Blame the shooter, not the gun

page: 2
26
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   
weapons, bats, hammers ect just lay there until someone finds a use for them
do we outlaw "everything"? anything can be used as a weapon.
there were crazies long before guns




posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by lambs to lions
 


I disagree, guns kill people. We need total gun prohibition. Also, forks contribute greatly to americas obesity problem, so i propose we outlaw forks too.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Austin0777
 


Also pencils and pens cause spelling errors.

Cars cause car accidents.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 06:33 PM
link   
The problem is that people tend to build things... if we were to just cut everyones hands off as babies, kinda like circumsion.. well we wouldnt have any crime ever again.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
A bunch of people were killed, a baby, a child, and many wounded and all that people can do is worry about losing their guns.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchildren
A bunch of people were killed, a baby, a child, and many wounded and all that people can do is worry about losing their guns.


When tragedies are used to further the erosion of our rights it is a legitimate concern.

I feel for the families. And God only knows that had I been there my weapon would be hot from firing back.

But the fact of the matter is, these events are RARE. There are 330 million people in the US. 270 million guns, and roughly one third of the population own guns.

To collectively punish all of us who own guns because of what CRIMINALS AND PSYCHOS do is not only unfair, it is a violation of everything this country is supposed to be about.

Everyone believes in individual rights...Until it's something they don't like. Then they forget about individual rights and start talking about collective punishment. It's sad, pathetic, and should be worrisome to anyone who values their rights.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Assuming it was not a case of "Mind Control" to facilitate an anti-gun agenda, then Holmes could have simply tossed homemade incendiary grenades into the audience after he tossed the tear gas canisters and caused even more mahem. What if he drove a pickup into the line waiting to buy tickets....will the "anti-truck" crowd lobby the government to do away with pickup trucks (esp 3/4 ton and higher)....and what will be next, 4 door sedans? I dont want to even consider the damage that could be done by a baseball bat since my son plays in little league!



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn

Originally posted by Starchildren
A bunch of people were killed, a baby, a child, and many wounded and all that people can do is worry about losing their guns.


When tragedies are used to further the erosion of our rights it is a legitimate concern.

I feel for the families. And God only knows that had I been there my weapon would be hot from firing back.

But the fact of the matter is, these events are RARE. There are 330 million people in the US. 270 million guns, and roughly one third of the population own guns.

To collectively punish all of us who own guns because of what CRIMINALS AND PSYCHOS do is not only unfair, it is a violation of everything this country is supposed to be about.

Everyone believes in individual rights...Until it's something they don't like. Then they forget about individual rights and start talking about collective punishment. It's sad, pathetic, and should be worrisome to anyone who values their rights.


Yet whenever something like this happens, and the talk of gun restriction/abolishment comes up, all the Americans on here scream and shout "OH BUT WE NEED OUR GUNS TO STOP THE GOVERNMENT FROM MAKING US SLAVES!!!! YOU CAN PRY MY GUNS OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS!!!!"

Well last time I checked, not 1 single American has gone to the White House to stop Obama/Bush/Clinton, or any other President for that matter, from taking away your supposed freedoms, with a rifle in their hands. And you know what? Not one will ever do that. Why? Because they would be shot down in the middle of the street by the Secret Service, the Police, or any other number of Security personnel they have working there.

The sad thing is, every day we hear from Americans how they will use Firearms to stop the US Government from being tyrannical. And how they will use them to "keep the freedom alive", and to make sure the Constitution is never abolished. But not once have we seen "a well regulated Militia" storm the Government to stop them from implementing supposed Draconian laws that have been passed, like the Patriot Act. Instead, all we saw and heard was how much the US Government is the new Nazi regime, and alot of people bitching and moaning about how it got passed. Did anyone rise up then to stop the Government??? And has anyone else done anything when other bad laws have been passed?

The argument of "we need our guns to protect our freedoms, and to stop the Government from ever becoming a dictatorship!!!!!" has been done to death. America has become the land of the sheep, the land of the lawsuit, and the land of the celebrity. At the end of the day, America will self destruct, just like Rome did, and when the smoke has cleared, and Americans are wondering where it all went wrong, maybe then you will realise that constant wars, violence, and the use of firearms will be on of the major factors that has lead to said downfall.

I can't remember who said it, but this quote sums it up perfectly - "There are too many stupid people these days. I'm not saying it should be a crime punishable by death, but maybe we should just take the warning labels off everything, and let the problem sort itself out........"



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starchildren
A bunch of people were killed, a baby, a child, and many wounded and all that people can do is worry about losing their guns.


All other people can worry about is taking away rights of those americans that follow the law.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by TerribleTeam2
 


Those who clamor for revolution usually get the enslavement they fought to stave off. History shows us that revolution usually ends up with something worse than what the nation in question had before the revolt.

I dont like revolution fetishists. But I do believe in the occasional necessity of such an act. Our right to arms doesn't extend solely for the purpose of killing governments or criminals, but to enshrine in law the most basic right. The Right to Life, and the protection thereof.

It is not always the right time for revolution, but it is always necessary to protect oneself.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
The killer was a member of the Occupy movement.
Maybe we should jail all Occupiers.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
If we are gonna blame guns, then we must also blame the number one firearms salesman known as Barack Obama.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Love how the gun zealots think they're being witty with their "guns dont kill people" NRA propaganda slogan from the 90's.

But I will admit that guns by themselves don't kill people. They are inanimate objects and require someone to pull the trigger.

However people with GUNS kill people. It would be absurd to ban trucks, or other vehicles because their primary use is not to kill people, their primary use is transportation. Guns have no other purpose but to cause severe injury or death.

Guns give people an inflated sense of power. Why do we almost never hear about people robbing a bank with a knife?

And if we allow everyone to own a gun we would almost certainly slip back into the lawlessness of the old west. Just how safe was that time period?



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


Funny how things go full circle....create paranoia to foster a gun buying craze and then some crazy guy goes nutso covering all bases with legally acquired firearms (handguns, shotgun and rifle and lots of ammo).



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
Love how the gun zealots think they're being witty with their "guns dont kill people" NRA propaganda slogan from the 90's.

But I will admit that guns by themselves don't kill people. They are inanimate objects and require someone to pull the trigger.

However people with GUNS kill people. It would be absurd to ban trucks, or other vehicles because their primary use is not to kill people, their primary use is transportation. Guns have no other purpose but to cause severe injury or death.



Bull^%&*. A gun's purpose is to shoot bullets. You yourself said that someone has to pull the trigger. They also have to aim it. The wielder decides what is fired at.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 

IF you outlawed guns to gang members, drug dealers and other criminals and then required all others to own firearms if they had no mental history (and maybe pass a safety course) then....but wait how are you going to make the "outlaws" turn in their guns? IT is a function of the culture: from hip-hop gangsta to para-military types. I will cite that all citizens over 18 in Switzerland are required to own not just a gun but an assault rifle (sig 551?) as a defacto citizen militia. Their crime rate is virtually "0". Perhaps homogeneous race and culture are a factor. The fact that the citizens are armed is the primary reason why Hitler did not invade their country during WW2.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 


Hitler was already fighting on 2 fronts, I don't think he wanted to stretch his already thin troops and invade a mountainous country. That would only have proven disastrous and would have been a waste of resources.

Switzerland issues rifles to every able-bodied male because that's their army, not because they want everyone to have guns.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by lambs to lions
 


Looking at the Colorado Batman shooter's level of education, Holmes may be over his head in student loan debt. With the prospect of failing out, he would be an indentured servant for life on a fixed income with no way of becoming self-sufficient. As a student loan debtor, a living wage is not possible as the debt collectors garnish 25% his wages and confiscate all of his tax return.

You can't stop shooter's like this with a ban on weapons because anything can be used as a weapon when you run amok. Even if guns were banned and the shooter could not get weapons.. he could use whatever else is available... he could have come in with a baseball bat or homemade pipe bomb.

Running Amok is a known phenomenon and happens to the best of the best of humanity when disenfranchised into situations such as insurmountable student loan debt without bankruptcy protection.

I'm not making excuses for the guy. I'm giving you a little insight on one possible reason why he did it.

As for banning guns... the movie theater and that area of Colorado was a gun free zone already. That means that banning guns doesn't work. If citizens were legally allowed to carry firearms in the theater, I believe there would be less than 12 deaths there because at least there would be someone there to fire back. Instead, the gun ban law created more victims.

We need to return bankruptcy protection to student loan borrowers. This is the only way to help people in this situation.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by RoninMD
 


So because a "gun-free" cinema was attacked with a nut job wielding an AR-15 and a shotgun, that certainly means that a national ban on automatic rifles and any magazine able to hold more than 10 rounds would not work?

People for gun control don't want to take your guns away, we simply want more control and more restrictions on who can own weapons coupled with more severe penalties if you're caught with any unlicensed weapon or illegal weapon.

A nut job having an AR-15 and a shotgun only intensifies the already violent situation and increases the likelihood that a lot of people will die.

States that have tough gun laws, also have the lower deaths by gun rates.

Link
edit on 7/22/2012 by muse7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by muse7
 


The states with stricter gun laws also have higher violent crime rates

Study @ University of Chicago Law School


Our most conservative estimates show that by adopting shall-issue laws, states reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%. If those states that did not permit concealed handguns in 1992 had permitted them back then, citizens might have been spared approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies. To put it even more simply Criminals, we found, respond rationally to deterrence threats.


Stop using this event as leverage to force your political opinion on others

This was a sick sadistic man who made a personal decision to kill people - mankind has yet to figure out a way to stop that and gun ownership doesn't have a damn thing to do with it





new topics
top topics
 
26
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join