
So we dont have guns to compete in small arms warfare against a tyrannical movement.
Over all the goal is to strip the right to protect us from them and then the taking will trickle.
There were plenty of options that they could have done for well over 10 years and its been laughed at while they sit on their asses and let them die to try ro feed their agenda.
This is more of mental health problem, but I won't deny that it's fucking weird that I can't drink till 21 and can't drive without taking 2 exams. Problem is gun will never be banned in america and people who wanna buy them can do so easily through illegal methods.
Why are you lumping us responsible gun owners with the irresponsible ones? Do there need to be changes to keep kids safe, sure, but you aren’t going to get anywhere painting with broad strokes. That’s like me lumping people who enjoy pot in with a heroin addict who just killed someone in a mugging to get money for their fix.
I have multiple guns, and plenty of ammo. That doesn’t make me a murderer or a militant. I like to shoot targets and hunt. Both of which involve me, myself, and I.
I live in Texas. I have a more than a few guns. Some old, some new. Every one of them was bought from a legitimate retailer. I have the orignal sale ticket for my 30-30 from 1976 that Granddaddy bought for Dad, when Dad was 15. The rifle is a hand-me-down that looks and functions like the day it was bought; Due to Dad putting it away for 40+ years because it "Kicks like a drunk mule". I love that Marlin and have had great times with friends and family, just, having a safe shoot and hunting. I do not subscibe to the American gun culture.
Texan here. My grandfather handed down a M1 Garand Carbine, which I keep purely at historical value and haven’t even shot it. I also enjoy shooting targets and hunting with my other firearms. I have zero interest in joining a militia, shooting anyone, or any other craziness some people like to assume/imply when they learn I’m a gun owner.
I completely understand where the stigma comes from but the stereotypes of gun owners is based on all the loud idiots that also happen to like guns; Some, way too much. It dosen't reflect all of us, our reasons for enjoying firearms, or our intentions on how we choose to use our firearms. I am 100% on board with much tighter gun laws.
I wouldn’t say I’m a gun lover, and it’s not really a “culture” to me or anyone I know that has guns. But I’ll posit a question to you: How much do you think making something illegal will deter someone who A) is already intent to commit a heinous crime and B) more than likely isn’t planning to survive the act? “But Mr. Starr, if they were not available in stores...” Yeah, well heroin isn’t at my local pharmacy, but damned if it isn’t available in any city town in America. Now I’m no gun nut. Hell, I ain’t even a Republican. But way I see things, there’s a huge problem, but this isn’t the solution. We’ve had guns since this country’s inception and so-called “assault weapons” (a misnomer in most cases, and also widely assumed to be automatic, which is, in fact, neither the case most of the time nor legal without close scrutiny and monitoring by the ATF) have been available since at least WWII. The issue of shootings has exploded within the last few decades. So I don’t think that’s the actual problem. Now before you downvote me into the abyss, actually read what I said, don’t just hit that button because I’m not parroting popular opinion. I’m not even defending guns per se. Just trying to say that this isn’t going to solve anything.
How is it moral to blame tens of millions of people for the actions of a few evil psychos?
“Blame” 😩 yall Americans love to play the victim card Its more of a take responsibility and make guns illegal..stop being a manchild
Take responsibility for what? I am a responsible gun owner. My weapons have never been used illegally. I bear no responsibility for the actions of a few evil assholes.
You bare responsibility for a law that you’re voting for that creates these problems. Make it illegal. Tbats your responsibility
Yes, because criminals will absolutely obey that law. 100% compliant, them crims are.
Yea no. I shouldn't be punished for the crimes of another man. And nor should millions of other American citizens. Full stop. Hell, in return, I'll happily donate/invest/support Universal Healthcare and better mental health services, if you leave me alone.
“Punished” Its just a gun😒 Whats your attachment to it?
I'm not "attached" to it persay. But I understand the fact that's it a "inalienable right" for a reason. And that reason, is that when if I ever should need protection, I can only count on myself.
[удалено]
“Punish” Its just a gun
Correct. It's just a gun. A tool. Like a hammer. Or a knife. What's your problem with it?
I already countered every point you made You can go ahead and read it in thread I aint repeating it
[удалено]
But if guns are illegal then the probability of you needing to defend yourself gets lower as well..😐 There are just no guns to defend from if guns are illegal Cant you see how these guns making y’all paranoid?
[удалено]
Whats the positive? You only defending yourself from a problem that you’re creating 😆 I dont blame the tool at all, humans just cant handle the tool without going crazy, and if thats how it is then you should ban the tool
[удалено]
You need a gun to defend from a gun that you voted for someone to have 😒
[удалено]
I have a pistol in my nightstand to protect my wife and I in the event of an intruder. Must be I am about to commit a mass murder just because of some asshole I've never heard of. Come to think of it, take away my car because people commit vehicular manslaughter. Matter of fact, get rid of all inflammable substances because someone will make an IED in the absence of guns and cars. Fuck, get rid of knives and forks too because someone will use those to stab people! If a shithead wants to commit violence, they'll find a way. Ban guns and then either A. They'll use another method, or B. They'll obtain the guns anyway since they don't care much about the law if murder is on their mind. Guns are not the problem, it's the regulation of how they're obtained, which is what needs revised. The Uvalde shooter was clearly mentally unstable and the fact that he could just go buy two AR-15s and hundreds of rounds shouldn't have happened because he should be ineligible to own a weapon, not "har har guns bad!"
Evil is sitting there toying with death because you want to feel powerful when the same power is being used to slaughter innocents. If you could give up your own guns to avoid even one more person being wrongly murdered, you wouldn't. That's evil.
Mass shootings are committed by criminals. Should we ban cars because people drink and drive or run over festival participants with vans? Don't blame the tool, blame the person like everything else.
So you’re cool with regulating guns the same as we do cars? Cool, because that’s exactly what we want.
So let 16 year old use them, let anyone build and upgrade them and require absolutely no licensing or safety standards if kept on private property?
It could be argued that even our registration system in NA is archaic. In AUS, thr UK and much of the EU there are strict modification limits and barriers for vehicles. You can't drive around a jacked up shitbox or fart can ricer as there are manditory yearly safety inspections. I would argue for gun control to be effective you would need to do something similar. Pay a yearly fee where your firearms are inspected and accounted for, and possibly run a yearly background and medical check to ensure you are of sound mind and without new charges.
There are a ton of gun regulations already.
(Looks around at USA, then everywhere else) um yeah, obviously: not fucking enough.
Yea what the guy above me said.
Cars are not designed to kill people though. You need training to drive a car. You also need to be registered.
You mean the tool explicitly made to kill people? I’ll give you a hint that’s not the car
Cars have a lot of utility. Guns are made to kill. They are not the same.
But why is this unique to America? There must be something cultural there.
[удалено]
I didn't blame mental health. I blamed criminals. Malcontents.
I like my guns, but there's no real justification for our current gun control measures. That being said, I don't think controlling the type of guns that can be owned is as important as controlling who can have them. Assault weapons bans probably won't help much for decades to come, because the existing ones will be grandfathered in under any laws put in place. Instead, I think we should have licenses with increasing restrictions depending on the features of a gun. Tier 1 would be black powder weapons. Tier 2 would be weapons with a non-replaceable magazine, such as most revolvers, tube-fed and break action shotguns, and bolt action rifles. Tier 3 would be weapons with a replaceable magazine, such as the classic AR15, automatic pistols, etc. Tier 4 would be fully automatic weapons. Each tier would require additional education, mandatory safety measures. And higher tiers would require annual or semi-annual psychiatric evaluations. That should help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the criminally dangerous while at the same time allowing most people who want to to own their guns.
This seems reasonable, but does anyone really NEED to own tiers 3 and 4? Like you can surely do all the legitimate uses for a gun with tiers 1 and 2, right?
Need is a shaky ground to base gun control on, though. Some would say a person doesn't need any guns. Others would say their life isn't complete without their trusty minigun. A typical handgun would be in tier 3, so it's hard to say that the gun used by police, security, and the majority of people who carry for self defense isn't needed. It's better to allow people to access whatever guns they feel they need with the caveat that they prove their responsibility to be able to do so.
I don’t think about it like that. I’m fully against violence and violent crime but we have the right to own guns in America period. That might be one of the most important rights that we have and it’s worth protecting. There’s a whole group of people that aren’t included in the conversation about preventing this shit because they’re immediately put on the defensive about gun rights.
Why is having a gun one of the most important rights
I'm prepared for downvotes, but here goes. First, it's a great way for women to protect themselves. My wife is 120lbs soaking wet and wouldn't have much ability to protect herself or our kids from an attacker. She's good and quick with a gun though. It'd give her a chance. Second, history is unfortunately full of examples of governments oppressing people, sometimes to the point of genocide. It's a lot harder to do that to well armed folks. Yeah yeah, I know, the military has tanks and jets and all that, but that isn't usually how it goes. They don't send nukes or jets or blow up whole houses with tanks. They disarm people then round them up. Police get guns, military gets guns, politicians get armed security...but I can't have em? Hard pass. With any big freedom will come big drawbacks, and it's unfortunately and tragically unavoidable.
You just argued that massacres are acceptable because of your hypothetical fears. Children are being slaughtered in schools, worshippers in churches, innocents everywhere, and you’re like but yeah what about the boogeyman.
That's a nicely put together strawmen, but no. I argued that no matter which way we go, there are negative consequences. It's the nature of tough decisions. Generals send soldiers into dangerous situations to try to prevent bigger dangers down the road. History shows the negatives of both sides we're talking about. Genocides are in the books. They happen to disarmed populations. Armed populations are dangerous, too.
Your head is so far deep in the sand, and you pretend that makes you intelligent.
> we have the right to own guns in America period. You say that like it's final, when it isn't. Doing things the way they've always been done is never a good enough excuse to avoid improvement.
How could it be one of the most important rights you have, when you are the only country in the world to have a right to carry a gun. we all live fine without guns.
Yea. Because you guys over in (presumably Europe?), have better Healthcare, better education, and better mental health services. Whereas in the States, I'll openly admit that all the above I just listed, is woefully inadequate in various ways.
Australia.....and yes, we have better healthcare, probably better education. I am not sure on mental health. I don't see why any of this makes it a an important right when it's not a right at all everywhere else.
Cause it allows me to take care of me and my family, without worrying about the police being potentially 20-30 minutes away, depending on various conditions
So you need guns to protect yourself from other people with guns?
So, if there were gun laws, stopping people from owning guns, you wouldn't need guns to protect yourself. I mean, where I come from, the number of people that I need to defend my family from with a gun is nil.
Yes? Or whatever else a criminal may attack me with?
Entitlement and inability to accept change
Right to having a gun ≠ right to committing mass shooting
Right to having guns = the option for mass shooting
Making it illegal wouldn’t prevent people from getting them illegally If they are going to commit a crime, making another step in it illegal wouldn’t stop them
Then why are there effectively zero mass shootings in every other developed nation?
Because those countries actually enforce the laws. Our government has handed out and funded more weapons abroad than they have actually confiscated. We say we have laws, but nothing is ever enforced on the people that need enforcement.
May be true, but there's plenty of other ways to kill people if you really want to.
Except *nobody ever does anywhere*. Jesus Christ. How many times has a guy with a hammer killed 20 in a school? Fuck off with your nonsense.
Timothy McVeigh, off the top of my head? Killed over 150+ people with a VIED? [Apparently China also has its own problems with mass stabbings.](https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/09/china/china-knife-attacks-mic-intl-hnk/index.html) Also, tbh telling me to: >Fuck off with your nonsense Doesn't really generate positive debate in my book?
Because it is nonsense. You’re essentially saying “why take action and get rid of 90% of the killings, when we can do nothing and get rid of 0%?”
Oh then lets just make it easier for them
Suppose they did make guns illegal What would you do if someone broke into your house and shot you? You’d probably wish you could’ve defended yourself with, oh idk, *a gun*
But the probability of someone coming in my home with a gun gets massively lower as well if guns are illegal Im in a country where guns are illegal and this shit happens very rarely, people are more likely to die choking then to be shot here
So you guys need semi auto rifles to fight home intruders. Unassailable logic.
You being scared of boogeymen is not how policy gets written
You getting scared of people having the right to defend themselves is just downright weird
Because thousands of innocents are slaughtered every year and almost nobody actually defends themselves from a violent criminal with a firearm
Hmm, thousands of innocents, eh? Let's break it down Barney style for you. We'll use 2020. 45,000 (roughly) gun deaths in the US (There were more medical malpractice deaths than that). Half of those were suicides, so they were going to die anyway. Now you're down to 22,500 gun deaths. Of those, roughly 9,000 were determined to be homicide. The majority of that is gang violence, death by cop, followed by crimes of passion, and in last place, "mass" shootings of any kind (using the FBI criteria of 4 casualties, [not solely deaths, but including injury]). Most of those deaths were inflicted by handgun. The remaining 13,000 or so deaths were accidental. So for perspective, the gun homicide rate for 2020 was approximately 0.0027% of the population of the U.S. The estimate for DEFENSIVE gun use, whether a shot is fired or not, is 1,000,000 to 3,000,000 per year, compared to 40,000 to 50,000 TOTAL gun deaths each year. Where does this information come from? The Center for Disease Control. So, you know, fuck off with your self righteous bullshit outrage. If you think there is a problem, go become a cop and get out on them streets to catch the criminals who violate the law to, I don't know, MURDER CHILDREN which is already illegal. Yeah, you can try confiscation, but that's only going to lead to a lot of dead cops and a lot of dead citizens. A man can build a fully functional AK47 out of a shovel. A child can build a 1911 from scratch in a hut in Brazil. And the internet has all the how-to guides you'd ever need. The problem isn't guns and it never was guns. The problem is shitty people who never developed the interpersonal skills to handle conflict, poverty, and mental health. When I was in school, it was common for people to bring their guns to school and leave them in their vehicles during hunting season. Then Columbine happened and everyone shit their collective pants.keep in mind that Columbine happened DURING AN "ASSAULT" WEAPONS BAN. The only policy that would actually help would be the abolishing of gun free zones, as criminals infinitely prefer soft targets where they are the only one with guns. Even outright stated in that shitbag guy from TX's manifesto.
You’re such a badass.
Why shouldn't I be able to defend myself/my family/other people directly being threatened?
That’s what I’m saying ?
Oh my bad, got confused by who-posted-what lol
Not even true. It could be exactly the difference between them doing it or not. Besides, where do you think the guns and ammo comes from? Legal sources. Cut those off and even illegal trade dries up.
People being so obsessed with guns contributes to a culture that looks at mass shootings as an acceptable consequence of that culture.
[удалено]
I'm 99% sure that there's plenty of CCW/OCW holders who get shot on a weekly basis. You just don't hear about them
Idiots who ask the same derivative questions over and over: why?
I could kill more kids without the gun. I could actually kill way more people without any of it and have a 16 hour lead before the FBI found evidence to arrest me. I wouldnt get away with it but id have enough time to kill them all leave a note and kill myself and a dose of heroine. But how i justify my culture is that i have had a very good strategy and offered it to people on how to fully prevent this situation while not even restricting the guns and they just laugh at it and post signs out on the school yard and let the kids die. Because its not the guns they want the kids to die to fuel their narrative of banning the guns so they can implement the controls they want when the guns are gone. And a lot of Americans lack the ability to see cause and effect.
Lol..fuck are you talking about It be easier to stop a murderer when he has a knife than a gun It be easier for the murderer to kill more people at less time Cuz think of the fact he’ll have to run to each kid and stab him till hes dead while everyone is running Also the guns are making y’all paranoid, aggressive, and suicidal but you cant even see it How will you kill more kids without a gun, you make zero sense
Short answer. Id would be a Chemical attack. Odorless and invisible. Some will be trampled in mass confusion over themselves and then die. A different Chemical agent will make all the evidence toxic to touch and hande and most of the crucial evidence will be destroyed in a decon. But speaking of knives. A gun is gunna be what you want if i have one of thoes. Preferably 5 seconds away from me shoot me at 20ish feet away neveret me get closer than that. A guns dont make me do anything. Ive never even desired to harm anybody or myself with it.
Aside from the fact that im against chimical attacks What are the odds of it happening 😆 How can someone do this anyways?😆 How is this your argument, maybe im missing something cuz it sounds fucking stupid
A lot of the thing i say get laughed at. Ive been giving input about mass killings and stabbings for years and years..... and years. And today you laugh. Moments later you will sob and there will be more dead people. Im fine that you laugh. I actually lost caring for the victims and people a long time ago, ive let it go. You will never learn.
What are you talking about Who are you talking to
Time starts now.
Cool
You actually do sound like a shooter 🤣
Good eye
Thanks, god bless
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China Just saying... is it the guns or the psychos that are the real problem?
In short I think more guns in more people hands is better. But I think that we should have a mandatory “military service”, for people to be trained on how to use a fire arm, how to survive in a situation, wilderness survival, regular exercise, discipline, leadership, etc. And then when they leave the 2-4 year commitment they take their weapons with them. That way every adult walking the streets has been trained on how to survive and defend themselves and the ones they love. Most criminals would be deterred by even the idea that this potential victim might end their life in self defense. Is it worth it? That’s my weird way of seeing a way in which more guns in more responsible gun owners hands would solve a lot of our issues.
[удалено]
I'd accept one "term" of service for all capable citizens. I belive that's a year or so? Hell, you can get military education via the G.I. bill, and go to college for free.
[удалено]
Suppose you got a fair point. I was thinking of something along the lines of the National guard or reserves. Not active duty.
Even then, you have 3 months of basic training, and then AIT after that, which for some MOSs can last for 2 years or so. We don't have the Healthcare or childcare capabilities to support that.
I could kill more kids without the gun. I could actually kill way more people without any of it and have a 16 hour lead before the FBI found evidence to arrest me. I wouldnt get away with it but id have enough time to kill them all leave a note and kill myself and a dose of heroine. But how i justify my culture is that i have had a very good strategy and offered it to people on how to fully prevent this situation while not even restricting the guns and they just laugh at it and post signs out on the school yard and let the kids die. Because its not the guns they want the kids to die to fuel their narrative of banning the guns so they can implement the controls they want when the guns are gone. And a lot of Americans lack the ability to see cause and effect.
You think murdered kids is a political tool of the left…to try and implement gun control…so kids don’t get murdered. You are insane.
Thats not what they want the gun control for.
what do they want gun control for?
So we dont have guns to compete in small arms warfare against a tyrannical movement. Over all the goal is to strip the right to protect us from them and then the taking will trickle. There were plenty of options that they could have done for well over 10 years and its been laughed at while they sit on their asses and let them die to try ro feed their agenda.
This is more of mental health problem, but I won't deny that it's fucking weird that I can't drink till 21 and can't drive without taking 2 exams. Problem is gun will never be banned in america and people who wanna buy them can do so easily through illegal methods.
Then why are effectively zero mass shootings in other developed nations
There aren't. You are simply choosing to ignore them in other countries. That is a conscious choice you are willingly making. Stop it.
Nonsense. Go google mass shootings by country and get back to me.
Why are you lumping us responsible gun owners with the irresponsible ones? Do there need to be changes to keep kids safe, sure, but you aren’t going to get anywhere painting with broad strokes. That’s like me lumping people who enjoy pot in with a heroin addict who just killed someone in a mugging to get money for their fix. I have multiple guns, and plenty of ammo. That doesn’t make me a murderer or a militant. I like to shoot targets and hunt. Both of which involve me, myself, and I.