Ohio shopper shoots teen dead outside mall for trying to steal newly bought Nike Air Jordans

a reply to: ForteanOrg

You never answered my question. How did the criminals get their firearms with all the laws making it illegal to obtain firearms?

Rhetorical, they broke the law.

Know why?

Rhetorical again. Because they are criminals.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: ForteanOrg

OK,as has been pointed out by the mods previously, this is not a discussion on gun control. Lets keep it more focused on the topic of this incident and how it affects/relates to personal protection.

Thank you.

Welcome. Had these restrictive laws been in place in Ohio, JJ would still have lived. And there is a whopping chance he would never even have HAD the gun to threathen with in the first place. But no, we need more guns

What was it again that Elvis sung:

Then one night in desperation
A young man breaks away
He buys a gun, steals a car,
Tries to run, but he don't get far
And his mama cries
As a crowd gathers 'round an angry young man
Face down on the street with a gun in his hand
In the ghetto

.. and remember: that was sung by a white, all American good ole' Southern boy. Hail to the King!

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yes, they are criminals. I don't deny that, do I?

But there would be a lot more of them if the UK had the same laws as the US of A has. 3300 percent more to be exact. There, I said it again.

originally posted by: NavyDoc
[Ah, but by passing and working for laws that affect your fellow man, you ARE making choices for your fellow citizens. How noble and condescending of you.

We have this typically Dutch tradition: once every four years we have elections. And so, our people choose a number of other people that wlll decide for them. That's democracy for ya..

I'm actually an anarchist. But given the current state of affairs, I'm a fond lover of democracy and socialism. Seems to be the right thing just now. May change later, but as I'm already quite old, I don't think I will live to see the day that anarchism rules.

a reply to: macman

Calling him a coward and fake is probably taking it a little too far.

He's a human, like the rest of us and as such is entitled to opinions of his own. Though we may disagree with his opinion, I certainly will not belittle him for it.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: ForteanOrg

OK,as has been pointed out by the mods previously, this is not a discussion on gun control. Lets keep it more focused on the topic of this incident and how it affects/relates to personal protection.

Thank you.

Welcome. Had these restrictive laws been in place in Ohio, JJ would still have lived. And there is a whopping chance he would never even have HAD the gun to threathen with in the first place. But no, we need more guns

What was it again that Elvis sung:

Then one night in desperation
A young man breaks away
He buys a gun, steals a car,
Tries to run, but he don't get far
And his mama cries
As a crowd gathers 'round an angry young man
Face down on the street with a gun in his hand
In the ghetto

.. and remember: that was sung by a white, all American good ole' Southern boy. Hail to the King!

If guns were severely restricted in Ohio? Like they are in NYC and Chicago--you know the areas withteh highest crime rates and strictest gun control? The kid would still have the gun because, oddly enough and I know you won't be able to understand it, criminals by definition do not obey the law and it is very likely that the law abiding citizen, disarmed by his government, would have been killed or injured.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
a reply to: NavyDoc



And about drugs: in The Netherlands we have legalized selling and owning of weed. And we are on the brink of legalizing production. And, typically Dutch, have been tolerating illegal drugs in our society for many decades, including hard drugs. By accepting the fact that some use that stuff and not stigmatizing these users but helping them to remain part of society, we've had great success in keeping most of our population away from the nasty stuff. Yes, legalization of drugs, gambling, brothels and liquor is one of the best ways to bring down criminality. And it helps to avoid abuse in many ways.

At least we agree on something.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: ForteanOrg
So, you have no freedom, like the US in regards to the 2nd, and you champion this with some arbitrary 3300% less number.

Well, I don't need a gun to feel free. And the number is not arbitrary. It does not suit you, but it is the truth.

Funny thing.....there are still homicides in the UK and every else that firearms are banned or heavily restricted.

Yes. 3300 percent less than in the US of A, but indeed, aye. That's why we still need better prevention. But a nice strong weapons restriction law seems to be a good start.

Where firearms have been removed, (insert what ever inanimate object) takes it's place.

Yep. Mostly far less damaging objects. If a thug tries to kill me with his handkerchief I'll oblige and sneeze.

You, like every other cowardly Anti-2nd person, are nothing but a fake. You fake interest and outrage over deaths, only to scream and bellow when/if a firearm is used.

Manners and decorum please. And yes, it hurts me when people are killed.

originally posted by: NavyDoc
At least we agree on something.

So, you're worried too? Mm..

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

originally posted by: NavyDoc
At least we agree on something.

So, you're worried too? Mm..

I don't understand what you mean here. I simply agreed that legalizing a lot of "sin items" would reduce crime.

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

Yes, they are criminals. I don't deny that, do I?

We are not discussing the United Kingdom, we were discussing the United States. How did the criminals get their firearms when there are already so many laws preventing them from doing so?

###ATTENTION###

Emotions are running high. There's still no need for personal insults.

Attack and debate ideas instead of each other.

Don't reply to this PSA.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: ForteanOrg

Yes, they are criminals. I don't deny that, do I?

We are not discussing the United Kingdom, we were discussing the United States. How did the criminals get their firearms when there are already so many laws preventing them from doing so?

Right, you were discussing the US of A. Well, these criminals get their weapons because they are manufactured. By mostly American companies. Weapons were on high demand because American right wingers feared that Democrats might limit the rights to carry a gun, sooner or later. We're talking many tens of millions of weapons here and I don't believe for a second all these weapons remained in custody of their lawful owners.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Oh, that was just my miserable attempt at humour ..

Since we are miles apart when it comes to our opinion on owning and using weapons, but suddenly found ourselves agreeing on a subject, I a) had to reply that you were right we were agreeing here and b) express my worries that we were

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
a reply to: NavyDoc

Oh, that was just my miserable attempt at humour

..

Since we are miles apart when it comes to our opinion on owning and using weapons, but suddenly found ourselves agreeing on a subject, I a) had to reply that you were right we were agreeing here and b) express my worries that we were

Oh, I see. I'm not worried when someone sees the logical sense in something.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

You still have not explained why legislation that criminals know bars them from owning firearms is ignored by them.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: ForteanOrg

You still have not explained why legislation that criminals know bars them from owning firearms is ignored by them.

Oh come on! You can't be serious, everyone knows that since we made drugs illegal nobody ever gets high anymore.