Originally posted by FMFThat's an interesting point. Do you have any idea what the gap between rich and poor is like in Canada FMF? Are the 'haves' in the north less obvious than those south of the border? (I could look into this myself I suppose but I've got guests arriving shortly... )
What do you make of the contrast with Canada in terms of the correlation of movies and TV and gun crime?
Originally posted by boononMaybe so, but if this individual didn't have access to guns the slaughter would have been dramatically reduced.
I agree with your premise. Humans always adapt and overcome. What I am saying is that if for some reason there were no guns available, the killer would find an alternative. If he is sick enough to think of mass murder I believe he would be sick enough to figure another way to do it.
Originally posted by boononI'm not advocating outlawing them, i'm advocating much stricter gun control laws.
To get a gun legally in NY is anything but easy. It is a lengthy process that involves background checks by many different agencies. Outlawing them would not get rid of them. It would only make them available to the criminal, leaving the 'non' criminal defenseless. Guns are bad in the hands of bad people.
Originally posted by Proper KnobHow do you know, maybe a bomb or a fire would have been worse? If you want to
Maybe so, but if this individual didn't have access to guns the slaughter would have been dramatically reduced.
claim that without guns there would be no gun crime sure, but the human heart that
is hell bent on mass murder will find away. So direct the blame on the monster that
did the crime.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayOf course the blame lies on the person who carried out the attack, where have i indicated anything different?
How do you know, maybe a bomb or a fire would have been worse? If you want to
claim that without guns there would be no gun crime sure, but the human heart that
is hell bent on mass murder will find away. So direct the blame on the monster that
did the crime.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayWhat you need is a ban on guns that can hold over a certain number of rounds. No civilian needs military grade weapons, they are designed for one purpose - maximum killing.
We don't need more gun laws we need people who want to murder to have a
change of heart so murder doesn't occur. It is a crime issue not a more gun law
problem.
Kelly
Originally posted by Proper KnobNot sure how that would change thinigs, the last two times something like this
What you need is a ban on guns that can hold over a certain number of rounds. No civilian needs military grade weapons, they are designed for one purpose - maximum killing.
happened they were carrying more than one weapon. It is the human heart that
can get so twisted, the cure has to be there, where there is a will there will always
be away to do harm.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayKelly, we've been killing each other as long as we've been on this planet. The earliest school shooting in the US can be dated to 1764 (according wiki), our species is prone to violence.
Not sure how that would change thinigs, the last two times something like this
happened they were carrying more than one weapon. It is the human heart that
can get so twisted, the cure has to be there, where there is a will there will always
be away to do harm.
Kelly
If society can't reduce peoples propensity towards violence, then reduce the amount of violence they can commit. In the case of bullets it's a matter of math. A gun that can hold say five rounds is going to do a lot less damage than a gun which holds twenty or fifty.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by shilohWell first off it is not unpredictable... it's not even close to being unpredictable.
What do "us gun people" have to do with the unpredictable act of a particular deranged individual? What about "you economic people" or "you educational people" or "you psychology people?" What is pointing fingers going to accomplish?
The only thing that couldn't be predicted about this atrocity is where or when.
That it happened was nigh on inevitable.
And the reason that guns are relevant is that wide ownership of guns and the culture
surrounding them is why this man was able to kill that many people that quickly.
The ease of getting hold of weapons that powerful is a significant factor in both the number
and severity of such incidents. (not the only factor, but a significant one)
In this instance (according to the current news reports, which can be relied upon to be
inaccurate at this stage) it currently looks like the guns used were owned by the mother
of the murderer. Whether or not she had a legitimate need or reason to own them, if she
had them and their ammo securely stored in a gun safe that only she new the access code to
then it would have been much harder for her son to flip out and go on a killing spree.
And certainly much harder to go on that big a killing spree.
There are some legitimate uses for guns.
However as with all powerful and dangerous tools they should be strictly and heavily regulated
and restricted.
Those who want/need them should be able to demonstrate a need, as well as fitness to own them.
I have no objections to people owning hunting rifles or sporting pistols as long as they are well regulated
and secured.
However there is no need (except in some few exceptional circumstances which can be dealt with on
a case by case basis) for members of the public to own regular hand guns and assault rifles.
Originally posted by Proper KnobI didn't deny that 5 rounds verses 20 kills less, I just pointed out if you wanted to
Kelly, we've been killing each other as long as we've been on this planet. The earliest school shooting in the US can be dated to 1764 (according wiki), our species is prone to violence.
If society can't reduce peoples propensity towards violence, then reduce the amount of violence they can commit. In the case of bullets it's a matter of math. A gun ...[text shortened]... old say five rounds is going to do a lot less damage than a gun which holds twenty or fifty.
kill 20 you'd bring more guns or get created in other ways to do maximum damage
as Timothy McVeigh showed us with the Oklahoma City bombing.
Kelly