Blame the shooter, not the gun

page: 7
26
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I highly doubt 1 hero with a gun could have saved anything, he would probably panic with the rest of them due to the gas and would run to save his life, not stand and fight a guy with bullet proof armor and heavy weaponry. Its all talks in order to support.




posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Seriously, is there ever any cause to require a 100 round drum, or a 40 round clip?
How about paramilitary AR-15 style weapons?
What are these used for anyway?
Certainly not for hunting or home defense.
If you need that many rounds for either of these things, you need to spend more time on the range practicing.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


^^^ This!!!

The only reason it's legal is because the gun lobby pays off those sock puppet politicians. Rationally, there's no reason to permit anyone having those guns outside the police force, military, and maybe (!!) gun ranges for enthusiasts.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


"The issue here isn't guns...it's that he was able to get them WITHOUT BACKGROUND CHECKS!! That's just crazy..."

What makes you think he did not have a background check??? Why would a 24 year old male college student not pass the required federal background check assuming he had no prior arrests?

There is absolutely no reason given (that we know of as of now) this guy should be barred from owning a weapon prior to this incident.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by clayb2004
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


"The issue here isn't guns...it's that he was able to get them WITHOUT BACKGROUND CHECKS!! That's just crazy..."

What makes you think he did not have a background check??? Why would a 24 year old male college student not pass the required federal background check assuming he had no prior arrests?

There is absolutely no reason given (that we know of as of now) this guy should be barred from owning a weapon prior to this incident.


You mean apart from also ordering explosives online and "buckets full of bullets" without being a member of a gun club or range?



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by akalepos
 


Unfortunately, there is no shortage of unsuspecting innocent civilians for lunatics like this Holmes guy to target. This guy was a coward, and it goes to show why he was dressed in body armor. He was for some reason concerned with his own welfare while slaughtering innocents. I wonder what was going through his mind? He seemingly didn't try to escape and was arrested within incident...hard to explain.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I own a good number (will not disclose) of assorted shells, rifle and handgun cartridges. I am an avid hunter, and range shooter as are many of my friends and neighbors here in my area of the US. I am a member of a local range, although becoming a member of that range did NOT require a background check, only a simple fee paid to the department of natural resources. I have participated/taught many firearm safety classes. I assure you that I am an upstanding member of society with an impeccable record, having been subjected to several background checks and even holding a government issued security clearance.

So, I ask you, should I have a "federal flag" on my name for having numerous guns and ammunitions strictly to support my hobby? I also know several people that reload their own ammunition and ammunition for others that enjoy the same hobby, 6000 rounds is nothing to these individuals, are they evil-doers?

I also assure you that most items that could be used to create explosives can definitely be found, not only online, but in your local hardware stores, and especially farming supply stores.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by clayb2004
 


People seem to be ignoring the fact that he rigged his home with explosives and then set a timer to turn on loud anoying music after he left. He was trying to draw attention and cause a second massacare in his apartment building. Gun laws would not have stopped this guy. If it wasn't a gun he would have just used a car bomb or something of that nature.

Gun laws don't stop criminals. One of my favorite quotes comes from Sammy "The Bull" an infamous mob hitman.


“Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins.”



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Seriously, is there ever any cause to require a 100 round drum, or a 40 round clip?
How about paramilitary AR-15 style weapons?
What are these used for anyway?
Certainly not for hunting or home defense.
If you need that many rounds for either of these things, you need to spend more time on the range practicing.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


Its called a magazine not a clip.

What is a paramilitary style weapon?

Semi automatic AR 15s are technologically no different than semi-auto hunting rifles. The difference is cosmetic.


What, in history, proves the concept of prohibition? Since when does banning stuff solve problems



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


He ordered chemicals that could be used to make explosives. I could get much of the same stuff from a garden shop, Home Depot, Wal-Mart, a welding supply shop, or any other number of shops.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Please keep the discussion civil, in other words, discuss the topic not each other or your posting privileges will be at risk.

Thank you.

Springer...



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taupin Desciple

Originally posted by lambs to lions

To blame guns on gun-related violence is ridiculous.




Taken by itself, I hope you realize just how silly that statement is.

You're right, guns have nothing to do with a bullet leaving the chamber, barrel and nozzle and then lodging itself into the target. How silly of us to think otherwise.



I have been to hundreds of gun shops. Not once have I had to hit the deck because they started shooting at me.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by clayb2004
 


If the alternative is making it easier for stuff like Aurora to happen...hell yeah, I'm afraid it would be totally worth it giving up weapons that serve no practical purpose.

I'd love to use the road as my own personal race track, and I assure you, I'm an excellent motorbike driver


The problem is, while I might be very good, many are probably not. So should they allow me my freedom even if it makes it easier for others to kill? I'd gladly give up that freedom.

The "he would have killed anyway" reply is nonsense! So just because he's crazy and would have found some other way we should simply ignore a possible way to make it at least harder for him??



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I highly doubt 1 hero with a gun could have saved anything, he would probably panic with the rest of them due to the gas and would run to save his life, not stand and fight a guy with bullet proof armor and heavy weaponry. Its all talks in order to support.


One shot, one kill. Body armor does not cover your face.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by clayb2004
 


Yes, you should.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   
You can outlaw guns all you want. All you will be doing is making sure that criminals have an unarmed victim. Do you think criminals will turn in their guns because they are illegal?

POLICE TO NOT PREVENT CRIME, ARMED CITIZENS DO.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
Once again the main culprit in the aurora shootings, virginia tech and columbine was the easy availability of guns to enable these lunatics to go on their rampage.
edit on 7/22/2012 by muse7 because: (no reason given)


if you really care about "victims" you would be leading a modern day temperance campaign- the number of men, women and kids who suffer at the hands of alcohol- be it rape, violence, murder, broken homes, neglect etc dwarfs anything that guns in the hands of a wrong un can conjure.

If your "caring" is not consistent , it is not real



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   
and didn't Obama just despatch a few more people in Pakistan recently? Will he travel over there to comfort the families?

The state is your biggest killer, it is always the biggest killer



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I cannot disagree more. I don't see the logic in throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There will always be bad apples. Unnecessary death will always be horrible, and we will always try and cope and find ways to prevent it. But, it is futile. There are those that will always find a way. And yes, guns do make killing easy. But, that doesn't make it okay to take them away from everyone, or make it extremely difficult to own them. We all have a right to defend ourselves in any way that we see fit. Some people may think it is unnecessary to own a firearm, while others enjoy owning a small arsenal. This is America, and because I fear for my family, and I fear that someone may threaten them, I have the right to prepare for their defense. I choose to prepare for unlikely situations. I would much rather have a gun and never need it, then to need it and not have it.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by TerribleTeam2
reply to post by Phenomium
 


So tell me Phenom, what have you got planned to stop the US Government from taking the last of your remaining freedoms before they enact any Gun Restriction laws then???

This type of thinking proves the point I made earlier to Projectvxn. Cheers


I don't think we can STOP them from doing anything. It's clear that they (government) are going to do what they want despite our constitutional rights. It is also clear that they are NOT the government that our forefather's had placed here nor had in mind for our country. It IS clear that our country (America) has been hijacked for quite some years by the very entity that we won our freedoms from.

My point in making this particular post wasn't a suggestion to stop anything from happening, rather to refute those that I know will come posting how great of an idea it is for gun control to happen. Basically this is a preemptive strike on those who agree with the government taking our guns away as a justification for the events that just happened in Colorado (The Batman slaughter).

To answer your question though. I don't personally own a gun, but if I did, no matter what law they pass, I would not turn my gun in or register it because my constitution says I have the right to own it and to protect myself and my family with it. If they (this rogue government) wants to pass whatever law against the will of the people, I take the same stance as Bush on that one "Don't wave those damn law papers in my face, they're nothing but damn pieces of paper". This is how they think of our constitution....so this is what I think of THEIR despotic, constitutionally offensive laws. Who cares what they say or what laws they make....they are going to oppress and beat you and lock you in a FEMA prison eventually anyway, so just keep your weapons and tell no one about them and when they kick in your door without a warrant.....they will then know if you have a weapon or not.

The constitution is the law of the land, and if Bush or Obama passes illegal laws (which they have) by bypassing Congress and invalidating it's power to a mere ceremonial stature...claiming that they only report to the UN, then they can worship who they will. It doesn't mean that the American people have to though.

Our laws are constructed under the constitution before these monsters defiled it. As far as I am concerned the original constitution still stands and THEIR laws which have abrogated the sovereignty of our great nation and the base laws created by our forefathers, therefore, because their laws were created in opposition to the will of the people and passed behind the back of congress, are null and void.

The only real power they have is police, military, IRS and Federal Reserve intimidation and if we play by their rules....not only will the intimidation graduate to more tyranny but it will encompass every facet of our lives and we all will wish we were dead instead. Many have and will die anyway for no reason at all other than simply because they felt like killing us or in the name of power, experimentation or depopulation.

My answer in summary is this:
They will do what they have always done and our wants and needs are not an issue nor a factor in their tyrannical plans. We must simply resist and stick to the laws that our forefathers created for us and ignore their laws. Yes many will die...but more will die if we let them have total control and keep doing what they are doing.

Right now our future is either bleak or (giving them total control) ...more bleak, we have no hope for a better future as there is not enough time for us to witness the fruition of our labor but we can certainly stand and fight for our children and their futures, we have to resist.....every one of us.
Although, the likelihood of this collaboration or patriotism is unlikely.

This particular post though, was a prognosticated retort to the "true believers" of the governments amicability towards civilians regarding gun control, as I know they will be here soon, whether paid for or just ignorant.



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I forget the exact quote but "those who would give up rights for protection are fools and deserve neither". People like Holmes will always exist. But so will decent folk who would risk their life to stop him. Trust in the fact that the overwhelming majority of gun owners are decent folk.

Without guns he surely would have just used his ability to manufacture explosive devices to cause even more fatalities. Banning guns doesn't stop evil.





top topics
 
26
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum