Another Mass Shooting 20-30 hurt, Several Dead...

a reply to: reddragon2015

This has to be CIA related. Yet another one...just in the nick of time.

Yes, yes, banning guns wont stop illegal guns etc. et-bladdy-bla etc.

However, a ban on them will eventually lead to their non-existence and with severe penalties for illegal ownership of guns plus bans on manufacture of ammo added could lead to zero guns in under 50 years.

When you consider that the real original constitutional reason for the right to bear arms was to defend against unlawful and criminal government and that that particular horse left the barn a while back and that 'they' are always going to have much better weapons than those we can buy at Wal-Mart I think it's checkmate at this point.

let's just calmly let the Ewok's have our blasters whilst we all cheerfully fashion pointy sticks.

"Mass shootings" are statistically unimportant in the grand scheme of things. While it is sad for the dead and the families, honestly, because it makes the news makes it no more important than all of the other deaths that take place across the globe on a daily basis.

Want to save lives? Have a bleeding heart? Try banning the government from funding, arming and supporting terrorists because it's in their best interest to destabilize foreign regimes they dislike. Try holding militarized police officers in America accountable when they commit murder.

Stop dropping bombs on innocent civilians and children on a daily basis in dozens of countries across the world. Fix all that, and then ask me about the guns that keep our murderous, treasonous and tyrannical government at bay.

The only people in the United States that wan't to ban firearms because of safety are naive saps that can't come close to grasping the big picture in any way shape or form. The same kind of people that are responsible for the current state of this disgraced country.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: MOMof3

I guess Al Capone and all his mob buddies would be considered well adjusted upright citizens to you? Talk about a sick view of life.

At least Capone had respect for most of the general populace who didnt bother him. thugs today will pop a cap in you for just walking by. Sure they were scum but they werent mad dogs.

originally posted by: angus1745
Yes, yes, banning guns wont stop illegal guns etc. et-bladdy-bla etc.

However, a ban on them will eventually lead to their non-existence and with severe penalties for illegal ownership of guns plus bans on manufacture of ammo added could lead to zero guns in under 50 years.

When you consider that the real original constitutional reason for the right to bear arms was to defend against unlawful and criminal government and that that particular horse left the barn a while back and that 'they' are always going to have much better weapons than those we can buy at Wal-Mart I think it's checkmate at this point.

let's just calmly let the Ewok's have our blasters whilst we all cheerfully fashion pointy sticks.

Umm tell that to the taliban who were not as well armed. still around and kicking arent they? when you can blend into th e crowd it tend sto make stopping you alot harder. ANd The invention of th eGun will never go away. Giving up our rights to a item is very stupid and if you support that you are already dead and just waiting for dead animal pick up.

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

Tell that too the gang bangers in Chicago who are not caught.... your point is moot........ have a lovely day...

originally posted by: links234
As for France, those weapons were illegally imported from outside the country.

Mexico, well...the US government has been accused of giving them their guns. What more do you want?

France shows prohibition is ineffective. That criminals will always be able to get firearms and only law abiding citizens will be affected. Just like drugs, neither harsh penalties nor prohibition will stop those who want them, from getting them. We cant even keep drugs out of our prisons!

The US govt did supply the cartels with ar15s through the atf. Yet they want to disarm us. Hypocrites. They have a long history of funding both sides. They armed Isis too. And al Qaeda. That is a much more serious problem that needs to be addressed, and causes exponentially more death. Yet its swept under the rug.

a reply to: JourneymanWelder

I'm with you on that. crazy people will do crazy things when determined enough, regardless of the law.

all this seems too "easy." when has a mass shooter situation like this ever had a background like this? like... oh your typical scum of the earth ghetto thug just went and shot up a bunch of people.

it's just strange to me. not to say that every shooting occurrence like this needs to follow the same pattern, but everything just seems off.

a reply to: links234

I though that got disproved, a very small percentage of the guns that the mexican govt recovered form drug cartel soldiers had serial numbers. Every gun made in America has a serial number, the majority of the guns from what ive read come form china and russia.

a reply to: wanderlustqueen

Practically every day in some parts of the urban jungles scattered across this country. What is your point?

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
At least there isn't a gun problem in the States. Phew!
You guys made your bed but you don't have to lie in it if you stop sticking your head in the sand

Obviously the gun problem in the states is that no enough people own guns. If 1 in 5 would carry, that would guarantee no mass shootings. The problem is the government makes it as difficult as possible to own and carry.

Eliminating back-ground checks and holding periods would increase firearms ownership. Felons should be allowed to have guns unless they have committed a violent crime, but its simpler just to say everyone is allowed to have guns because felons would not follow that rule any way. Dangerous people should be kept in prison. People out of prison therefore should not be dangerous and should have a firearm even if they are a convicted felon.

After you leave prison 100% of your rights should be restored immediately, as there is no evidence to suggestion any other way leads to a better society.

The mass shootings are not even in the headlines anymore.

It's as normal as rain


Of course in America one day they may have like the weather channel, have a killer channel where they announce all the killings in the country; since there is so many.

The NRA could host and sponsor the channel.

a reply to: reddragon2015

320 million people in the USA, it's bound to happen considering the odds. No news here.

originally posted by: MayanBoricua
France shows prohibition is ineffective.

Guns in America make crimes more violent. That's all they do. More people die from 'regular' crime because guns are added to the equation.

Mass shooting's are going to keep happening. We're up to 50 this year. Not even two months into 2016 and we're up to 50 mass shootings in this country. How many has France had? Or Germany? Or Australia? The whole of the EU?

If we really want to have a discussion, which I don't think we do, then we'd address the crime that guns bring about. Suicides account for the most gun deaths. Why? Because suicide, more often than not, is an immediate response to an emotional event. People who attempt suicide and fail are less likely to try again, guns absolutely prevent that second chance.

We're not talking about the greater impact of guns though, we're talking about the smaller impact, our new national past time, mass shootings. What could have prevented these more recent ones? Background checks, maybe. At least in the case of the guy in Kansas, prosecute the guy who sold them to him. Whoever he is. How about in Washington? Maybe temporary removal from a disturbed individual at the behest of family members? He murdered his wife and two children in their home. Maybe he shouldn't have gotten to keep his guns, maybe he should have them taken away two days ago. Kalamazoo is a similar story, someone should've been able to say, 'that guy is acting crazy, he shouldn't have guns with him.'

Whatever though, we'll get the people charging in here saying that the idea that family members shouldn't be allowed to dictate who and who doesn't have a gun only to watch more spouses and children be murdered. 'Oh, well...nothing could've stopped it.'

We're numb to this. There's nothing good coming from yet another thread about it.

a reply to: THEatsking

THAT is the whole point, HE DIDN'T obey the existing laws, so the answer to your question is ,as CLEARLY depicted here ,no.

a reply to: angus1745

Because we have a different mindset than those who rely ONLY on authorities for their protection from these many examples of nuts,we now see popping up all the time.

a reply to: links234

What is a mass shooting or just shooting when Black people shoot?
crime.chicagotribune.com...
I'd like to know because there have been far more shootings in areas of unarmed people this year than 50.

originally posted by: links234

originally posted by: MayanBoricua
France shows prohibition is ineffective.

Guns in America make crimes more violent. That's all they do. More people die from 'regular' crime because guns are added to the equation.

Mass shooting's are going to keep happening. We're up to 50 this year. Not even two months into 2016 and we're up to 50 mass shootings in this country. How many has France had? Or Germany? Or Australia? The whole of the EU?

If we really want to have a discussion, which I don't think we do, then we'd address the crime that guns bring about. Suicides account for the most gun deaths. Why? Because suicide, more often than not, is an immediate response to an emotional event. People who attempt suicide and fail are less likely to try again, guns absolutely prevent that second chance.

We're not talking about the greater impact of guns though, we're talking about the smaller impact, our new national past time, mass shootings. What could have prevented these more recent ones? Background checks, maybe. At least in the case of the guy in Kansas, prosecute the guy who sold them to him. Whoever he is. How about in Washington? Maybe temporary removal from a disturbed individual at the behest of family members? He murdered his wife and two children in their home. Maybe he shouldn't have gotten to keep his guns, maybe he should have them taken away two days ago. Kalamazoo is a similar story, someone should've been able to say, 'that guy is acting crazy, he shouldn't have guns with him.'

Whatever though, we'll get the people charging in here saying that the idea that family members shouldn't be allowed to dictate who and who doesn't have a gun only to watch more spouses and children be murdered. 'Oh, well...nothing could've stopped it.'

We're numb to this. There's nothing good coming from yet another thread about it.

I'm in the UK and like you I have a different perspective, but Yanks will never get it.

They are so wrapped up in the notion that everyone is out to get them, including their own government, that they just can't look at the issue rationally, and when you throw their silly amendments into the equation it just gets even more surreal.

They are so brainwashed into believing that the world is like a Hollywood movie where there are "good guys" (i.e. Joe the plumber mr Average American), and "bad guys" (i.e. everyone else) that in their feeble minds the need for guns outweighs everything else.

They try to point out how messed up other countries are, despite the fact they've on the whole never left the USA and as we all know US news covers the center of the universe only - i.e what dumb shmuck trailer park Joe did in Oregon, or Florida, or Washington, or Idaho, or wherever - and that's more newsworthy than actual news from around the globe.

In earlier times people used to believe the sun and universe revolved around the Earth - well Americans in the 21st Century have a similar view, that the rest of planet Earth, the moon, the sun, and everything that ever existed revolves around them.

Or maybe it's more of a flat Earth theory - once you get beyond the US borders you drop off, into space, never to be heard of again.

Anyway, I think America needs more guns, because if you have lots of gun related crimes and deaths the thing you need the most is more guns.

It's like a fat guy who eats too many cakes and is going to die from his weight - what he needs is more and more cakes to protect him from cakes and other people who might eat cakes.

Never mind those idiots from countries of slim people who don't eat cakes, how we laugh at them - what do they know? They don't eat cakes at all and they aren't going to die from cake related obesity - how dare they tell us to lay off the cakes!

They don't have a cake problem to worry about - but if they DID have cake eating criminals, then they'd all be crying out for cakes to eat, then they'd understand what it's like.

Etc

I want an All Kake 47 automatic bun-into-my-mouth-dispenser with an extended magazine - that'll keep me safe from buns and cakes, and if we all had one we wouldn't have cake related health problems no more.

Yes-sir-ee I is an Americayn and I is demanding my cake related rights, yee-haw.

Etc.

Idiots.

a reply to: angus1745

Tell that to the largest armies in the world.

Both Russia and the US failed in Afghanistan against simple, poor peasants in the mountains of Afghanistan using 50 year old relic rifles.

Edit to add: the ewoks eventually won.