Blame the shooter, not the gun

page: 13
26
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   
There have been so many shootings in America ive lost count and the government has not taken anyones guns away yet. Even after Columbine no ones guns were taken away. Now im all for owning guns as i have a few myself but some people are just nutty over them. The government is not gonna bust down your door and take your guns over this, so please stop being paranoid. Be thankful this is all you have to worry about and not burying your son or daughter like the family of those victims.

Guns are not gonna be taken away, now can we end this gun obsession here?

I swear to God i think some of you people worship them and would give up your first born before your .45

edit on 24-7-2012 by hellbjorn012 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by newcovenant

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.


Well having a quick look on the web, stats show that 170 of the 183 countries worldwide have a literacy rate of 50% or higher. And going further, 128 out of 183 countries have a literacy rate of 80% or higher, and this is according to a report conducted by the United Nations Development Program. So basically in 2/3 of the countries you visit in the World, 8 out of ever 10 people at minimum would be able to read The Anarchists Cookbook, and learn how to make Plastic Explosives at a minimum.

And last time I checked, it was outright illegal for your average citizen to create explosives. And for those that are LEGALLY allowed to do it, there is an absolute sh*tload of paperwork, safety procedures, and storage procedures that they have to follow so the explosives don't get into the wrong hands. How often do you see in the news, apart from major events like the Oklahoma Bombings, of people walking into cinemas, or high schools, and using mines, grenades, or bombs to kill someone, outside of the military or terrorist attacks? And nobody has a problem with access to explosives being extremely limited, basically to demolition companies, and the Military. Very few people have a problem with that. I'm guessing again that less than 1% of people see this is a problem.

Yet when people bring the subject of guns up, and the talk of putting restrictions, or bans on an object who's sole purpose is destruction and death, your average American goes off about it - "OH NO YOU CAN'T DO THAT! YOU CAN'T TAKE MY GUNS AWAY!!!! I NEED THEM FOR SELF DEFEEEEEEEEEEEENCE IN CASE THE BOOGIE MAN COMES TO GET ME!!!!"

Well guess what - Claymore mines can be used for self defence too. So can land mines. I don't see your average person being able to walk into Wal Mart and buying those now, do you??? And guns aren't all that different. Both can lead to death, and at the very minimum, someone being in a whole world of hurt....



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by benzjie
 


Last night a man with basic chemistry knowledge and some over the counter chemicals leveled a building killing hundreds.

Your argument is entirely invalid
edit on 24-7-2012 by conspiracyrus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by TerribleTeam2
 


BINGO! Creating explosives is illegal yes? Criminals still do it.
Make guns illegal. Criminals still have them.

Last time i heard explosives in the news by average citizens? Aurora cinema shooting.

Best option is to at least keep lawful citizens on level playing field
edit on 24-7-2012 by conspiracyrus because: (no reason given)
edit on 24-7-2012 by conspiracyrus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by conspiracyrus
 


No.

100,000 people are shot in America every year. Anything that protects that status quo is obviously idiotic.

The US crime rate is relatively high, it's gun fatality rate is shocking, it's non-fatal gun crime rate is dumbfounding and the number of these mass shootings is increasing, not going down...

but sure, sure... no need to change anything...



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


Exactly... Why try and make things better when everythings fine as it is right....



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


Your missing some info... Most gun crimes happen in large urban cities... Take NYC for instance. Handgun ban in effect. Oakland CA... Firearm restrictions in place, banning guns only effects people who obey laws.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by hellbjorn012
 

If we didnt have the 2nd Amendment I am sure that many in government would actually try to confiscate the guns like they did in the UK and Australia.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Wongbeedman
 


No need to try and do something hard, like let people have guns and say, reduce the number of gun-homicides by 5%... why bother?

And sure, why not label ANYONE that wants to lower gun related crime and death as anti-freedom, anti-American, etc.

That's rational.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


And then what?

Put you in a prison camp? Like they did in the UK?

What horrible thing happened after they banned guns in the UK that you're so scared #less of?



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by conspiracyrus
 


I fully understand all of that.

What you seem to blithely ignore is 100,000 people shot every year, in America. And how the high gun ownership rate has not in any way lowered the crime rate, relative to other countries... in fact America's crime rate is much worse than many countries that ban guns...

So if it hurts 800,000 a decade and doesn't make the crime rate competitive... what the hell is the point?

Do you REALLY not think 100,000 people shot a year is bad? Can America not do as well as Canada??



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


No youre missing my point. 100,000 shot per year yes? Most of which occuring in large cities, many of these large cities (or even entire states) have firearm restrictions in place. Thus criminal element more heavily armed than their law abiding counter parts. Criminal opportunism methinks



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by conspiracyrus
 


No, I didn't miss your point, but it's irrelevant.

You're OK with 100K people being shot, as long as they're nowhere near you.

I'm not.

100K people being shot every year, no matter how they're clumped, is way too many.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


I live in a major urban city with firearm restrictions in place. It does nothing to change the crime rate. Most residents dont own guns. Crime and the amount of people shot sit squarely on criminal shoulders. Criminals do not obey laws. Thus laws banning guns will not stop criminals



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by conspiracyrus
 


So just give up then?

Don't try, say, national restrictions? Thinking maybe, local restrictions are essentially meaningless...

Nope, just say # it, 100K shot every year is a small price to pay to make sure I have greater access to guns than in any other western country?

That's a #ed up attitude IMO.

Selfish through and through.

Instead of wanting a reduction, you just make excuses for why it's not even worth trying to lower the number of people shot every year.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Wongbeedman
 


Who said anything about living in fear?

Shooting is a great hobby, guns are an awesome investment, its a means to put healthy meat on the table for my family if I so choose, and it is a means of protection should something nasty happen, whether it be to me on a personal level, or on a more widespread level.

There is an old saying that is very appropriate:

It's better to have a gun and not need it than it is to need a gun and not have it.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


Yes its selfish of me to protect myself lawfully from criminals who ignore laws and restrictions. Silly me for blaming bad people for the crimes they commit. Its absurd of me to believe that people are responsible for their actions. Ludicrous of me to believe after law has been passed banning firearms that criminal elements and deranged individuals will not comply.

Realism... Get some
edit on 24-7-2012 by conspiracyrus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by hellbjorn012
The government is not gonna bust down your door and take your guns over this, so please stop being paranoid.


So government agents didnt confiscate privately owned guns in New Orleans after hurricane katrina?

All of those videos and reports about it happening are all fake?



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by TerribleTeam2
 


The purpose of a gun is not death and destruction. That is determined by the human operator.

The ONLY purpose of a gun is to fire a projectile.



posted on Jul, 24 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by lambs to lions
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.
So go ahead, blame the guns, and let them scare you into giving up another freedom.


As expected, now every anti gun person is getting on their soap box. What people dont realize is:

There have been people doing senseless harm to others since the dawn of mans existence. By the way, you dont need a gun to take out a group of people. War was much more brutal when men were bashing each others skulls in with mace's, clubs, and battle axes. Literally spilling your opponents blood on yourself.

Personally, I would rather be shot than stabbed, and I would rather be stabbed than have my head bashed in with a large piece of hardened steel with spikes.

Also, guns aren't ever going to NOT be manufactured, so there will always be ways to get them. Look at what happened during prohibition times with alcohol.....if you take away the law abiding citizens guns, than only the criminals will have them. That sounds great....

If I was in that theater, I would have been the only one NOT screaming and running. Even in my decrepit state and age, I would unload every last round I had on the shooter, and possibly saved lives. Had I been a younger man, I would have ran up behind him and slashed his throat.

Understand this, be it guns, bombs, or bows and arrows, people will always find ways to do harm to others. This is why people such as myself carry weapons at all times. Because not only do I not want to be a victim, but with psychopaths out there, I dont want to be standing idle whilst they do harm unto innocent people.





 
26
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join