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.
Originally posted by kingmonkey
Simple logic would suggest that no guns would equate to 26 people in Connecticut still being alive today. Not really difficult to fathom.
More food for thought if you can stomach it.....since the Columbine school massacre more people have been killed by guns in the US than the number of soldiers killed in WWII. Are you happy to continue with this insanity?
If only the perpetrators mother had been a gun owner and all this could have been prevented!
Originally posted by kingmonkey
More food for thought if you can stomach it.....since the Columbine school massacre more people have been killed by guns in the US than the number of soldiers killed in WWII. Are you happy to continue with this insanity?
Originally posted by kingmonkey
Simple logic would suggest that no guns would equate to 26 people in Connecticut still being alive today. Not really difficult to fathom.
Originally posted by kingmonkey
If only the perpetrators mother had been a gun owner and all this could have been prevented!
Originally posted by kingmonkey
Are you happy to continue with this insanity?
Originally posted by Propulsion
been sitting there forever until someone actually picked them up to use them. Am I the only one who understands this?
Originally posted by magma
I see no reason why all gun owners can not have a licence to own, carry and possess firearms.
On the conditions that:
Medical checks are done. Every 12 months
Mental health checks are done. Every 12 months
Apppropriate licence is valid. Every 12 months
Each person should be required to undergo medical and mental helath clearance every 12 months. Without exceptions.
If they fail to show up or fail the test, they hand in their guns. If they do not hand in their guns they go to jail.
A warrant will be automically raised for their arrest.
Pretty simple really.
Originally posted by Qemyst
Originally posted by kingmonkey
More food for thought if you can stomach it.....since the Columbine school massacre more people have been killed by guns in the US than the number of soldiers killed in WWII. Are you happy to continue with this insanity?
According to stats I'm seeing, Gun Homicides in America from 1999 - 2009 is close to 95,000. The max per year was in the 10,000's. So, let's add 3 more years on there. Hell. I'll even make it 20,000 per year for those 3 years. That's 155,000 since 1999.
Let's add in unintentional gun deaths, which is typically below 1000. I'll say 2000 per year though, just to be safe.
14 years times 2000 is another 28,000. We're up to 183,000.
416,800 died in WWII. That's AMERICAN military deaths alone. Not counting civilians.
I could go further though and say that you never specified the deaths of the soldiers in WWII had to be American. You simply said "soldiers". That would put the amount of soldiers dead in WWII in the 23-24 million range.
Care to enlighten me on how roughly 183,000 is greater than 416,800?
Originally posted by kingmonkey
Simple logic would suggest that no guns would equate to 26 people in Connecticut still being alive today. Not really difficult to fathom.
That same simple logic does not factor in the fact that humans are quite devious and adaptable and that they would still kill people.
Originally posted by kingmonkey
If only the perpetrators mother had been a gun owner and all this could have been prevented!
She was a gun owner, but you already knew that when you made your attempt to be snide.
I can continue discussing this for as long as you can dish info. Granted, I might get bored and want to go play violent video games.
Originally posted by kingmonkey
Are you happy to continue with this insanity?
I'm happy to continue with my insanity if you're happy to continue with your own insanity.edit on 16-12-2012 by Qemyst because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by pavil
Originally posted by kingmonkey
Simple logic would suggest that no guns would equate to 26 people in Connecticut still being alive today. Not really difficult to fathom.
More food for thought if you can stomach it.....since the Columbine school massacre more people have been killed by guns in the US than the number of soldiers killed in WWII. Are you happy to continue with this insanity?
If only the perpetrators mother had been a gun owner and all this could have been prevented!
There is NO way you will collect all the guns in America. Bad people will still be armed with very powerful guns and the normal citizen will not if we were to ban guns outright.
I suppose people will want to ban all guns, where does that leave hunters, which are a significant percent of the population 14+M hunt every year and 22M have hunted in the past 5 years.
Again it comes down to mental health to me. We walk by people in our own neighborhoods that very well could be one incident away from doing one of these mass killings yet we just brush them aside. Again I never hear it was a normal sane person who perpetrates these mass killings. They never say "he was a pillar of the community, I never saw that coming". We almost always hear that the person was disturbed for a long time before they snapped. I would be all for a psychological profile as well as a normal background check to own a gun or buy ammunition or body armor. That alone would do more than other type of gun regulation. It wouldn't infringe on the normal citizens rights and would be in the best interest of everyone. Sure it will cost more, but that is one additional cost I am willing to pay as it would weed out those seeking guns who are too unstable.
I don't own a firearm and I support my fellow American's right to bear them, as long as they aren't crazy. If I wanted to get a gun, I wouldn't be offended that I were to be subject to a psychological evaluation to determine if I was not a threat to others. It won't catch everyone, but I think it's a start.
Taking guns out of normal decent American's is not the correct solution to this problem.
Originally posted by kingmonkey
The WWII stat was taken from a Seattle Times article, but on further investigation gun death stats seem to vary wildly depending on the source. So for the sake of argument, lets go with your annual figure of 10,000 people. 10,000 people every single year, if that figure doesn't make you stop and consider your gun laws then I guess nothing will.
Originally posted by kingmonkey
Your point about people still being able to kill without guns is a bit childish
Originally posted by kingmonkey
I often see arguments suggesting that a solution to these kind of events would be to arm the entire population, but here we have a gun owner killed by their own weapons.
Originally posted by kingmonkey
If finding these very frequent and seemingly easily executed spree killings completely abhorrent makes me insane mate then I guess I must be.
Originally posted by kingmonkey
Mental illness issues clearly have to be tackled. You or I may be right, or neither with regards to gun control but one thing is 100% certain, another one of these things will happen in the not too distant future.