Mass Shooting in El Paso, Texas

motogrady
Posts
3931
Joined
1/27/2008
Location
WV US
8/8/2019 8:25am
Beeby wrote:
Georgia has a group of people that think they are preparing for the day the government needs to be controlled?! Why doesn’t that surprise me?! Oh...
Georgia has a group of people that think they are preparing for the day the government needs to be controlled?! Why doesn’t that surprise me?!

Oh and they have guns too! Again, shocker.

People. The government and these groups lock heads, the government are turning up in full military force. Doesn’t matter how many guns you and your working men’s club have, they’ll hose you down.

Preparing for protecting the people of America from the tyranny of the government is just like telling yourself you eat carrots to see in the dark.
Bebey has an opinion hey hey hey!
Yep, it ain't fo everbody...this livin in the USA!

https://youtu.be/TybkYXx1FAQ

Somebody get me a cheeseburger!
1
1
Barrett57
Posts
2270
Joined
8/31/2010
Location
GB
8/8/2019 8:36am
SCR wrote:
What country is that?
The country that within living memory murdered 11 million people it deemed sub-human.
1
2
Falcon
Posts
10129
Joined
11/16/2011
Location
Menifee, CA US
Fantasy
856th
8/8/2019 8:49am Edited Date/Time 8/8/2019 8:50am
I don't usually get too involved in the gun discussions because.... well, read above for 11 pages. (EDIT: 9 pages.)

However, I'd like to point out the flaw I perceive in CM_84's logic. He states that he doesn't live in a country with such a shitty government that he needs to arm himself against it. Well, congratulations I say. To be honest, I don't feel the need to defend myself against the U.S. Government, either. But what about this: what if your government changes to something less desirable? What if you get an elected leader or a group that decides not to cede power when the allotted term is up? What if that person or group in power decides to assassinate all opposing parties? Levy unrealistic and unsustainable taxes on you? Quarter troops in your house? Demand your firstborn be drafted into the army? Kill you and sell your daughters into slavery? You may think I'm being hyperbolic here, but all of the atrocities I mention above have been committed by governments in the past. Some of them are happening today.

Folks, we can rely on the kindness of strangers and other countries to defend our freedoms or we can do it ourselves. THIS is the reason for the 2nd amendment, and our founding fathers put those rules in place to assure government by the people would survive. Guns are not about protection in your house, or hunting, or " 'Murica." The 2nd amendment is about preserving every other amendment on the Constitution.

There is truly only one thing that keeps those in power from abusing said power: the fear of losing it. Private gun ownership is a means to that end.
5
CM_84
Posts
764
Joined
8/3/2018
Location
AU
8/8/2019 9:09am
SCR wrote:
What country is that?
Barrett57 wrote:
The country that within living memory murdered 11 million people it deemed sub-human.
I lived in Germany when I made this account. I now live in Australia

However I was being facetious. My point was we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical governments taking all of our shit any more.
My second point was, the US doesn’t have mental illness at dramatically higher rates than the rest of the world, yet it does have mass shootings at dramatically higher rates than the rest of the world.

The US is a great country, just like most modern societies.

The Shop

Beeby
Posts
1520
Joined
9/3/2009
Location
Chicago, IL US
8/8/2019 9:47am
Beeby wrote:
Georgia has a group of people that think they are preparing for the day the government needs to be controlled?! Why doesn’t that surprise me?! Oh...
Georgia has a group of people that think they are preparing for the day the government needs to be controlled?! Why doesn’t that surprise me?!

Oh and they have guns too! Again, shocker.

People. The government and these groups lock heads, the government are turning up in full military force. Doesn’t matter how many guns you and your working men’s club have, they’ll hose you down.

Preparing for protecting the people of America from the tyranny of the government is just like telling yourself you eat carrots to see in the dark.
motogrady wrote:
Bebey has an opinion hey hey hey!
Yep, it ain't fo everbody...this livin in the USA!

https://youtu.be/TybkYXx1FAQ

Somebody get me a cheeseburger!
I'd go as far as to say its fact, rather than opinion. No one in the public is going to overturn the US government.

If there is a chance of it, we need to really worry because our military is designed to protect us from other countries military, not our own people. All my tax money is wasted.
8/8/2019 9:59am
Falcon wrote:
I don't usually get too involved in the gun discussions because.... well, read above for 11 pages. (EDIT: 9 pages.) However, I'd like to point out...
I don't usually get too involved in the gun discussions because.... well, read above for 11 pages. (EDIT: 9 pages.)

However, I'd like to point out the flaw I perceive in CM_84's logic. He states that he doesn't live in a country with such a shitty government that he needs to arm himself against it. Well, congratulations I say. To be honest, I don't feel the need to defend myself against the U.S. Government, either. But what about this: what if your government changes to something less desirable? What if you get an elected leader or a group that decides not to cede power when the allotted term is up? What if that person or group in power decides to assassinate all opposing parties? Levy unrealistic and unsustainable taxes on you? Quarter troops in your house? Demand your firstborn be drafted into the army? Kill you and sell your daughters into slavery? You may think I'm being hyperbolic here, but all of the atrocities I mention above have been committed by governments in the past. Some of them are happening today.

Folks, we can rely on the kindness of strangers and other countries to defend our freedoms or we can do it ourselves. THIS is the reason for the 2nd amendment, and our founding fathers put those rules in place to assure government by the people would survive. Guns are not about protection in your house, or hunting, or " 'Murica." The 2nd amendment is about preserving every other amendment on the Constitution.

There is truly only one thing that keeps those in power from abusing said power: the fear of losing it. Private gun ownership is a means to that end.

2
SCR
Posts
1090
Joined
12/10/2009
Location
CA US
8/8/2019 10:04am
SCR wrote:
What country is that?
Barrett57 wrote:
The country that within living memory murdered 11 million people it deemed sub-human.
CM_84 wrote:
I lived in Germany when I made this account. I now live in Australia However I was being facetious. My point was we don’t live in...
I lived in Germany when I made this account. I now live in Australia

However I was being facetious. My point was we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical governments taking all of our shit any more.
My second point was, the US doesn’t have mental illness at dramatically higher rates than the rest of the world, yet it does have mass shootings at dramatically higher rates than the rest of the world.

The US is a great country, just like most modern societies.
That's what everyone thinks right before the tyrannical Govt takes all your shit.
2
borg
Posts
5753
Joined
12/7/2009
Location
Long Beach, CA US
8/8/2019 10:06am
Point of personal preference: look up the phrase posse comitatus. It will advise you that the US military by law is not allowed to operate on US soil with regards to domestic issues.
2
Gworm
Posts
1628
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
8/8/2019 10:55am Edited Date/Time 8/8/2019 11:02am
Edge of adhesion,

Consider this before you talk about paranoia.


Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Mao Tze Tung, communist dictator of China said:

“War can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun.”

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Idi Amin, president of Uganda from 1971 to 1979, said:

“I do not want to be controlled by any superpower. I myself consider myself the most powerful figure in the world, and that is why I do not let any superpower control me.”

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Pol Pot, who created in Cambodia one of the 20th century’s most brutal and radical regimes, was responsible for killing one million of his own ‘educated,’ yet unarmed citizens

Now look at the corruption we are seeing in our own FBI leadership that was put in place under Obama.
2
2
early
Posts
8290
Joined
2/13/2013
Location
University Heights, OH US
Fantasy
2231st
8/8/2019 11:05am
Gworm wrote:
Edge of adhesion, Consider this before you talk about paranoia. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others...
Edge of adhesion,

Consider this before you talk about paranoia.


Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Mao Tze Tung, communist dictator of China said:

“War can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun.”

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Idi Amin, president of Uganda from 1971 to 1979, said:

“I do not want to be controlled by any superpower. I myself consider myself the most powerful figure in the world, and that is why I do not let any superpower control me.”

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Pol Pot, who created in Cambodia one of the 20th century’s most brutal and radical regimes, was responsible for killing one million of his own ‘educated,’ yet unarmed citizens

Now look at the corruption we are seeing in our own FBI leadership that was put in place under Obama.
You put lawful investigation of high ranking government officials under the same umbrella of corruption as Nazi genocide of Jews and Chinese round ups of dissidents (which is currently happening)?

Wow
1
1
Gworm
Posts
1628
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
8/8/2019 11:15am
No, I don’t consider it the same, never thought it would be interpreted that way. Sorry.

But those investigations are being proven to be BS. Look at all the bias in the FBI leadership. That is just an example of something I would have never thought would happen in this country.
ns503
Posts
3992
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
NS Toolies CA
8/8/2019 11:17am
Practically every other civilized country in the world with a form of democratic government has absolutely no issues, without having a second ammendment. Why does the US need it so badly?

Is there even any other country in the world that has such a thing?

The paranoia is rather mind boggling...

1
early
Posts
8290
Joined
2/13/2013
Location
University Heights, OH US
Fantasy
2231st
8/8/2019 11:24am
Gworm wrote:
No, I don’t consider it the same, never thought it would be interpreted that way. Sorry. But those investigations are being proven to be BS. Look...
No, I don’t consider it the same, never thought it would be interpreted that way. Sorry.

But those investigations are being proven to be BS. Look at all the bias in the FBI leadership. That is just an example of something I would have never thought would happen in this country.
I am of the opinion that every high ranking official should be investigated in the same way. Pres, Vice Pres, party leaders in the House and Senate. Same thing with the IRS. You know people in the upper tax brackets are less likely to be audited than people who file a 1040ez. If you fill out the simple tax form your information is run through programs that can find anomolies in the data and red flag it, but the rich filers are so complex there isn't enough staff to really look through them as well as they should.
1
Gworm
Posts
1628
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
8/8/2019 11:27am Edited Date/Time 8/8/2019 11:32am
Gworm wrote:
No, I don’t consider it the same, never thought it would be interpreted that way. Sorry. But those investigations are being proven to be BS. Look...
No, I don’t consider it the same, never thought it would be interpreted that way. Sorry.

But those investigations are being proven to be BS. Look at all the bias in the FBI leadership. That is just an example of something I would have never thought would happen in this country.
early wrote:
I am of the opinion that every high ranking official should be investigated in the same way. Pres, Vice Pres, party leaders in the House and...
I am of the opinion that every high ranking official should be investigated in the same way. Pres, Vice Pres, party leaders in the House and Senate. Same thing with the IRS. You know people in the upper tax brackets are less likely to be audited than people who file a 1040ez. If you fill out the simple tax form your information is run through programs that can find anomolies in the data and red flag it, but the rich filers are so complex there isn't enough staff to really look through them as well as they should.
I agree, investigate the same way. But that’s not what has been going on. If you”ll notice, in the original post, I didn’t say anything about the investigation, just the corruption.
early
Posts
8290
Joined
2/13/2013
Location
University Heights, OH US
Fantasy
2231st
8/8/2019 11:43am Edited Date/Time 8/8/2019 4:32pm
Gworm wrote:
I agree, investigate the same way. But that’s not what has been going on. If you”ll notice, in the original post, I didn’t say anything about...
I agree, investigate the same way. But that’s not what has been going on. If you”ll notice, in the original post, I didn’t say anything about the investigation, just the corruption.
Not gonna go into it anymore as far as corruption goes.
motogrady
Posts
3931
Joined
1/27/2008
Location
WV US
8/8/2019 12:09pm
Gworm wrote:
Edge of adhesion, Consider this before you talk about paranoia. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others...
Edge of adhesion,

Consider this before you talk about paranoia.


Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Mao Tze Tung, communist dictator of China said:

“War can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun.”

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Idi Amin, president of Uganda from 1971 to 1979, said:

“I do not want to be controlled by any superpower. I myself consider myself the most powerful figure in the world, and that is why I do not let any superpower control me.”

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Pol Pot, who created in Cambodia one of the 20th century’s most brutal and radical regimes, was responsible for killing one million of his own ‘educated,’ yet unarmed citizens

Now look at the corruption we are seeing in our own FBI leadership that was put in place under Obama.
early wrote:
You put lawful investigation of high ranking government officials under the same umbrella of corruption as Nazi genocide of Jews and Chinese round ups of dissidents...
You put lawful investigation of high ranking government officials under the same umbrella of corruption as Nazi genocide of Jews and Chinese round ups of dissidents (which is currently happening)?

Wow
And you ignore the examples of pol pot, Idi Amin, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao?

No, the way Barry jammed his agenda down our throats at the 11th hour, the stuff the squad of 3 wants to do, the above fbi behavior, to just sit back
with your head in the sand is, just, I dunno, wow.

If the powers that be would just kinda let it ride,
that's one thing. But it never ends. They always want more and more, and not from themselves. From the ones that actually work.
They're kinda like a cancer when you think about it.

Hence the need for the checks public guns provide.

Laughing Hopefully it never comes to this.....oh.....but maybe it's already begun?


https://youtu.be/ZwMVMbmQBug
early
Posts
8290
Joined
2/13/2013
Location
University Heights, OH US
Fantasy
2231st
8/8/2019 12:23pm
motogrady wrote:
And you ignore the examples of pol pot, Idi Amin, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao? No, the way Barry jammed his agenda down our throats at the...
And you ignore the examples of pol pot, Idi Amin, Hitler, Stalin, and Mao?

No, the way Barry jammed his agenda down our throats at the 11th hour, the stuff the squad of 3 wants to do, the above fbi behavior, to just sit back
with your head in the sand is, just, I dunno, wow.

If the powers that be would just kinda let it ride,
that's one thing. But it never ends. They always want more and more, and not from themselves. From the ones that actually work.
They're kinda like a cancer when you think about it.

Hence the need for the checks public guns provide.

Laughing Hopefully it never comes to this.....oh.....but maybe it's already begun?


https://youtu.be/ZwMVMbmQBug
Both sides are guilty of horrible ideas. Both sides have some good ideas. My head is not in the sand in regards what is actually happening out there. The trick is seeing through the smoke screen.
1
Falcon
Posts
10129
Joined
11/16/2011
Location
Menifee, CA US
Fantasy
856th
8/8/2019 3:23pm
SCR wrote:
What country is that?
Barrett57 wrote:
The country that within living memory murdered 11 million people it deemed sub-human.
CM_84 wrote:
I lived in Germany when I made this account. I now live in Australia However I was being facetious. My point was we don’t live in...
I lived in Germany when I made this account. I now live in Australia

However I was being facetious. My point was we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical governments taking all of our shit any more.
My second point was, the US doesn’t have mental illness at dramatically higher rates than the rest of the world, yet it does have mass shootings at dramatically higher rates than the rest of the world.

The US is a great country, just like most modern societies.
With utmost respect and out of curiosity, why is it that you say, "...we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical governments taking all of our shit any more."??
haydos25
Posts
1689
Joined
8/4/2010
Location
Sydney AU
Fantasy
3333rd
8/8/2019 4:12pm
Falcon wrote:
With utmost respect and out of curiosity, why is it that you say, "...we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical...
With utmost respect and out of curiosity, why is it that you say, "...we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical governments taking all of our shit any more."??
I feel like these topics always get off track. The original post and the whole gun control debate is centred around the daily mass shootings and thousands of lives lost in the general public due to gun violence and gun culture in america. Not about the potential of a tyranical government and the peoples right to defend themselves against that. Or the actual likelihood of the people to realistically be able to defend themselves in that situation anyways. I do see how the two can be linked though.

I think the only question that needs to be asked is: Is this loss of life an acceptable sacrifice for the right to bear arms?

If the answer in US citizens mind is yes, then the discussion ends now, and there should be no further reporting on it. If the answer is no then the discussion can begin around restrictions, background checks, permits, buy backs, amnestys and other techniques that have been used around the world and how they would be valid or innapropriate for the US.

But from what i see, it seems like in some peoples eyes at least its seen as an unfortunate cost of doing business.
haydos25
Posts
1689
Joined
8/4/2010
Location
Sydney AU
Fantasy
3333rd
8/8/2019 4:23pm
motogrady wrote:
Sure I care about gun safety. Another thing you think you know. I just don't believe the answer is to just throw our hands up and...
Sure I care about gun safety.
Another thing you think you know.
I just don't believe the answer is to just throw our hands up and say here, take these, we are but mere children and don't deserve or need them.

And before you ask what the answers are read the thread. The whole thread.

Now I expect you will throw a few on the barbe, wrestle an alligator or 2, and have a gaday.

It's all you guys do over there, correct?

Oh, and yeah, nobody wants to come here. You have it all figured out.
If your kid keeps hitting his little brother in the head with a baseball bat, do you take the bat off him? Or give a baseball bat to his brother and hope that because now they both have bats neither of them will get hit?

By the way we have crocodiles here, alligators, bigger uglier and more aggresive cousin. If you want to start with the cultural digs at least be accurate mate.
1
Gworm
Posts
1628
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
8/8/2019 5:01pm
Falcon wrote:
With utmost respect and out of curiosity, why is it that you say, "...we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical...
With utmost respect and out of curiosity, why is it that you say, "...we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical governments taking all of our shit any more."??
haydos25 wrote:
I feel like these topics always get off track. The original post and the whole gun control debate is centred around the daily mass shootings and...
I feel like these topics always get off track. The original post and the whole gun control debate is centred around the daily mass shootings and thousands of lives lost in the general public due to gun violence and gun culture in america. Not about the potential of a tyranical government and the peoples right to defend themselves against that. Or the actual likelihood of the people to realistically be able to defend themselves in that situation anyways. I do see how the two can be linked though.

I think the only question that needs to be asked is: Is this loss of life an acceptable sacrifice for the right to bear arms?

If the answer in US citizens mind is yes, then the discussion ends now, and there should be no further reporting on it. If the answer is no then the discussion can begin around restrictions, background checks, permits, buy backs, amnestys and other techniques that have been used around the world and how they would be valid or innapropriate for the US.

But from what i see, it seems like in some peoples eyes at least its seen as an unfortunate cost of doing business.
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But can you show me evidence that the murder rate will be cut? And that’s with the total disappearance of guns.

I think it’s naive to think that criminals won’t still have guns with a ban, though, so even then there would not be a huge difference in gun deaths. There could actually be more, because people would be more vulnerable.

I think it’s total crap to accuse us of being ok with the deaths as the price we are willing to pay to own guns. If you don’t want guns, that’s your choice. Are you ok with not being able to defend your family if needed?
1
CM_84
Posts
764
Joined
8/3/2018
Location
AU
8/8/2019 5:10pm Edited Date/Time 8/8/2019 5:18pm
Falcon wrote:
With utmost respect and out of curiosity, why is it that you say, "...we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical...
With utmost respect and out of curiosity, why is it that you say, "...we don’t live in a society where we have to worry about tyrannical governments taking all of our shit any more."??
haydos25 wrote:
I feel like these topics always get off track. The original post and the whole gun control debate is centred around the daily mass shootings and...
I feel like these topics always get off track. The original post and the whole gun control debate is centred around the daily mass shootings and thousands of lives lost in the general public due to gun violence and gun culture in america. Not about the potential of a tyranical government and the peoples right to defend themselves against that. Or the actual likelihood of the people to realistically be able to defend themselves in that situation anyways. I do see how the two can be linked though.

I think the only question that needs to be asked is: Is this loss of life an acceptable sacrifice for the right to bear arms?

If the answer in US citizens mind is yes, then the discussion ends now, and there should be no further reporting on it. If the answer is no then the discussion can begin around restrictions, background checks, permits, buy backs, amnestys and other techniques that have been used around the world and how they would be valid or innapropriate for the US.

But from what i see, it seems like in some peoples eyes at least its seen as an unfortunate cost of doing business.
Gworm wrote:
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But...
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But can you show me evidence that the murder rate will be cut? And that’s with the total disappearance of guns.

I think it’s naive to think that criminals won’t still have guns with a ban, though, so even then there would not be a huge difference in gun deaths. There could actually be more, because people would be more vulnerable.

I think it’s total crap to accuse us of being ok with the deaths as the price we are willing to pay to own guns. If you don’t want guns, that’s your choice. Are you ok with not being able to defend your family if needed?
Reckon that nutcase in Vegas could have killed 58 people and injured 400+ people with a knife?
How about those kids in Columbine?
I think people find it easier to kill other people with a gun.....just my opinion

The murder rate will never be zero. But let’s try and get it as low as possible.

In Australia both the homicide rate and suicide rate absolutely did drop after the gun laws changed. Other countries have had similar results.

There will always be drink driving deaths, I have never heard anyone say that because it will never be zero let’s just allow people to drink whatever they want and get behind the wheel.
Gworm
Posts
1628
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
8/8/2019 5:13pm
haydos25 wrote:
I feel like these topics always get off track. The original post and the whole gun control debate is centred around the daily mass shootings and...
I feel like these topics always get off track. The original post and the whole gun control debate is centred around the daily mass shootings and thousands of lives lost in the general public due to gun violence and gun culture in america. Not about the potential of a tyranical government and the peoples right to defend themselves against that. Or the actual likelihood of the people to realistically be able to defend themselves in that situation anyways. I do see how the two can be linked though.

I think the only question that needs to be asked is: Is this loss of life an acceptable sacrifice for the right to bear arms?

If the answer in US citizens mind is yes, then the discussion ends now, and there should be no further reporting on it. If the answer is no then the discussion can begin around restrictions, background checks, permits, buy backs, amnestys and other techniques that have been used around the world and how they would be valid or innapropriate for the US.

But from what i see, it seems like in some peoples eyes at least its seen as an unfortunate cost of doing business.
Gworm wrote:
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But...
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But can you show me evidence that the murder rate will be cut? And that’s with the total disappearance of guns.

I think it’s naive to think that criminals won’t still have guns with a ban, though, so even then there would not be a huge difference in gun deaths. There could actually be more, because people would be more vulnerable.

I think it’s total crap to accuse us of being ok with the deaths as the price we are willing to pay to own guns. If you don’t want guns, that’s your choice. Are you ok with not being able to defend your family if needed?
CM_84 wrote:
Reckon that nutcase in Vegas could have killed 58 people and injured 400+ people with a knife? How about those kids in Columbine? I think people...
Reckon that nutcase in Vegas could have killed 58 people and injured 400+ people with a knife?
How about those kids in Columbine?
I think people find it easier to kill other people with a gun.....just my opinion

The murder rate will never be zero. But let’s try and get it as low as possible.

In Australia both the homicide rate and suicide rate absolutely did drop after the gun laws changed. Other countries have had similar results.

There will always be drink driving deaths, I have never heard anyone say that because it will never be zero let’s just allow people to drink whatever they want and get behind the wheel.
Recon he couldn’t have done it with explosives, or a truck?
haydos25
Posts
1689
Joined
8/4/2010
Location
Sydney AU
Fantasy
3333rd
8/8/2019 5:13pm
Gworm wrote:
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But...
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But can you show me evidence that the murder rate will be cut? And that’s with the total disappearance of guns.

I think it’s naive to think that criminals won’t still have guns with a ban, though, so even then there would not be a huge difference in gun deaths. There could actually be more, because people would be more vulnerable.

I think it’s total crap to accuse us of being ok with the deaths as the price we are willing to pay to own guns. If you don’t want guns, that’s your choice. Are you ok with not being able to defend your family if needed?
A lot of assumptions being made in this post.

Firstly im not completely anti gun. I have guns personally and i know that banning them completely is unrealistic and impossible. Cant put toothpaste back in the tube.

Yes criminals will still have guns, criminals in australia still have guns, as do registered licensed gun owners. But making them harder to get a hold of can't be a bad thing, and i dont understand the argument that because some bad guys have guns, that everyone should be allowed to have them. All that does is ensure that all bad guys have guns.

Defending the family argument is very emotional and pulls on the heart strings, but statistically you're more likely to shoot yourself or a family member than save them. Not to mentioned logistically defending them with a gun isn't really the easiest thing to do either.

My suggestion is regulation not abolition of guns. Training, licensing, registration, restriction of certain weapons and certain high risk sections of society. I cant see how those things are impossible to do all while keeping the 2nd ammendment. After all it calls for a regulated militia, wheres the regulation at the moment?
1
motogrady
Posts
3931
Joined
1/27/2008
Location
WV US
8/8/2019 5:15pm
motogrady wrote:
Sure I care about gun safety. Another thing you think you know. I just don't believe the answer is to just throw our hands up and...
Sure I care about gun safety.
Another thing you think you know.
I just don't believe the answer is to just throw our hands up and say here, take these, we are but mere children and don't deserve or need them.

And before you ask what the answers are read the thread. The whole thread.

Now I expect you will throw a few on the barbe, wrestle an alligator or 2, and have a gaday.

It's all you guys do over there, correct?

Oh, and yeah, nobody wants to come here. You have it all figured out.
haydos25 wrote:
If your kid keeps hitting his little brother in the head with a baseball bat, do you take the bat off him? Or give a baseball...
If your kid keeps hitting his little brother in the head with a baseball bat, do you take the bat off him? Or give a baseball bat to his brother and hope that because now they both have bats neither of them will get hit?

By the way we have crocodiles here, alligators, bigger uglier and more aggresive cousin. If you want to start with the cultural digs at least be accurate mate.
That ship sailed when you made the crass "loud noises and entertainment" remark.

mate.
haydos25
Posts
1689
Joined
8/4/2010
Location
Sydney AU
Fantasy
3333rd
8/8/2019 5:21pm
motogrady wrote:
That ship sailed when you made the crass "loud noises and entertainment" remark.

mate.
That remark hit a sore point did it? haha

All good mate
Gworm
Posts
1628
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
8/8/2019 5:22pm
Gworm wrote:
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But...
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But can you show me evidence that the murder rate will be cut? And that’s with the total disappearance of guns.

I think it’s naive to think that criminals won’t still have guns with a ban, though, so even then there would not be a huge difference in gun deaths. There could actually be more, because people would be more vulnerable.

I think it’s total crap to accuse us of being ok with the deaths as the price we are willing to pay to own guns. If you don’t want guns, that’s your choice. Are you ok with not being able to defend your family if needed?
haydos25 wrote:
A lot of assumptions being made in this post. Firstly im not completely anti gun. I have guns personally and i know that banning them completely...
A lot of assumptions being made in this post.

Firstly im not completely anti gun. I have guns personally and i know that banning them completely is unrealistic and impossible. Cant put toothpaste back in the tube.

Yes criminals will still have guns, criminals in australia still have guns, as do registered licensed gun owners. But making them harder to get a hold of can't be a bad thing, and i dont understand the argument that because some bad guys have guns, that everyone should be allowed to have them. All that does is ensure that all bad guys have guns.

Defending the family argument is very emotional and pulls on the heart strings, but statistically you're more likely to shoot yourself or a family member than save them. Not to mentioned logistically defending them with a gun isn't really the easiest thing to do either.

My suggestion is regulation not abolition of guns. Training, licensing, registration, restriction of certain weapons and certain high risk sections of society. I cant see how those things are impossible to do all while keeping the 2nd ammendment. After all it calls for a regulated militia, wheres the regulation at the moment?
The satatement that we are ok with the needless deaths is emotional, too. As well as being insulting.
CM_84
Posts
764
Joined
8/3/2018
Location
AU
8/8/2019 5:28pm
Gworm wrote:
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But...
If you could get rid of all guns in the world, and they would never be reproduced, then gun deaths would absolutely go to zero. But can you show me evidence that the murder rate will be cut? And that’s with the total disappearance of guns.

I think it’s naive to think that criminals won’t still have guns with a ban, though, so even then there would not be a huge difference in gun deaths. There could actually be more, because people would be more vulnerable.

I think it’s total crap to accuse us of being ok with the deaths as the price we are willing to pay to own guns. If you don’t want guns, that’s your choice. Are you ok with not being able to defend your family if needed?
CM_84 wrote:
Reckon that nutcase in Vegas could have killed 58 people and injured 400+ people with a knife? How about those kids in Columbine? I think people...
Reckon that nutcase in Vegas could have killed 58 people and injured 400+ people with a knife?
How about those kids in Columbine?
I think people find it easier to kill other people with a gun.....just my opinion

The murder rate will never be zero. But let’s try and get it as low as possible.

In Australia both the homicide rate and suicide rate absolutely did drop after the gun laws changed. Other countries have had similar results.

There will always be drink driving deaths, I have never heard anyone say that because it will never be zero let’s just allow people to drink whatever they want and get behind the wheel.
Gworm wrote:
Recon he couldn’t have done it with explosives, or a truck?
Other countries that have gun control, do they have similar or lower rates of mass murder than the US?
When other countries introduced gun control, I do not think bombings etc went up in frequency.

Again, I don’t think gun control solves the problem, I just think it helps, if it helps it is worth it in my eyes.



haydos25
Posts
1689
Joined
8/4/2010
Location
Sydney AU
Fantasy
3333rd
8/8/2019 5:30pm
Gworm wrote:
The satatement that we are ok with the needless deaths is emotional, too. As well as being insulting.
Maybe it was an emotional remark and my bedside manner probably needs some improvement. Nevertheless the point remains the same.

If you could choose to put an end to all mass shootings tomorrow, would you do it if the price you had to pay was submit to regulation and gun control. Eg. limits to weapons, licencing, restrictions pistols and semi auto/auto weapons?

Obviously its not that simple and nobody can guarantee no more atrocities even with gun control, as Australia and New Zealand have proven in recent times. But i think its just an interesting question that i ask with all due respect to try to get my head around how important guns are in your country that's all.

Post a reply to: Mass Shooting in El Paso, Texas

The Latest