Ban gun free zones to reduce mass shootings

Speaking as a British person, I have to say that the USA right now scares the crap out of me. You have a sea of guns in there, your NRA needs to be locked up as a collection of crazed lunatics and you have a political party that's been plunging into a pit of insanity for years.
At the rate the USA is going, there will indeed be a wall put up around the USA. The thing is, all the locks will be on the outside, along with a sign saying 'Do not let the gun-crazy lunatics out.'

interesting ^

as a us citizen i often wonder about those in europe who have been negatively affected by some of the syrian refugees who choose to commit crimes toward them.

does calling the police keep you safe all of the time? hmm?

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a British person, I have to say that the USA right now scares the crap out of me. You have a sea of guns in there, your NRA needs to be locked up as a collection of crazed lunatics and you have a political party that's been plunging into a pit of insanity for years.
At the rate the USA is going, there will indeed be a wall put up around the USA. The thing is, all the locks will be on the outside, along with a sign saying 'Do not let the gun-crazy lunatics out.'

I cant deny we got some issues that requires our attention; but no sign, wall, or redcoat will stop us from doing anything we want to do, ever.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a British person, I have to say that the USA right now scares the crap out of me. You have a sea of guns in there, your NRA needs to be locked up as a collection of crazed lunatics and you have a political party that's been plunging into a pit of insanity for years.
At the rate the USA is going, there will indeed be a wall put up around the USA. The thing is, all the locks will be on the outside, along with a sign saying 'Do not let the gun-crazy lunatics out.'

You are defining the moral and ethical nature of our entire nation by the actions of the mentally ill, gang bangers and terrorists.

They aren't exactly representative of the entire population any more than your soccer hooligans are representative of your entire population. Or should we treat all brits as a bunch of drunken brawlers?

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a British person, I have to say that the USA right now scares the crap out of me. You have a sea of guns in there, your NRA needs to be locked up as a collection of crazed lunatics and you have a political party that's been plunging into a pit of insanity for years.
At the rate the USA is going, there will indeed be a wall put up around the USA. The thing is, all the locks will be on the outside, along with a sign saying 'Do not let the gun-crazy lunatics out.'

I cant deny we got some issues that requires our attention; but no sign, wall, or redcoat will stop us from doing anything we want to do, ever.

Sure, go ahead. But you do realise that so many mass shootings is completely insane don't you? We haven't had one here for years. And your second amendment was written to protect your country from invasion. That ship has long since sailed.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

It is impossible to take away guns from folk in the US anyhow....well without a lot of bloodshed.
Also impossible to take away gun culture from the US..ingrained as tea is for us.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a British person, I have to say that the USA right now scares the crap out of me. You have a sea of guns in there, your NRA needs to be locked up as a collection of crazed lunatics and you have a political party that's been plunging into a pit of insanity for years.
At the rate the USA is going, there will indeed be a wall put up around the USA. The thing is, all the locks will be on the outside, along with a sign saying 'Do not let the gun-crazy lunatics out.'

I cant deny we got some issues that requires our attention; but no sign, wall, or redcoat will stop us from doing anything we want to do, ever.

Sure, go ahead. But you do realise that so many mass shootings is completely insane don't you? We haven't had one here for years. And your second amendment was written to protect your country from invasion. That ship has long since sailed.

These shootings break my heart.

But we were born into different cultures / societies and mine will have guns for the foreseeable future, so I want some too.

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a British person, I have to say that the USA right now scares the crap out of me. You have a sea of guns in there, your NRA needs to be locked up as a collection of crazed lunatics and you have a political party that's been plunging into a pit of insanity for years.
At the rate the USA is going, there will indeed be a wall put up around the USA. The thing is, all the locks will be on the outside, along with a sign saying 'Do not let the gun-crazy lunatics out.'

I cant deny we got some issues that requires our attention; but no sign, wall, or redcoat will stop us from doing anything we want to do, ever.

Sure, go ahead. But you do realise that so many mass shootings is completely insane don't you? We haven't had one here for years. And your second amendment was written to protect your country from invasion. That ship has long since sailed.

These shootings break my heart.

But we were born into different cultures / societies and mine will have guns for the foreseeable future, so I want some too.

We don't have wolves or bears here, so I understand the need for guns in rural regions. I understand the need for guns in an urban area with high levels of crime. And I understand the need for guns if you are being threatened. I fail to see the point of owning a gun simply because you want one. Your comment of 'mine will have guns for the foreseeable future, so I want some too' makes no sense whatsoever to me. Just because something is available does not mean that you need it. I'd love to have a Spitfire because I think that it's the best plane ever. That doesn't mean that there's one on my lawn.
Making guns freely available purely based on a amendment to your constitution that was written at a time when there was a danger of invasion from the North and even from the West (the French in Louisiana) makes no sense now. Besides that amendment is for the right to bear arms as a part of the militia, which was part of the armed forces at the time.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Ooo I dunno around my parts there is a rumour going around of a very big angry badger down the canal.
Also you can actually own a spitfire .

originally posted by: machineintelligence
Rights are not privileges. Inalienable rights means secured by law, unable to be bought, unable to be disposed of, unforfeitable, untouchable. The right to keep and bear arms when it is violated sets up situations where people are gunned down like sheep to the slaughter.

Banning gun free zones would have more impact in the reduction of mass shootings, terrorism, and all other criminal behavior than any law restricting firearms ownership. Unarmed victims are far easier to kill than armed ones. This should be simple logic for people to understand. Mass shooting in gun free zones are far, far more common than mass shootings at places like shooting ranges, gun shows, or cop bars for that matter.

Lets start talking about banning gun free zones when a mass shooting takes place in one instead of talking about banning guns.

It sure worked at the soccer practice where the licensed gun carrying patriot shot and killed a 7 yr old girl just the other day, now didn't it?

NO THANKS!!!

originally posted by: introvert
You cannot ban gun-free zones because people have personal property rights that are on par with one's right to bear arms. People have the right to demand people follow their rules, within constitutional reason, on their own property.

Your right ends where someone else's rights begin.

That's true. Although I generally agree with the OP that 'gun-free' zones should generally be eliminated, that cannot be extended to private property. A private citizen or business should always have the right to establish its own policy in that regard, just as it should on certain other issues.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a British person, I have to say that the USA right now scares the crap out of me. You have a sea of guns in there, your NRA needs to be locked up as a collection of crazed lunatics and you have a political party that's been plunging into a pit of insanity for years.
At the rate the USA is going, there will indeed be a wall put up around the USA. The thing is, all the locks will be on the outside, along with a sign saying 'Do not let the gun-crazy lunatics out.'

I cant deny we got some issues that requires our attention; but no sign, wall, or redcoat will stop us from doing anything we want to do, ever.

Sure, go ahead. But you do realise that so many mass shootings is completely insane don't you? We haven't had one here for years. And your second amendment was written to protect your country from invasion. That ship has long since sailed.

These shootings break my heart.

But we were born into different cultures / societies and mine will have guns for the foreseeable future, so I want some too.

We don't have wolves or bears here, so I understand the need for guns in rural regions. I understand the need for guns in an urban area with high levels of crime. And I understand the need for guns if you are being threatened. I fail to see the point of owning a gun simply because you want one. Your comment of 'mine will have guns for the foreseeable future, so I want some too' makes no sense whatsoever to me. Just because something is available does not mean that you need it. I'd love to have a Spitfire because I think that it's the best plane ever. That doesn't mean that there's one on my lawn.
Making guns freely available purely based on a amendment to your constitution that was written at a time when there was a danger of invasion from the North and even from the West (the French in Louisiana) makes no sense now. Besides that amendment is for the right to bear arms as a part of the militia, which was part of the armed forces at the time.

Thats bc youre a euro cuck man. If you dont want one dont get one, if you dont want me to have mine come take it.

Nah, the US is f***ed. No amount of gun regulation can save it at this point without a massive amount of bloodshed. All the people who'd use them for evil things already have guns, and while stricter regulations would lead to less shootings committed by teenagers and also less suicides, the organised-crime style things would only get worse. They have passed the event horizon.
What they do need to stop doing though, is following the retarded logic train of "if more people have guns, there will be less shootings!"

Currently, the biggest threat to the United States is its own police force, because they are allowed to get away with the "they might have possibly been trying to maybe reach for a gun or something dangerous like a ballpoint pen when I shot them twelve times in the back of the head."

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a British person, I have to say that the USA right now scares the crap out of me. You have a sea of guns in there, your NRA needs to be locked up as a collection of crazed lunatics and you have a political party that's been plunging into a pit of insanity for years.
At the rate the USA is going, there will indeed be a wall put up around the USA. The thing is, all the locks will be on the outside, along with a sign saying 'Do not let the gun-crazy lunatics out.'

I cant deny we got some issues that requires our attention; but no sign, wall, or redcoat will stop us from doing anything we want to do, ever.

Sure, go ahead. But you do realise that so many mass shootings is completely insane don't you? We haven't had one here for years. And your second amendment was written to protect your country from invasion. That ship has long since sailed.

These shootings break my heart.

But we were born into different cultures / societies and mine will have guns for the foreseeable future, so I want some too.

We don't have wolves or bears here, so I understand the need for guns in rural regions. I understand the need for guns in an urban area with high levels of crime. And I understand the need for guns if you are being threatened. I fail to see the point of owning a gun simply because you want one. Your comment of 'mine will have guns for the foreseeable future, so I want some too' makes no sense whatsoever to me. Just because something is available does not mean that you need it. I'd love to have a Spitfire because I think that it's the best plane ever. That doesn't mean that there's one on my lawn.
Making guns freely available purely based on a amendment to your constitution that was written at a time when there was a danger of invasion from the North and even from the West (the French in Louisiana) makes no sense now. Besides that amendment is for the right to bear arms as a part of the militia, which was part of the armed forces at the time.

Thats bc youre a euro cuck man. If you dont want one dont get one, if you dont want me to have mine come take it.

No-one is suggesting taking your gun and this is where the gun lobby starts to play on fears by coming unglued on people who even mention gun control. I have no idea what 'euro cuck man' means and if it's some kind of bizarre insult then I'm going to note that you were the person to wimp out and resort to insults. I prefer to stay above the fray.
I've seen stories about maniacs who have been seen walking about in car parks by kids playgrounds carrying a gun and babbling some nonsense about how it's their right to bear their arms in public and that they don't understand why the parents are scared of them. Those people are frankly delusional. Guns do not belong anywhere near a playground.
Surely schools should be gun-free zones? And hospitals? Kindergartens? What's wrong with the idea of gun-free zones?
What's also wrong with background checks, to make sure that criminals and the mentally ill can't easily get their hands on guns? What's wrong with some common sense? The point of a gun is to kill things. That's what they were designed to do. They're not 'cool', they're not an accessory, they shoot bullets and they kill people. You don't give a maniac a lethal weapon. They are too dangerous for that. What's wrong with having responsible people having access to guns, not the kind of delusional lunatics that we keep hearing about?

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

And hereby we come to one of the major issues I have with the US's rampant gun culture. To my knowledge, there are quite a few people who own guns not because they see them as the dangerous weapons/tools that they are, but because they view them as fashion accessories or collector's items.

Also, a Citizen does not need a fully automatic assault rifle. Sorry, you just don't. If the US military decides to impose martial law, the people are f***ed anyway. The biggest hope would come from military personnel that would go against that, not guerrilla-wannabes.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: milom

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
Speaking as a British person, I have to say that the USA right now scares the crap out of me. You have a sea of guns in there, your NRA needs to be locked up as a collection of crazed lunatics and you have a political party that's been plunging into a pit of insanity for years.
At the rate the USA is going, there will indeed be a wall put up around the USA. The thing is, all the locks will be on the outside, along with a sign saying 'Do not let the gun-crazy lunatics out.'

I cant deny we got some issues that requires our attention; but no sign, wall, or redcoat will stop us from doing anything we want to do, ever.

Sure, go ahead. But you do realise that so many mass shootings is completely insane don't you? We haven't had one here for years. And your second amendment was written to protect your country from invasion. That ship has long since sailed.

These shootings break my heart.

But we were born into different cultures / societies and mine will have guns for the foreseeable future, so I want some too.

We don't have wolves or bears here, so I understand the need for guns in rural regions. I understand the need for guns in an urban area with high levels of crime. And I understand the need for guns if you are being threatened. I fail to see the point of owning a gun simply because you want one. Your comment of 'mine will have guns for the foreseeable future, so I want some too' makes no sense whatsoever to me. Just because something is available does not mean that you need it. I'd love to have a Spitfire because I think that it's the best plane ever. That doesn't mean that there's one on my lawn.
Making guns freely available purely based on a amendment to your constitution that was written at a time when there was a danger of invasion from the North and even from the West (the French in Louisiana) makes no sense now. Besides that amendment is for the right to bear arms as a part of the militia, which was part of the armed forces at the time.

Thats bc youre a euro cuck man. If you dont want one dont get one, if you dont want me to have mine come take it.

No-one is suggesting taking your gun and this is where the gun lobby starts to play on fears by coming unglued on people who even mention gun control. I have no idea what 'euro cuck man' means and if it's some kind of bizarre insult then I'm going to note that you were the person to wimp out and resort to insults. I prefer to stay above the fray.
I've seen stories about maniacs who have been seen walking about in car parks by kids playgrounds carrying a gun and babbling some nonsense about how it's their right to bear their arms in public and that they don't understand why the parents are scared of them. Those people are frankly delusional. Guns do not belong anywhere near a playground.
Surely schools should be gun-free zones? And hospitals? Kindergartens? What's wrong with the idea of gun-free zones?
What's also wrong with background checks, to make sure that criminals and the mentally ill can't easily get their hands on guns? What's wrong with some common sense? The point of a gun is to kill things. That's what they were designed to do. They're not 'cool', they're not an accessory, they shoot bullets and they kill people. You don't give a maniac a lethal weapon. They are too dangerous for that. What's wrong with having responsible people having access to guns, not the kind of delusional lunatics that we keep hearing about?

If immediately gun free zones were created and strict background checks implemented to you liking, anybody would still be able to get a gun within the week. We have guns, it is what it is. You have stated you understand the need for urban dwellers to own firearms. 80% of the US citizens are urban dwellers. They, and all others, have a moral and legal right to self defense.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
Also, a Citizen does not need a fully automatic assault rifle. Sorry, you just don't.

That may be true, but its also completely irrelevant to the current gun control debate. Fully-automatic rifles have not been an off-the-shelf category of firearm in the United States for decades. Although still technically available, they haven't been produced for the civilian market since 1986 and, as a result, prices are exorbitant, costing many thousands of dollars. They also require extra layers of bureaucratic red tape in order to purchase compared to other classes of firearm, and the total process of purchase can take months.

These are NOT the same category of firearms that would be affected by a so-called 'assault weapons ban.' Those are semi-automatic. One bullet and one bullet only for each trigger pull.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: machineintelligence
a reply to: introvert

I like a honest conversation. I'm also pro-2nd.

Your threads and posts on this site do not support those comments.

Believe as you wish, but the fact remains that you have not addressed my specific points.

Comment on that and not my post history.

Your post history ARE your specific points. People have memory. You cant stop or prohibit that.

You say you want open honest communication but you follow that by telling people what they can or cant say and what they can or cant respond to. That is neither open nor honest.

A property owner not allowing armed individuals on to their property does not erode your rights. An armed individual can still exercise his right, just not on that property.

I believe in your right to say that, just not in my neighborhood. I pay the HOA fees so I get to make that decision. You can exercise your right, but do it somewhere else.

There is ongoing argument over whether state government can limit or override federal government. Do you honestly believe you, as a simple property owner on which you operate a public access business, have that same authority?

I have had conceal carry permits. On occasion someone, usually an off duty police officer working as security, has tried to stop me from entering a business. The last time that happened the officer said, "I don't want that in here." I responded, "I have a license that says I can carry this anywhere except airports and court rooms and nowhere on there does it say I need your permission." End of story.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Your post history ARE your specific points. People have memory. You cant stop or prohibit that.

And my post history would prove that I am pro-2nd. Don't try to deflect from the issue because you feel the need to go after me instead.

You say you want open honest communication but you follow that by telling people what they can or cant say and what they can or cant respond to.

I've done nothing of the sort. Are you just making-up stuff? That really makes no sense.

I pay the HOA fees so I get to make that decision.

If you live in a HOA neighborhood, then you know full well that property rights of the owners superseded the rights of others when it comes to certain rules. Many HOA's will not allow you to fly a flag outside of your homes as to keep up a certain appearance. Wouldn't that be against free speech, yet is completely legal?

You can exercise your right, but do it somewhere else.

That's the point I was making this entire time.

A private property owner can create a gun-free zone if they wish. You can exercise your right to carry, but will have to do it somewhere else if you don't want to follow their rules.

There is ongoing argument over whether state government can limit or override federal government. Do you honestly believe you, as a simple property owner on which you operate a public access business, have that same authority?

Can you clarify? It's not very clear what you are trying to imply or ask.

I have had conceal carry permits. On occasion someone, usually an off duty police officer working as security, has tried to stop me from entering a business. The last time that happened the officer said, "I don't want that in here." I responded, "I have a license that says I can carry this anywhere except airports and court rooms and nowhere on there does it say I need your permission." End of story.

And what is your point?

a reply to: introvert

And my post history would prove that I am pro-2nd. Don't try to deflect from the issue because you feel the need to go after me instead.

You claim to be pro 2nd yet you seek to limit its scope. I am not deflecting anything. You are deflecting however by asserting my response is out of a need to 'go after you'. I assure you, 'you' do not rate that high on my list. The subject matter does.

You said in response to machineintelligence:

Comment on that and not my post history.

In regard to that statement I said, "You say you want open honest communication but you follow that by telling people what they can or cant say and what they can or cant respond to."

Then you said,

I've done nothing of the sort. Are you just making-up stuff? That really makes no sense.

Your two statements appear to be in conflict. Just because you didn't say it to me doesn't mean I didn't see it. Obviously there is no need to make things up.

If you live in a HOA neighborhood, then you know full well that property rights of the owners superseded the rights of others when it comes to certain rules. Many HOA's will not allow you to fly a flag outside of your homes as to keep up a certain appearance. Wouldn't that be against free speech, yet is completely legal?

Even the mighty HOA bows to greater authority. As do business owners. And many of those HOA violations of free speech have been challenged and overruled.

A private property owner can create a gun-free zone if they wish. You can exercise your right to carry, but will have to do it somewhere else if you don't want to follow their rules.

You are intentionally using a very frivolous definition of 'gun free zone' in an attempt at trivializing the issue. To compare a business owner saying he does not wants guns on his property to a legislation enabled government declared gun free zone is nothing more than disinformation and deception.

Can you clarify? It's not very clear what you are trying to imply or ask.

The question was quite clear. Do you, as a simple business owner, believe you have the same authority in regard to federal law as a state government?

And what is your point?

My point is obvious. A business saying they don't want guns on their property was easily over ruled by the license that granted me permission to carry the firearm. Nowhere on that license does it say I need your permission.

My inalienable right trumps your preference.