|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 03 2015 09:30 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 09:23 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 08:47 Eskendereya wrote:On December 03 2015 08:42 Doraemon wrote:
has trump come out and said if everyone was armed, this wouldn't have happened yet? I'm sure if you were under attack by terrorist gunmen you'd want a gun for self protection. But I find that liberals and Democrats are afraid to own guns because they are afraid they may shoot themselves, at least it seems. I care slightly less about "themselves" and more about "accidentally/ purposely shooting a family member or any other person". As a Canadian socialist apparatchik dog and a gun owner, I feel like these concerns are legitimate but I'm a guy who goes above and beyond what's legally required. I own two rifles that are stored unloaded in a gun safe, the ammo is in another room, and there's a trigger lock on each rifle. There's something fundamentally fucked up about taking those things lightly and sadly it gives me a bad name. Lethal force is to be treated with an amount of respect that many just don't seem to have. This macho confidence that everything's going to be alright and that shit things only happen to lesser individuals, it's disconcerting. People who act responsibly don't have a bad name.
No but many people also don't make that distinction.
|
On December 03 2015 09:35 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 09:30 m4ini wrote:On December 03 2015 09:23 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 08:47 Eskendereya wrote:On December 03 2015 08:42 Doraemon wrote:
has trump come out and said if everyone was armed, this wouldn't have happened yet? I'm sure if you were under attack by terrorist gunmen you'd want a gun for self protection. But I find that liberals and Democrats are afraid to own guns because they are afraid they may shoot themselves, at least it seems. I care slightly less about "themselves" and more about "accidentally/ purposely shooting a family member or any other person". As a Canadian socialist apparatchik dog and a gun owner, I feel like these concerns are legitimate but I'm a guy who goes above and beyond what's legally required. I own two rifles that are stored unloaded in a gun safe, the ammo is in another room, and there's a trigger lock on each rifle. There's something fundamentally fucked up about taking those things lightly and sadly it gives me a bad name. Lethal force is to be treated with an amount of respect that many just don't seem to have. This macho confidence that everything's going to be alright and that shit things only happen to lesser individuals, it's disconcerting. People who act responsibly don't have a bad name. No but many people also don't make that distinction.
Ignorants be ignorants, not much you can do there apart from not giving a shit about their opinions. Thumbs up for being responsible.
|
On December 03 2015 09:23 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 08:47 Eskendereya wrote:On December 03 2015 08:42 Doraemon wrote:
has trump come out and said if everyone was armed, this wouldn't have happened yet? I'm sure if you were under attack by terrorist gunmen you'd want a gun for self protection. But I find that liberals and Democrats are afraid to own guns because they are afraid they may shoot themselves, at least it seems. I care slightly less about "themselves" and more about "accidentally/ purposely shooting a family member or any other person". As a Canadian socialist apparatchik dog and a gun owner, I feel like these concerns are legitimate but I'm a guy who goes above and beyond what's legally required. I own two rifles that are stored unloaded in a gun safe, the ammo is in another room, and there's a trigger lock on each rifle.There's something fundamentally fucked up about taking those things lightly and sadly it gives me a bad name. Lethal force is to be treated with an amount of respect that many just don't seem to have. This macho confidence that everything's going to be alright and that shit things only happen to lesser individuals, it's disconcerting.
You're doing it right then 
|
On December 03 2015 09:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 09:23 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 08:47 Eskendereya wrote:On December 03 2015 08:42 Doraemon wrote:
has trump come out and said if everyone was armed, this wouldn't have happened yet? I'm sure if you were under attack by terrorist gunmen you'd want a gun for self protection. But I find that liberals and Democrats are afraid to own guns because they are afraid they may shoot themselves, at least it seems. I care slightly less about "themselves" and more about "accidentally/ purposely shooting a family member or any other person". As a Canadian socialist apparatchik dog and a gun owner, I feel like these concerns are legitimate but I'm a guy who goes above and beyond what's legally required. I own two rifles that are stored unloaded in a gun safe, the ammo is in another room, and there's a trigger lock on each rifle.There's something fundamentally fucked up about taking those things lightly and sadly it gives me a bad name. Lethal force is to be treated with an amount of respect that many just don't seem to have. This macho confidence that everything's going to be alright and that shit things only happen to lesser individuals, it's disconcerting. You're doing it right then
Thanks dad
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
|
On December 03 2015 09:47 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 09:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 09:23 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 08:47 Eskendereya wrote:On December 03 2015 08:42 Doraemon wrote:
has trump come out and said if everyone was armed, this wouldn't have happened yet? I'm sure if you were under attack by terrorist gunmen you'd want a gun for self protection. But I find that liberals and Democrats are afraid to own guns because they are afraid they may shoot themselves, at least it seems. I care slightly less about "themselves" and more about "accidentally/ purposely shooting a family member or any other person". As a Canadian socialist apparatchik dog and a gun owner, I feel like these concerns are legitimate but I'm a guy who goes above and beyond what's legally required. I own two rifles that are stored unloaded in a gun safe, the ammo is in another room, and there's a trigger lock on each rifle.There's something fundamentally fucked up about taking those things lightly and sadly it gives me a bad name. Lethal force is to be treated with an amount of respect that many just don't seem to have. This macho confidence that everything's going to be alright and that shit things only happen to lesser individuals, it's disconcerting. You're doing it right then Thanks dad
You're very welcome, but take off your damn shoes when you come home. I just got the carpet steamed. Also, pick up some milk on the way home.
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/12/02/hours-before-san-bernardino-mass-shooting-doctors-were-on-capitol-hill-petitioning-congress-to-lift-ban-on-gun-violence-research/?tid=sm_tw
Hours before San Bernardino shooting, doctors urged Congress to lift ban on gun violence research
On Wednesday morning, a group of doctors in white coats arrived on Capitol Hill to deliver a petition to Congress. Signed by more than 2,000 physicians around the country, it pleads with lawmakers to lift a restriction that for nearly two decades has essentially blocked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from conducting research on gun violence.
Joined by a handful of Democratic lawmakers, the doctors spoke about the need to view gun violence as a public health epidemic and research ways to solve it – as the country would with any disease causing the deaths of thousands of Americans each year.
“It is disappointing that we have made little progress over the past 20 years in finding solutions to gun violence," said Nina Agrawal, a New York physician and member of the advocacy group Doctors for America, according to the group's Twitter feed.
“We should all be able to agree that this debate should be informed by objective data and scientific research,” said Rep. David Price (D-N.C.).
The group cited a letter released by former Rep. Jay Dickey of Arkansas, who authored an amendment that restricted federal funding for research into gun violence and its effects on public health. He now regrets that effort.
"Research could have been continued on gun violence without infringing on the rights of gun owners," wrote Dickey, who has said he only wanted to ensure that no dollars went to gun control advocacy. "Somehow or someway we should slowly but methodically fund such research until a solution is reached. Doing nothing is no longer an acceptable solution."
After the speeches and presentations, after the group posed for pictures, Wednesday's event ended. The crowd dispersed. And hours later, another mass shooting began to unfold in San Bernardino, Calif. Multiple shooters, multiple victims – with 14 dead and even more wounded.
Perhaps that's not as much of a coincidence as it might seem, given that the United States has experienced an average of more than one mass shooting for every day of 2015.
"It’s ironic," Price said in an interview Wednesday evening, after the extent of the carnage in California became clearer. "It certain does underscore what we were saying earlier today about the scourge of gun violence, which has become such a feature of our daily lives."
Yet maybe it really wasn't that ironic, he added a moment later, given the all-too-familiar scenes. "What we were saying this morning was just one piece of this, but surely it is the least we can do to take the shackles off our researchers and begin to understand this problem more fully," Price said. "What we’re talking about is really very modest and very basic."
Others raised the issue of the research ban after the mass shooting that killed 10 people at an Oregon community college in October.
Congressional lawmakers "control the purse strings. They could change this today, if they wanted to," Daniel Webster, who directs the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research in Baltimore, told the Post at the time.
Webster wasn't optimistic that change would come anytime soon. But like the doctors who made their plea to lawmakers on Capitol Hill early Wednesday, hours before gunfire rocked another community, he hoped it would come sooner than later.
"It just affects the basic things we care about in public health – the mortality, the life expectancy, morbidity, mental health. It affects all of those things in pretty profound ways," Webster said of gun violence. "If we had a disease that was killing as many people as our guns in our country, we would devote a lot more resources to make sure we had the best data, the best research to know what is most affected."
For reference, the US government doesn't look into gun violence. We don't do research because law makers refuse to take action on the issue. I am sure this has nothing got do with money they received from the NRA and gun manufactures. Its not even about gun control, we can't even collect information through our government.
Personally I don't mind people owning guns. My brother owns what would be considered an assault weapon by most. But I don't like any lobby prohibiting research because the results might cut into their profit.
On a side note, 180,000 back ground checks were preformed on back Friday to purchase 1 or more firearms. I feel safer already.
|
On December 03 2015 10:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 09:47 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 09:23 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 08:47 Eskendereya wrote:On December 03 2015 08:42 Doraemon wrote:
has trump come out and said if everyone was armed, this wouldn't have happened yet? I'm sure if you were under attack by terrorist gunmen you'd want a gun for self protection. But I find that liberals and Democrats are afraid to own guns because they are afraid they may shoot themselves, at least it seems. I care slightly less about "themselves" and more about "accidentally/ purposely shooting a family member or any other person". As a Canadian socialist apparatchik dog and a gun owner, I feel like these concerns are legitimate but I'm a guy who goes above and beyond what's legally required. I own two rifles that are stored unloaded in a gun safe, the ammo is in another room, and there's a trigger lock on each rifle.There's something fundamentally fucked up about taking those things lightly and sadly it gives me a bad name. Lethal force is to be treated with an amount of respect that many just don't seem to have. This macho confidence that everything's going to be alright and that shit things only happen to lesser individuals, it's disconcerting. You're doing it right then Thanks dad You're very welcome, but take off your damn shoes when you come home. I just got the carpet steamed. Also, pick up some milk on the way home.
As genial as this exchange is, it doesn't matter how well trained you are or how safe you are. You could be the guy who snaps and decides to kill people, with all your training and preparation being brought to bear. Guns, outside of simple 3 shooter handguns and muzzle loading muskets should be outlawed or heavily regulated. Why the hell is it so easy to amass an arsenal in this country? (you're Canadian, I know, so sorry) It is just insane to me.
I am so tired of hearing how mass killings could occur with other weapons, or how the government wants us to be unarmed. Or how people won't attack us because we have guns. Clearly this shit happens, and it is time to do SOMETHING.
|
On December 03 2015 10:32 Plansix wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/12/02/hours-before-san-bernardino-mass-shooting-doctors-were-on-capitol-hill-petitioning-congress-to-lift-ban-on-gun-violence-research/?tid=sm_twShow nested quote +
Hours before San Bernardino shooting, doctors urged Congress to lift ban on gun violence research
On Wednesday morning, a group of doctors in white coats arrived on Capitol Hill to deliver a petition to Congress. Signed by more than 2,000 physicians around the country, it pleads with lawmakers to lift a restriction that for nearly two decades has essentially blocked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from conducting research on gun violence.
Joined by a handful of Democratic lawmakers, the doctors spoke about the need to view gun violence as a public health epidemic and research ways to solve it – as the country would with any disease causing the deaths of thousands of Americans each year.
“It is disappointing that we have made little progress over the past 20 years in finding solutions to gun violence," said Nina Agrawal, a New York physician and member of the advocacy group Doctors for America, according to the group's Twitter feed.
“We should all be able to agree that this debate should be informed by objective data and scientific research,” said Rep. David Price (D-N.C.).
The group cited a letter released by former Rep. Jay Dickey of Arkansas, who authored an amendment that restricted federal funding for research into gun violence and its effects on public health. He now regrets that effort.
"Research could have been continued on gun violence without infringing on the rights of gun owners," wrote Dickey, who has said he only wanted to ensure that no dollars went to gun control advocacy. "Somehow or someway we should slowly but methodically fund such research until a solution is reached. Doing nothing is no longer an acceptable solution."
After the speeches and presentations, after the group posed for pictures, Wednesday's event ended. The crowd dispersed. And hours later, another mass shooting began to unfold in San Bernardino, Calif. Multiple shooters, multiple victims – with 14 dead and even more wounded.
Perhaps that's not as much of a coincidence as it might seem, given that the United States has experienced an average of more than one mass shooting for every day of 2015.
"It’s ironic," Price said in an interview Wednesday evening, after the extent of the carnage in California became clearer. "It certain does underscore what we were saying earlier today about the scourge of gun violence, which has become such a feature of our daily lives."
Yet maybe it really wasn't that ironic, he added a moment later, given the all-too-familiar scenes. "What we were saying this morning was just one piece of this, but surely it is the least we can do to take the shackles off our researchers and begin to understand this problem more fully," Price said. "What we’re talking about is really very modest and very basic."
Others raised the issue of the research ban after the mass shooting that killed 10 people at an Oregon community college in October.
Congressional lawmakers "control the purse strings. They could change this today, if they wanted to," Daniel Webster, who directs the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research in Baltimore, told the Post at the time.
Webster wasn't optimistic that change would come anytime soon. But like the doctors who made their plea to lawmakers on Capitol Hill early Wednesday, hours before gunfire rocked another community, he hoped it would come sooner than later.
"It just affects the basic things we care about in public health – the mortality, the life expectancy, morbidity, mental health. It affects all of those things in pretty profound ways," Webster said of gun violence. "If we had a disease that was killing as many people as our guns in our country, we would devote a lot more resources to make sure we had the best data, the best research to know what is most affected."
For reference, the US government doesn't look into gun violence. We don't do research because law makers refuse to take action on the issue. I am sure this has nothing got do with money they received from the NRA and gun manufactures. Its not even about gun control, we can't even collect information through our government. Personally I don't mind people owning guns. My brother owns what would be considered an assault weapon by most. But I don't like any lobby prohibiting research because the results might cut into their profit. On a side note, 180,000 back ground checks were preformed on back Friday to purchase 1 or more firearms. I feel safer already.
It makes me so upset that we can't even gather significant data, since that would lead to the inevitable conversations that would jeopardize gun ownership.
|
On December 03 2015 10:47 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 10:32 Plansix wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/12/02/hours-before-san-bernardino-mass-shooting-doctors-were-on-capitol-hill-petitioning-congress-to-lift-ban-on-gun-violence-research/?tid=sm_tw
Hours before San Bernardino shooting, doctors urged Congress to lift ban on gun violence research
On Wednesday morning, a group of doctors in white coats arrived on Capitol Hill to deliver a petition to Congress. Signed by more than 2,000 physicians around the country, it pleads with lawmakers to lift a restriction that for nearly two decades has essentially blocked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from conducting research on gun violence.
Joined by a handful of Democratic lawmakers, the doctors spoke about the need to view gun violence as a public health epidemic and research ways to solve it – as the country would with any disease causing the deaths of thousands of Americans each year.
“It is disappointing that we have made little progress over the past 20 years in finding solutions to gun violence," said Nina Agrawal, a New York physician and member of the advocacy group Doctors for America, according to the group's Twitter feed.
“We should all be able to agree that this debate should be informed by objective data and scientific research,” said Rep. David Price (D-N.C.).
The group cited a letter released by former Rep. Jay Dickey of Arkansas, who authored an amendment that restricted federal funding for research into gun violence and its effects on public health. He now regrets that effort.
"Research could have been continued on gun violence without infringing on the rights of gun owners," wrote Dickey, who has said he only wanted to ensure that no dollars went to gun control advocacy. "Somehow or someway we should slowly but methodically fund such research until a solution is reached. Doing nothing is no longer an acceptable solution."
After the speeches and presentations, after the group posed for pictures, Wednesday's event ended. The crowd dispersed. And hours later, another mass shooting began to unfold in San Bernardino, Calif. Multiple shooters, multiple victims – with 14 dead and even more wounded.
Perhaps that's not as much of a coincidence as it might seem, given that the United States has experienced an average of more than one mass shooting for every day of 2015.
"It’s ironic," Price said in an interview Wednesday evening, after the extent of the carnage in California became clearer. "It certain does underscore what we were saying earlier today about the scourge of gun violence, which has become such a feature of our daily lives."
Yet maybe it really wasn't that ironic, he added a moment later, given the all-too-familiar scenes. "What we were saying this morning was just one piece of this, but surely it is the least we can do to take the shackles off our researchers and begin to understand this problem more fully," Price said. "What we’re talking about is really very modest and very basic."
Others raised the issue of the research ban after the mass shooting that killed 10 people at an Oregon community college in October.
Congressional lawmakers "control the purse strings. They could change this today, if they wanted to," Daniel Webster, who directs the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research in Baltimore, told the Post at the time.
Webster wasn't optimistic that change would come anytime soon. But like the doctors who made their plea to lawmakers on Capitol Hill early Wednesday, hours before gunfire rocked another community, he hoped it would come sooner than later.
"It just affects the basic things we care about in public health – the mortality, the life expectancy, morbidity, mental health. It affects all of those things in pretty profound ways," Webster said of gun violence. "If we had a disease that was killing as many people as our guns in our country, we would devote a lot more resources to make sure we had the best data, the best research to know what is most affected."
For reference, the US government doesn't look into gun violence. We don't do research because law makers refuse to take action on the issue. I am sure this has nothing got do with money they received from the NRA and gun manufactures. Its not even about gun control, we can't even collect information through our government. Personally I don't mind people owning guns. My brother owns what would be considered an assault weapon by most. But I don't like any lobby prohibiting research because the results might cut into their profit. On a side note, 180,000 back ground checks were preformed on back Friday to purchase 1 or more firearms. I feel safer already. It makes me so upset that we can't even gather significant data, since that would lead to the inevitable conversations that would jeopardize gun ownership.
It wouldn't even jeopardize gun ownership, because no law is going to seize weapons. It would just start a discussion on real, effective ways to prevent these crimes. And it might lead to the shocking realization that states with loose gun restrictions and lots of sales also have a lot of gun violence. Which the people who make the fire arms don't want.
|
On December 03 2015 10:37 frazzle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 10:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 09:47 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 09:23 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 08:47 Eskendereya wrote:On December 03 2015 08:42 Doraemon wrote:
has trump come out and said if everyone was armed, this wouldn't have happened yet? I'm sure if you were under attack by terrorist gunmen you'd want a gun for self protection. But I find that liberals and Democrats are afraid to own guns because they are afraid they may shoot themselves, at least it seems. I care slightly less about "themselves" and more about "accidentally/ purposely shooting a family member or any other person". As a Canadian socialist apparatchik dog and a gun owner, I feel like these concerns are legitimate but I'm a guy who goes above and beyond what's legally required. I own two rifles that are stored unloaded in a gun safe, the ammo is in another room, and there's a trigger lock on each rifle.There's something fundamentally fucked up about taking those things lightly and sadly it gives me a bad name. Lethal force is to be treated with an amount of respect that many just don't seem to have. This macho confidence that everything's going to be alright and that shit things only happen to lesser individuals, it's disconcerting. You're doing it right then Thanks dad You're very welcome, but take off your damn shoes when you come home. I just got the carpet steamed. Also, pick up some milk on the way home. As genial as this exchange is, it doesn't matter how well trained you are or how safe you are. You could be the guy who snaps and decides to kill people, with all your training and preparation being brought to bear. Guns, outside of simple 3 shooter handguns and muzzle loading muskets should be outlawed or heavily regulated. Why the hell is it so easy to amass an arsenal in this country? (you're Canadian, I know, so sorry) It is just insane to me. I am so tired of hearing how mass killings could occur with other weapons, or how the government wants us to be unarmed. Or how people won't attack us because we have guns. Clearly this shit happens, and it is time to do SOMETHING.
So far, in 2015 there's been an average of 1 mass shooting (4+ casualties = mass shooting) every day... So yeah, I agree with you 
|
It's interesting that the authorities are refusing to release the race of the suspects and refusing to rule out terrorism. And apparently the FBI may be taking over the investigation. Definitely weird that one of the dead suspects is female.
|
On December 03 2015 10:52 xDaunt wrote:
It's interesting that the authorities are refusing to release the race of the suspects and refusing to rule out terrorism. And apparently the FBI may be taking over the investigation. Definitely weird that one of the dead suspects is female.
I dislike the fact that they don't recognize that domestic terrorism is still terrorism.
|
|
|
On December 03 2015 10:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 10:52 xDaunt wrote:
It's interesting that the authorities are refusing to release the race of the suspects and refusing to rule out terrorism. And apparently the FBI may be taking over the investigation. Definitely weird that one of the dead suspects is female. I dislike the fact that they don't recognize that domestic terrorism is still terrorism.
Gotta be brown and pray 5 times a day before you get that title from the government. These will be loners and the mentally ill.
My cynicism in strong today.
|
On December 03 2015 10:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 10:52 xDaunt wrote:
It's interesting that the authorities are refusing to release the race of the suspects and refusing to rule out terrorism. And apparently the FBI may be taking over the investigation. Definitely weird that one of the dead suspects is female. I dislike the fact that they don't recognize that domestic terrorism is still terrorism.
I'd be surprised if this turns out to be some kind of Muslim terrorism, but we'll see.
|
according to bbc itmight have been a result of some sort of work dispute. definately not confirmed though. if so that's completely crazy.
"The Los Angeles Times and the New York Times, citing unnamed law enforcement officials, say investigators believe the suspects were known to those targeted
"Investigators believe there were three gunmen and one of them had worked at the facility and recently had a dispute with fellow employees, according to law enforcement officials," the New York Times reports, adding a witness said despite a face covering, one sounded and appeared very similar to employee who had left earlier.
"
|
On December 03 2015 10:37 frazzle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 10:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 09:47 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 09:23 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 08:47 Eskendereya wrote:On December 03 2015 08:42 Doraemon wrote:
has trump come out and said if everyone was armed, this wouldn't have happened yet? I'm sure if you were under attack by terrorist gunmen you'd want a gun for self protection. But I find that liberals and Democrats are afraid to own guns because they are afraid they may shoot themselves, at least it seems. I care slightly less about "themselves" and more about "accidentally/ purposely shooting a family member or any other person". As a Canadian socialist apparatchik dog and a gun owner, I feel like these concerns are legitimate but I'm a guy who goes above and beyond what's legally required. I own two rifles that are stored unloaded in a gun safe, the ammo is in another room, and there's a trigger lock on each rifle.There's something fundamentally fucked up about taking those things lightly and sadly it gives me a bad name. Lethal force is to be treated with an amount of respect that many just don't seem to have. This macho confidence that everything's going to be alright and that shit things only happen to lesser individuals, it's disconcerting. You're doing it right then Thanks dad You're very welcome, but take off your damn shoes when you come home. I just got the carpet steamed. Also, pick up some milk on the way home. As genial as this exchange is, it doesn't matter how well trained you are or how safe you are. You could be the guy who snaps and decides to kill people, with all your training and preparation being brought to bear. Guns, outside of simple 3 shooter handguns and muzzle loading muskets should be outlawed or heavily regulated. Why the hell is it so easy to amass an arsenal in this country? (you're Canadian, I know, so sorry) It is just insane to me. I am so tired of hearing how mass killings could occur with other weapons, or how the government wants us to be unarmed. Or how people won't attack us because we have guns. Clearly this shit happens, and it is time to do SOMETHING.
I understand your sentiment, I do. I was like you until I started looking at the numbers, and then I became interested in firearms, became a bit of a ballistics nerd and got into the hobby of shooting paper with my brother and a couple of friends.
I don't think there's much value in unraveling in the whole debate but to put it simply, I could also be the gun who kills his kids with a knife, or the guy who drinks and drives or texts and rives, or the guy who commits any number of atrocities. Why does "the guy who snaps" justifies banning or "heavily regulating" access? It largely ignores the root of the problem of shootings, I would argue. In Canada, the homicide rate is much lower per capita than the rate in the US, and I feel safe. Statistically, my odds of getting shot are so outlandishly low that I don't really buy into the fear rhetoric that you seem to have adopted. I'm more likely to get hit by a car or something like this. And we have a lot of guns here too...
Now to be clear, I'm fine with some legit regulation. I'm fine with ability tests, with all sorts of background checks and whatnot. But ultimately shootings like these are freak events here, and the reason why ESPECIALLY in the US, it's not gun control that needs to be looked at is because gun control for a country which insanely has decided that weapons should be the second amendment, it's simultaneously the path with the most resistance, and also the path that would yield the least results.
Shootings happen in the US not because you have access to guns, but because the US is a breeding ground for poor and miserable unemployed mentally ill people who are treated like trash. So while I think that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is a silly thing to say because it oversimplifies reality, it's true enough. Violence doesn't happen in a vacuum. The US is really good at putting people in a corner until they lose their shit.
|
One thing I wonder about is where do all the illegal guns come from? Are they like stolen from US manufacturers? Corrupt people in places where they can sell them in a black market? Imported from outside the US? I think it might be best to hit on some of the more root causes of this stuff. Hit it from the angle of mental health and other *why* reasons people do this, make legal gun ownership have a system where there are effective checks and no loopholes, and 3 curb the illegal guns that apparently are easy as pie to get by criminals.
If you drastically reduce illegal guns and make the process of getting a legal gun more lengthy, perhaps also more expensive, then you can overall reduce the number of guns while leaving the people who are dedicated enough (IE hunters and gun club people) to be able to obtain them. The US just needs to calm its tits about gun ownership and by attacking the problem from multiple angles will help with a cultural shift where people will be less and less "into" guns. Think like what they are doing with smoking, trying to slowly phase it out instead of fast and large scale changes.
|
On December 03 2015 11:07 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2015 10:37 frazzle wrote:On December 03 2015 10:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 09:47 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:40 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 09:23 Djzapz wrote:On December 03 2015 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 03 2015 08:47 Eskendereya wrote:On December 03 2015 08:42 Doraemon wrote:
has trump come out and said if everyone was armed, this wouldn't have happened yet? I'm sure if you were under attack by terrorist gunmen you'd want a gun for self protection. But I find that liberals and Democrats are afraid to own guns because they are afraid they may shoot themselves, at least it seems. I care slightly less about "themselves" and more about "accidentally/ purposely shooting a family member or any other person". As a Canadian socialist apparatchik dog and a gun owner, I feel like these concerns are legitimate but I'm a guy who goes above and beyond what's legally required. I own two rifles that are stored unloaded in a gun safe, the ammo is in another room, and there's a trigger lock on each rifle.There's something fundamentally fucked up about taking those things lightly and sadly it gives me a bad name. Lethal force is to be treated with an amount of respect that many just don't seem to have. This macho confidence that everything's going to be alright and that shit things only happen to lesser individuals, it's disconcerting. You're doing it right then Thanks dad You're very welcome, but take off your damn shoes when you come home. I just got the carpet steamed. Also, pick up some milk on the way home. As genial as this exchange is, it doesn't matter how well trained you are or how safe you are. You could be the guy who snaps and decides to kill people, with all your training and preparation being brought to bear. Guns, outside of simple 3 shooter handguns and muzzle loading muskets should be outlawed or heavily regulated. Why the hell is it so easy to amass an arsenal in this country? (you're Canadian, I know, so sorry) It is just insane to me. I am so tired of hearing how mass killings could occur with other weapons, or how the government wants us to be unarmed. Or how people won't attack us because we have guns. Clearly this shit happens, and it is time to do SOMETHING. I understand your sentiment, I do. I was like you until I started looking at the numbers, and then I became interested in firearms, became a bit of a ballistics nerd and got into the hobby of shooting paper with my brother and a couple of friends. I don't think there's much value in unraveling in the whole debate but to put it simply, I could also be the gun who kills his kids with a knife, or the guy who drinks and drives or texts and rives, or the guy who commits any number of atrocities. Why does "the guy who snaps" justifies banning or "heavily regulating" access? It largely ignores the root of the problem of shootings, I would argue. In Canada, the homicide rate is much lower per capita than the rate in the US, and I feel safe. Statistically, my odds of getting shot are so outlandishly low that I don't really buy into the fear rhetoric that you seem to have adopted. I'm more likely to get hit by a car or something like this. And we have a lot of guns here too... Now to be clear, I'm fine with some legit regulation. I'm fine with ability tests, with all sorts of background checks and whatnot. But ultimately shootings like these are freak events here, and the reason why ESPECIALLY in the US, it's not gun control that needs to be looked at is because gun control for a country which insanely has decided that weapons should be the second amendment, it's simultaneously the path with the most resistance, and also the path that would yield the worst results easily. Shootings happen in the US not because you have access to guns, but because the US is a breeding ground for poor and miserable unemployed mentally ill people who are treated like trash. So while I think that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is a silly thing to say because it oversimplifies reality, it's true enough. Violence doesn't happen in a vacuum. The US is really good at putting people in a corner until they lose their shit.
I appreciate your attempt to reason this out. Clearly many things factor into these events. Let's just make gun ownership more regulated. You need to prove you have training. You need to have no violent criminal record. You need to pass safety standards regularly. You can't get certain weapons at all, or at least not without reason and registration of those arms. All these little impediments make it much more likely that these events would be less common.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
