It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Blame the shooter, not the gun

page: 10
26
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by lambs to lions
 

Most gun control advocates will argue that the difference between a gun and a truck (which may be used to run people over or facilitate a truck bomb) is that a gun was designed to kill people whereas a truck was not. But they miss two points; 1) guns are tools; to kill, deter others from killing or protecting one from being killed,and 2) humans are relatively fragile; we can drown in less than a minute or two in the water; die from a blow to the head, neck or chest area by a bare hand or innumerable other tools or from untold accidents. They also forget the real rationale for gun rights (ie, the Second Amendment)...but that is the subject of another thread.

edit on 23-7-2012 by CosmicCitizen because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Guns are created to use as a weapon. Trucks are made for transportation. Fans are made to cool you off. A couch is made to rest on. A stove is made to cook with. I can explain more things to anyone who needs it so all these stupid analogies that make zero sense can stop.

If you gun rights people believe its the shooter and not the gun that causes problems.....wouldnt it make sense to try to limit who can be a shooter by having stricter gun laws?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



If a person is hell bent on shooting someone, do you think any amount of laws would prevent them from obtaining a gun? If they cant buy it from a store, they will steal one.

People were murdering other people long before the beautiful invention of gun powder, and they would continue to murder people if all guns suddenly disappeared overnight.

Take the ahole from Colorado for example....he was obviously a very intelligent guy, and possessed the know how to make explosives by combining chemicals. If he couldnt get a gun, he was still bent on killing others as evidenced by the alleged booby traps in his apartment.

How about the Unabomber? Obviously another very bright individual, and he never shot anyone. He preferred explosives.

Say we get rid of all guns, whats next, banning intelligence?



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Reply to post by lambs to lions
 


Ummmm what? Lol. Most states that im aware of do not screen people who are purchasing guns for mental competancy or mental illness. A criminal background check is good but its not enough. Plus I feel like a lot of people think the best way to prevent violence is to give everyone a gun....which would just make things worse. It would be like the wild west lol.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by acmpnsfal
 


If every single person in that theater was armed, think the shooter wouldve been so anxious to do what he did? Of course not, it would be straight up suicide.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Reply to post by FreeFromTheHerd
 


Ummmm im not advocating outlawing guns. I want there to be stricter laws concerning who can get their hands on one.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Reply to post by FreeFromTheHerd
 


Lol right. If everyone had guns, nobody would commit crime. Seems legit.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by FreeFromTheHerd
 


Ummmm im not advocating outlawing guns. I want there to be stricter laws concerning who can get their hands on one.




The laws are already strict. No convicted felons. No one adjudicated mentally ill. No fugitives. No one convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, etc etc.

Would you also support restricting who can buy books?



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by FreeFromTheHerd
 


Lol right. If everyone had guns, nobody would commit crime. Seems legit.




It would be mutually assured destruction.

You know, the same concept that prevented nuclear holocaust during the Cold War.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Since these shootings started, my only question has been, "Are they on psychiatric meds?" Although I have never seen anyone address that, I discovered this site recently and think it's far more relevant than the gun laws. I've been physically assaulted by people on Paxil and Xanax. Out of all of my gun loving friends.....no assaults. Fortunately, my gun loving friends wouldn't dream of taking psychiatric medications. LOL. Most of America is heavily medicated but no one will talk about it because of the money involved for big pharma. Same Old Song and Dance, my Friends.

SSRI Stories



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   
I'm amazed how these mass murder stories captivate the headlines and airwaves for days afterward. There have always been "mass" murders and always will be. As I pointed out immediately after the Theatre shooting, twice as many people were murdered in Chicago over the past 2 weeks.. most of them children. But, I guess in America, where most of us are well-off and have no pressing personal problems, discussing events that are indigenous to the human condition is a way to pass the time..
-cwm



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   
I wonder what people would say if he put poisoned water in a water gun and ran around spraying people who didnt think anything of it.

"Ban the water guns! It made him do it!"



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr10k
I wonder what people would say if he put poisoned water in a water gun and ran around spraying people who didnt think anything of it.

"Ban the water guns! It made him do it!"


Then why ban anything? why not allow fully automatic weapons, grenades, heck even rpgs. Because after all these are just inanimate objects too right?

It seems to me that a lot of you gun nuts would prefer that there was no law at all, because you just want your 'freedom' apparently. Really I think you should just go back to your wild west days, every man for himself. I think that would suit you best.
edit on 23-7-2012 by mushrooms because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by FreeFromTheHerd
 


Ever heard of the Anarchist's Cookbook? Took me all of 3 seconds to open up google, type it in, and voila, there it is in PDF form 2nd on the list. Doesn't take a qualified genius to search for it online and then have the instructions on how to make explosives. So therefore you DON"T need to be intelligent to find out how to make explosives, you just need to be able to follow instructions. Kinda blows your theory out of the water, pun not intended.......



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by lambs to lions
 


Kind of like saying prescription drugs kill people and not the doctors who prescribe them. Like they have no fault at all then why is Micheal Jackson doctor sitting in jail?


Guns and ammo sales need to be computerized, registered and regulated just like prescription drugs and pill mills.
They already are? Do it better.

Nobody wants to take anyone's guns away and in fact I think it is just the opposite. I think they want people to have weapons and a lot of them. There are already 90 guns for every 100 people in the US. Gun control means control over your gun(s). You think people shouldn't have that then you have no business with one.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by TerribleTeam2
reply to post by FreeFromTheHerd
 


Ever heard of the Anarchist's Cookbook? Took me all of 3 seconds to open up google, type it in, and voila, there it is in PDF form 2nd on the list. Doesn't take a qualified genius to search for it online and then have the instructions on how to make explosives. So therefore you DON"T need to be intelligent to find out how to make explosives, you just need to be able to follow instructions. Kinda blows your theory out of the water, pun not intended.......



You need to be able to read.
This indicates a minimum of intellect necessary.
Not so with some other deadly weapons.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 03:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by lambs to lions
In the wake of the movie theatre shooting in Aurora, CO there has been much talk about whether or not we should have more strict gun control laws in the United States. The idea more strict gun control laws are both ignorant and dangerous.

To blame guns on gun-related violence is ridiculous. Why not just go ahead and talk about banning alcohol? After-all, drunken drivers kill far more people every year than domestic gun violence. Why don't we ban alcohol? We don't even mention it because parts of every class of America participates in the consumption of alcohol.

The truth is, and always has been that people kill people. It isn't the gun's fault, nor the alcohol. It is the irresponsible, selfish jacka$$ that disregards the lives of others.

Perhaps, we should instead establish more stiff punishments for these crimes. Instead of locking someone up for 20 years, we should put their life to an end. We could even do it publicly. Oh, but no!!! How dare we humiliate a murderer like that! They have rights! It is pathetic the way that we bleed over the rights and feelings of those who disregard the lives of others.

When I first heard about the Aurora shootings, I read that the found him near the scene of the crime. He was obviously the shooter. He injured and killed children. His punishment should have been carried out right there in the parking lot. He should have left in a body-bag in the back of the medical examiner's van.

If not, then he should have been left alone with the families of the victims, so they could do with him as they saw fit. That would have been justice. Instead, he murdered those people in cold blood, but he is sitting in a jail cell somewhere getting three square meals, while the families of the victims try to put their lives back together.

But, instead of treating this situation as we should, we instead turn to talk of blaming guns and the lack of tighter gun-control laws. We should be punishing this person as the monster that he is, not finding a way to take away another of our Constitutional rights.

So go ahead, blame the guns, and let them scare you into giving up another freedom.


Was the guy drunk when he shot up the theater? I dont think so. If you are talking solely about the banning of firearms based on these types of attacks then how can you compare it to drinking? Two totally separate arguments.

The guy had guns and he shot up the place. He wasn't drunk, and even if he was he still had the guns.

I agree with stiffer punishments. Ban guns and if someone gets caught with one, then they get dragged into the street right there and shot in the head. Let's see how many folks continue to carry guns illegally then (in a gun free society.)

The public do not need guns. If you want to hunt, use a bow or traps. If you want to overthrow the government....well it will take more than you, your buddies and your AR-15's.

We could have a gun free society. And since the majority of the US population will never own a gun anyway, it seems like a reasonable thing do to.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   
See... people keep saying... "Guns don't kill people, people do".... This is not really correct.... it is a combination of the two that makes the action happen.... but that's beside the point really...

I understand what people are saying... that lots of sane people own guns, and that if someone wants to kill you they will, whether guns are controlled or not...

but my argument is this.... you are right, it is the person in control of the gun that initiates the action and makes the deed happen, however, some people are just not responsible or intelligent enough to be given such immense power... the power of life and death.

All these people arguing that we should control cars, because they also kill people are missing the point.... a car is not designed to kill, it is not it's prime reason for being made.... therefore the argument is foolish....

I have no real problem with people owning Hand guns... albeit I am from the UK.... but please.. can you give me some valid reasons for a normal everyday person to own an assault rifle such as an AK47... I cannot think of any.. and it is the proliferation of these type of weapons that makes these mass shootings easier to perpetrate.

You are quite right, it is the person the commits the act...... so, by that logic, gun control is a good thing, because some people just should not be given the option of owning weapons of any kind... they are not intelligent or responsbile enough...we all know people like this.....

So really, while arguing against gun control, you are really confirming it is needed... although you could call it "Muppet Control".... just got to stop the muppets from getting their hands on them...... In a society where ANYONE can get their hands on large ammounts of military grade weapons and ammunition... a proliferation of mass shootings is inevitable....

You see, it is these people that have a bad day, that have an argument with their spouse, the crimes that are committed on a whim... these are the crimes that turn into murders in America, these are the crimes that are spontaneous... now, with the proliferation of guns, it's easy to grab one to sort out any small grievance... if these people really had to work to source a firearm, you could guarantee that these petty disputes would not turn into murders.... by the time they got hold of one it would seem like just what it was.. a petty argument.

Saying all that though.... Canada has a higher percentage of firearm possession than the USA... but significantly less shootings..... so we could argue that is something to do with the American culture....something inherently wrong with the people of the nation themselves....

I am sorry America... but it is not a "right" to own a firearm..... it is a right be speak freely, it is a right to have children, (although that's also up for debate!) it is a right to be able to beleive what you wish..... it is not, and should not, be a "right" to own firearms.... you're just asking for trouble....

Look at this very recent shooting also mentioned here on ATS... the man that accidently shot his son thinking he was an intruder.... a perfect example to prove my point... if he did not have a handgun in the house...he would more than likely either shout to the intruder "who is it", at which point his son would answer and still be alive, or he would have jumped on him, wrestled a bit, and realised his mistake, and his son would still be alive. This man now has to live with this for the rest of his life...... all thanks to the "shoot first, ask questions later" attitude of American citizens... This has to change... and I feel sorry for you if you cannot see this....

Anyway.. just my 2 cents....

PA



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 


I've been saying this for ages, as a society America couldn't pass a background check for a gun license.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:46 AM
link   
Don't ban guns, that would be stupid, surely owning a gun in today's society is a must, how else do you get food to feed your family other than killing animals?
The stupidity of the pro gun crowd astounds me, clearly the sort of people you want carrying lethal weapons.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


Calling it a tool doesnt justify it, its a tool for killing a person as quickly as possible. Its not like a drill or a knife that actually has purposes other than killing. Your not exactly gonna shoot holes in your wall to nail a picture up.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join