Americans Hopeful This Will Be Last Mass Shooting Before They Stop On Their Own For No Reason

originally posted by: Finspiracy

originally posted by: Tempter
You can't outlaw guns. That's against our Constitution.

Next.

I am well aware of that. That is the main reason i think your constitution needs a serious update.

Next.

"Your Constitution" and you think you have a dog in this race?

Funny

originally posted by: Finspiracy
I know all of those points. I know second amendment. My point is that guns will always exist, and their mechanics is constantly improved to be more deadly. Criminals will always have them. And the police and the military. I don't think it is a good idea to sell guns and bullets to average Joe because they might snap and then what happened in Vegas will not stay in Vegas anymore, it goes global.

So to try to guard against the smallest of percentage chances, you want to keep the law abiding from being able to defend themselves from the bad guys with guns and the possibility that their own officials will also go bad and turn on them?

I'm not sure that's an acceptable trade off.

Better to address why people go bad. If you do that, you might reduce all three problems rather than simply trying to remove inanimate tools.

originally posted by: Tempter
"Your Constitution" and you think you have a dog in this race?

Funny

Fair enough. Sorry for posting. I am a stupid hippie. Done with this topic.

Again:

The gun control vs. gun owners debaters are not going budge. So if we put the gun control issue to the side, what other alternative is there?

a reply to: Finspiracy

I know what you are saying. Do you not understand why i asked that?

Why should your government get to monopolize violence against you? Have they proven trustworthy in this regard?

originally posted by: Gaspode
Again:

The gun control vs. gun owners debaters are not going budge. So if we put the gun control issue to the side, what other alternative is there?

Understand, not all of us own guns. Some of us just understand why it's important that we should be allowed to if we so choose.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Good points.
It would be interesting to compare deaths caused by cigarettes and alcohol and if or how it declined as taxes were raised and warning labels were added?

Cigarettes are pretty much self-inflicting harm - can't really measure up to mass shootings. The same can be said about fast food and other high sugar content products.
Alcohol remains undoubtedly a problem either way. Still not intentional mass murder.

a reply to: Gaspode

The other thing most don't realize is that there is still a significant percentage of the US population for whom a gun is a necessary tool of life. Try living in a rural area for long without one.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I suppose "regular" and "unleaded" would be in poor taste, however it does make sense in this situation.

Those with the means to defend themselves would be afforded the opportunity.

O/T -

There is nothing (no matter how dangerous) that is off the streets in America.

Ban guns if it makes liberals and politicians feel warm and fuzzy.

Americans are still going to own a #^$%-ton of firearms.

Crack and heroin are highly illegal and both will get you lengthy prison sentences. Yet, I cannot walk to the store (two blocks away) without at least three people trying to sell to me).

Make guns illegal and they will simply be added to the list of items sold on the street corners in my neighborhood (they are already but they are not "pushed" for lack of a better term).

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Gaspode
Again:

The gun control vs. gun owners debaters are not going budge. So if we put the gun control issue to the side, what other alternative is there?

Understand, not all of us own guns. Some of us just understand why it's important that we should be allowed to if we so choose.

I agree. I feel exactly the same way. I don't particularly like guns, but my dad and brother are both avid hunters and gun lovers, and I respect their right to own guns.

Next...a reply to: Finspiracy

originally posted by: joemoe
a reply to: Finspiracy

Yes. Isn't self defense a right almost everywhere? You need firearms for that?

Yes ... try using a knife in a gun fight? Or better yet try fighting an enemy invasion or a tyrannical government without firearms.

so your AR is going to stop a drone strike or a armored vehicle.....tell me how that works out for you

originally posted by: Finspiracy

originally posted by: joemoe

Because in the US we have the rights to protect ourselves from those willing to harm us or our family.

Yes. Isn't self defense a right almost everywhere? You need firearms for that?

Feel free to be a victim yourself but don't force others to be one because you don't like firearms. Firearms allow people have a better chance to protect themselves and the people they love. The police can't protect you, they show up to take a report or to call the corner to come get the body.

Banning firearms will not stop crazy people wanting to hurt or kill other people. We can look at what happened in Nice France to see that. A person driving a large box truck drove into a large group of people killing 86 of them.

a reply to: Gaspode

The US had no army when the second amendment was added. The continental army that fought the revolution was disbanded in 1783. So the people had to form " well regulated" militias .

But Republicans, National Rifle Association, and Russians have turned it into a religion. Now it's a race of state of the art killing machine guns. Like some bored old rich psychopath spending money on 40 rifles he'll never use. He just needed one and thousands of bullets.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: joemoe
a reply to: Finspiracy

Yes. Isn't self defense a right almost everywhere? You need firearms for that?

Yes ... try using a knife in a gun fight? Or better yet try fighting an enemy invasion or a tyrannical government without firearms.

so your AR is going to stop a drone strike or a armored vehicle.....tell me how that works out for you

You have to remember our military forces are made up of regular citizens who are sworn to protect the Constitution. If we have to fight a tyrannical Government or a foreign invasion, many of them will be on our side with the latest arsenals. Not to mention we have four times more vets than active duty personnel who will also remember their Oaths.

No thanks.

originally posted by: joemoe
a reply to: Finspiracy

How is not allowing a regular citizen carry a weapon be considered as a punishment?

Because in the US we have the rights to protect ourselves from those willing to harm us or our family.

Well its clearly doing a great job

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Gaspode

Interesting theory.

Cigarettes kill people every day.
We regulated and taxed the crap out of them.
Still killing more people than guns.

Same can be said for alcohol.

How many people need to die with alcohol as a cause before banning beer?
Drunk drivers kill innocent people too.


Have a drink on me.

One guy with a cigarette doesn't kill/injure a stadium of music goers. Its self-inflicted.

Alcohol is very similar although I agree stricter control over allowing anyone to drink and drive is needed.

a reply to: Gaspode

Other countries do not have the same rights or population makeup as we do! Look if we want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment there is a provision for that. However, until then ... we as US citizens have the Rights to Arms ... it is Constitutionally protected.

originally posted by: joemoe
a reply to: Finspiracy

Yes. Isn't self defense a right almost everywhere? You need firearms for that?

Yes ... try using a knife in a gun fight? Or better yet try fighting an enemy invasion or a tyrannical government without firearms.

Don't go to a gun fight... stop pretending you are ever going to fight an enemy invasion or tyrannical government.