Originally posted by boonon I can't say for sure the death toll would have been less. It probably would have. I find any number of innocent people killed un acceptable. Are you saying that less is acceptable? As a society we need to get to the root cause of what caused this individual to do this. Going after his weapon of choice is what I find irrelevant. Our society seems to be gettin ...[text shortened]... used this mans 'illness'. Would you agree that our society is more violent than in the past?
Originally posted by boonon I can't say for sure the death toll would have been less. It probably would have. I find any number of innocent people killed un acceptable. Are you saying that less is acceptable? As a society we need to get to the root cause of what caused this individual to do this. Going after his weapon of choice is what I find irrelevant. Our society seems to be gettin ...[text shortened]... used this mans 'illness'. Would you agree that our society is more violent than in the past?
No amount is acceptable, but fewer is definitely better.
The weapon of choice is relevant since it is what enabled him to kill as many as he did.
No one is suggesting that guns caused this man's illness.
Originally posted by galveston75 Just my opinon but I think right now is not a good time to defend guns. Nothing personal but just my thought. If you feel you have to, it's up to you.
I'm not defending the gun G75. I believe though that the real focus should be on this man, and all of the recent people like him. I believe there is a bigger picture out there and it's easier to blame the gun instead of tackling our society's growing violence and what is causing this.
Originally posted by Agerg Utter garbage...what is the utility of a gun other than to put holes in things (often humans) with the secondary effect of catastrophic shockwave damage to whatever lies inside the vessel that now has a gaping hole in it!???
It [b]was a gun which is responsible for the death of those children. Sure there was some dickhead that had to be there pointing a ...[text shortened]... uclear bombs![/i]
Anthrax doesn't kill people, people kill people - with anthrax! 🙄[/b]
Yes. People kill people. You hit it right on the head.
Originally posted by boonon I'm not defending the gun G75. I believe though that the real focus should be on this man, and all of the recent people like him. I believe there is a bigger picture out there and it's easier to blame the gun instead of tackling our society's growing violence and what is causing this.
Here's one...how about we tackle our societys' growing violence and what is causing this, as well as taking away from society that which empowers them to commit violence on a massive scale? 😕
Originally posted by galveston75 How much to bet he and these other young men grew up watching and playing war games and other violent videos?
There's a lot of questions as to what the real causes here are.
After a quick search it seems there are studies that have both found a link between violent video games and aggressive behavior and also contradicted that link. This tells me there just needs to be more and better designed studies done.
Originally posted by galveston75 Just my opinon but I think right now is not a good time to defend guns. Nothing personal but just my thought. If you feel you have to, it's up to you.
I agree sir, but since the debate is out there, here are some early reports of at least one of the weapons involved. They simply say a .223 cal weapon, which can be an M16, AR15, CAR15, Ruger Mini14, or other weapons.The reports of 100 rnds being discharged seem to indicate an assault type weapon with several 30-40 round magazines being used. Note in the article it states in Conn. you need a permit to own a handgun and assault weapons are not legal.
That seems to tell me at least, that simply outlawing guns won't stop people from owning, or buying them.
Originally posted by boonon Yes. People kill people. You hit it right on the head.
So you wouldn't have a problem with people having their own stockpiles of suitcase nukes then, I mean, nukes don't kill people do they!?...and what's more, you gotta defend against intruders somehow haven't you bonoon! 😞
Originally posted by Agerg Here's one...how about we tackle our societys' growing violence and what is causing this, [b]as well as taking away from society that which empowers them to commit violence on a massive scale? 😕[/b]
Yes it will have to be a multi prong fix. But the hard part is seeing the signs they may be showing to ones who know them. We all have to pay attention to ones around us and be willing to help or report them before it gets to these out of control levels.
Originally posted by PsychoPawn There's a lot of questions as to what the real causes here are.
After a quick search it seems there are studies that have both found a link between violent video games and aggressive behavior and also contradicted that link. This tells me there just needs to be more and better designed studies done.
It's a tuff thing to figure out but hopefully all that can get what is needed to help will try to find some answers.
Originally posted by boonon I can't say for sure the death toll would have been less. It probably would have. I find any number of innocent people killed un acceptable. Are you saying that less is acceptable? As a society we need to get to the root cause of what caused this individual to do this. Going after his weapon of choice is what I find irrelevant. Our society seems to be gettin used this mans 'illness'. Would you agree that our society is more violent than in the past?
The key in all mass shootings is that the perpetrators can kill vast amounts of people because access to guns is easy. Take away the guns and the scale of the slaughter is reduced. I'm not saying less is acceptable, no deaths are acceptable.
This individual walked into a school with four guns, if reports are correct, no one has a chance of disarming or stopping him. If the same individual walks into a school armed with a bat or a knife there is every chance he can be disarmed or overcome.
The earliest recorded school shooting in the US can be traced to 1764. They have always occurred, but they seem to be happening with a lot more regularity.
Originally posted by ChessPraxis http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ct-school-shooter-made-combat-weapon-article-1.1220431
I agree sir, but since the debate is out there, here are some early reports of at least one of the weapons involved. They simply say a .223 cal weapon, which can be an M16, AR15, CAR15, Ruger Mini14, or other weapons.The reports of 100 rnds being discharged ...[text shortened]... to tell me at least, that simply outlawing guns won't stop people from owning, or buying them.
I disagree; so long as there is a demand for N guns, then at least N + a*N guns will be supplied by those who build them (where a*N is a surplus of these things they'd like to shift...somehow!). If guns are outlawed (and later destroyed via amnesties and such) then there will be less availability of these things, and the above N will be drastically reduced.
There is gun crime in the UK; but since it's so much more difficult to get hold of a gun here, your average idiot or psycho opts for knives and such...
Originally posted by ChessPraxis http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ct-school-shooter-made-combat-weapon-article-1.1220431
I agree sir, but since the debate is out there, here are some early reports of at least one of the weapons involved. They simply say a .223 cal weapon, which can be an M16, AR15, CAR15, Ruger Mini14, or other weapons.The reports of 100 rnds being discharged ...[text shortened]... to tell me at least, that simply outlawing guns won't stop people from owning, or buying them.
No it probably won't help. Too many out there now.
Guns????
14 Dec '12 21:08
Back to Top