BREAKING: California High School Shooting - at least 2 injured

reply to post by TDawgRex


True, but the industrial/developed world cannot go back to horses..
Cars are an essential part of life, there' cannot be any alternative!

reply to post by eLPresidente


Yep, aware no body died, but it was a good rolling topic which is why I continued posting here.
It's not that I don't want to pay attention to the figures, the figures don't matter, its a technical aspect to a situation that is a morphing mentality!

Of the 2.5 million Americans who use firearms in self defense, what % would you assume have stockpiles like this:
Link


With the gang related criminal enterprises who don't obtain guns legally, are the police not actively investigating,arresting and convicting people like that? You cant compare the two numbers, because 1 is based on breaking the law, the other based on defending from it.

I'm not advocating that anyone forcibly remove weapons from Americans hands, however I believe that if Americans don't freely give up their fully automatic weapons, semi-automatic weapons (except pistols) and any other unique brand of weapon absent to the category of pistol, shotgun and hunting rifle.. then laws need to be introduced advising Americas that if any weapon NOT in the category of allowed weapons is used, it will be investigated and reported. The party who owns it charged and the weapon confiscated.

However, I believe that effective immediately, all gun shops should immediately stop selling any weapons (and required ammunition) outside of those 3 categories.

Perhaps offer incentives for people to hand them in. Replacement weapons (from the categories). Training, financial incentives.

I've seen that 2nd amendment put on this board a 1000 times, its so vague and references to death its almost mute.

How about we look at James Madison s OTHER amendments

That there be prefixed to the Constitution a declaration, that all power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from, the people. That Government is instituted and ought to be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right of acquiring and using property, and generally of pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

well, I don't know about you.. but im sure families in Aurora, Sandytown, Columbine, Virginia... do not feel safe.

Also,

Why do you think it is, that the gun debate has caused such a massive argument, when other amendments offered by James, get totally ignored and left to rot?

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

could it be because the 'excuse' to have protection, the false 'position' that the amendment is at risk is purely a smoke screen for peoples sick... twisted... hobby for amassing an arsenal of unnecessary machines of murder?

"The second you start advocating any use of force to strip Americans from their unalienable right to bear arms (ban of any kind), you lose all moral standing. Using guns and violent use of force. If you advocate voluntary gun turn-ins through ideas then there is nothing wrong with it at all."


Well, then we do agree. I've nothing against anyone doing anything voluntarily in this matter.



To the poster above says "Cars are apart of our everyday lives" or something to that extent...

WHOSE every day lives? Ours? You mean, the ones who built a society around cars?


You know, people can live just fine without cars, and that argument can be made through and through.

The economy can't survive without them, but people can. So... you should rephrase that.


I have always had a problem with cars. What a terrible tool for people to have founded their society upon.


I mean, seriously? Do you all not think about that more? Cars aren't a part of nature that we have to accept,

it's something our fathers and fathers fathers began putting into play that we now blindly accept as somehow natural and necessary. It's only necessary for this crumbling society, not for life itself.

This thread isn't about cars, so I'll stop.

But, anyway. I'll say real quick... that. Guns ARE necessary in our every day lives, so is militia.

And, I do believe we are and have already been deprived of militia. Afterall, do you know of any "militias"?

The NRA, is that a militia? Is that a silly question?

to repeat, Guns ARE a necessary part in our every day lives, so is militia. We just don't USE THEM properly, nor
do we use our right (or are we probably allowed) our right to militia properly.

It's very important for the safety and security (and feeling of security) of every individual that they know they are protected from a possible corrupt government that wants to kill them. That IS apart of our every day lives, or rather should be.

But we aren't allowed it, really. You don't KNOW that it's apart of a healthy lifestyle and feeling good, because you aren't allotted it. I don't doubt whatsoever that you absolutely, like me, fear our government. It should NOT be that way.
I admit, I fear its atrocious power.

We should have the comfort of being able to organize equal force to be able to combat it.

Our government is the bully in the classroom, and your the nerdy kid.

Safety with guns makes us the nerdy kid with a big group of other nerdy kids that can tackle the bully or put up a fight if needed. Right now we're just a bunch of lone nerdy kids who don't know eachothers whereabouts and we're all displaced from eachother and lost on the playground therefore are all subject and vulnerable to beatings from the
bully one at a time.

That's what happens when the 2nd ammendment is slowly abolished.


"because cars are an essential part of our lives.
much like air transport... electricity....and water! they can very easily cause death, but when managed and handled properly they work. Besides, its acceptable losses for cars and transport, because its common and expected. "


"they can very easily cause death, but when managed and handled properly they work." This goes 100% exactly to the T the same for Guns. Guns can very easily cause death, but when managed and handled properly they DO work for what they are intended for.


And guess what, a CAR *IS* a gun. A car could be used to kill 50 people on a sidewalk at one point.

Honestly I don't know why that doesn't happen more...


"Besides, its acceptable losses for cars and transport, because its common and expected"

It's not acceptable by me! Not one car death has been acceptable by me. By the masses, yes, you're right.
But, it will not ever be acceptable by me. and, as silly as it may sound to you, mass car ownership is not ok by me.
Nor do I think it was even necessary.

You haven't stopped to think... that, unearthing Guns from everyone is ALMOST damn similar from trying to unearth Cars from everyone. Both are equally as ridiculous ideas.

Guns are ingrained into the country MUCH longer than Cars have been. The Gov't going into people's homes and confiscating peoples guns (Lord have mercy if this ever happens) is EQUALLY as ridiculous as the Gov't going into
people's homes and confiscating their vehicles. How childish are any of you to think that's acceptable?
The united states is not utopia, it's not the promised land (even if you've heard differently), it's just the US.

We have guns.

We drive cars that are too fast.

We drink whisky and commit fornication and glorify it.

We hail country music as gospel.

We have tons of casinos.

We have gangs and urban poverty out the wazoo...

etc..


This ISNT utopia, it's not ever going to be, so why are you trying to fine tune everything until it is?

Originally posted by tgalahan2
WHOSE every day lives? Ours? You mean, the ones who built a society around cars?
You know, people can live just fine without cars, and that argument can be made through and through.
The economy can't survive without them, but people can. So... you should rephrase that.

Firstly, take your elbow of the spacebar .. make it easier to read!

Your right, there are people out there that survive without cars, just like there are people out there that survive without guns.
However, if you remove all cars from the nation, society breaks down and the economy goes into free fall. Goodbye USA!
Alternatively, if you make it illegal for gun shops to sell 'certain' weapons and encourage the buy back/introduction of laws.. then i don't think the economy stops.. infact, it would probably improve your society in effect bettering your nation!

reply to post by Agit8dChop


But what's next? More people are killed by blunt force trauma than by rifles every year. That is according to the FBI's own stats.

I guess I'll have to register my power tools or baseball bat (Do I have to register the ball as well?)

I guess I'll need to get a permit for my forks and kitchen knives as well.

Once you take away a law abiding citizens rights...the house of cards tumbles shortly after.

Back on topic, I heard on the news just now that a pellet gun was also used. They seem to be covering all the bases...don't they?

reply to post by TDawgRex


No, well..

If over the years there are multiple mass murders occurring with power-saws, then yes I suppose society will force a rethink of how we manage power-saws. But can you see that happening? Hopefully society doesn't go that way. Then again, im sure when the 2nd amendment was written, the authors probably didn't conceive society would evolve into what it has today.

There is nothing wrong with updating the 2nd amendment, its happened many times in the past with other aspects of the constitution. Unfortunately, Americans have proven they are not sane enough to hold these types of weapons in society. I think peoples safety and protection is more important than allowing people a hobby to stockpile.

Here's a humdinger for you,

If the government/corporate world was presented with an alternative of banning these big pharma medications or banning gun shops selling certain weapons.. what do you think the Media would side for?

"Alternatively, if you make it illegal for gun shops to sell 'certain' weapons and encourage the buy back/introduction of laws.. then i don't think the economy stops.. infact, it would probably improve your society in effect bettering your nation!"


Sure, man. If you believe that's the Gov't's real agenda. It may be, but I somehow doubt it is.
My points are really, made in the event that the Gov't tries to confiscate weapons. I'm not really against tightening of
security in understandable ways. Please, please make sure that's what our leaders are really trying to do, though.

It would be nice to have limitations on Gun ownership in perfect or better ways to the point where we can weed out every or decrease the chances of them going into the wrong hands.

It would also be nice to do that with licenses for cars!


In fact, we should have already BEEN doing that, and I do not doubt that the Gov't and people everywhere in the US
have constantly been strengthening filters for getting a license for anything.

Therefore, what's with all the hub-bub? Everyone, should already know, that... we attempt to filter distribution of items of possible dangerous use. I mean, duh. So, why the statement? Why the statement that we must begin to put tighter
restrictions on guns?

Who doesn't know that only qualified people should own guns OR cars? And there isn't anything beyond ultimate qualification, so what's the real agenda here?


You can only qualify for something so much, and you can only dequalify (not qualify) for it so much.



Getting my drift at all?

Originally posted by tgalahan2Sure, man. If you believe that's the Gov't's real agenda. It may be, but I somehow doubt it is.

I do not like the administration, nor do I like the things they are doing over sea's, however I do not believe they are trying to enslave you and murder you in a 2nd holocaust.

it's that kind of thinking, that led to Sandy town.

(to clarify)

In other words, what kinds of restrictions are they talking about?



There are no NEW restrictions on Guns or Cars that could be introduced.


I promise you every possible restriction should and has already been considered on the purchase/sale of firearms and cars.


Are... you.. seeing my point? I mean, it's not like we magically overnight just automatically understood that there are these things that cause people to go insane and shoot people. We have the same information over pathology and who should and shouldn't buy guns or cars as we have for years and years. A few school shootings doesn't give us any type of education on as who should or shouldn't purchase guns.

I'm trying to portray what I'm saying as best as possible. I hope you get what I'm saying.

It's propaganda, guys. You're buying into it. Nothing here is being learned, only new things are being propaganda'd.

We know the same stuff we have for a long time.


Ok, so.. a couple more tighter security measures for guns? Great, cool... shut up about it and get it over with. I don't think anyone is against that. But, there's no way it should be anything major. Since, there's nothing here that we learned that we shouldn't, or didn't already know. But it is being made major for some reason, and why? Exactly.

And that, is precisely what's going on. Of course the Gov't already knew these things. You think our Gov't, from centuries of being masters of war, suddenly learn that people go crazy and shoot up schools and theatres? and they must SUDDENLY TAKE ACTION AGAINST IT. Lol, guys..... guys....

"do not like the administration, nor do I like the things they are doing over sea's, however I do not believe they are trying to enslave you and murder you in a 2nd holocaust.

it's that kind of thinking, that led to Sandy town."



Maybe not, and I don't claim that. and I didn't say anything about that, did I?

other than we should have the right to bear arms for the reason stated in the 2nd ammendment.


But, it's propaganda, for some motive, I'm sure of that.

But I don't know what it's for.


Oh, and US gov't if you're reading which you probably are... you don't need to worry about me, I'm generally pretty lazy and uneducated. I couldn't lead a flock of lemmings off a cliff.

In fact, after these few paragraphs I probably won't speak much on this topic again.


So you don't need to kill me.


Thanks.

Originally posted by roughycannon

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by roughycannon

 

Out of curiosity what country do you live in?
Maybe your media doesn't glorify violence.

Im in the UK our school shootings are never covered in the MSM

Name one school shooting in the history of the UK that has not been reported extensively in the MSM. I'm not saying you can't, but I am very dubious. Surely all school shootings in the UK have had extensive MSM coverage?

I smell something...

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

Of the 2.5 million Americans who use firearms in self defense, what % would you assume have stockpiles like this:
Link

Im a sport shooter in a home of sport shooters and our "stockpile" dwarves that angsty nerds stockpile easily.

It's absurd to put a cap on what's a "sane" number of a thing to own and what's an "insane" number of a thing to own.

It's just stupid fear. Like "OMG you have 20,000 rounds of ammo!!!" So what? My house goes through at least 1,000 a week during the competitive season.

People with no clue shouldnt have such strong opinions. It just makes them sound foolish.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Well clearly, if its competition weapons, it can be managed and handled a better way. Perhaps, storage at home is forbidden and they are protected somewhere?
I know 20k of ammo isn't uncommon.. However, I also know that there has been enough massacres (with some significant ones very recently) from the psychopathic aspect of your society to justify a reasonable resolution!

I'm sorry, but perhaps if it had been managed better from the beginning, rules and regulations might not be nessecary! I would however expect a functioning society to 're-adjust' with the times, its laws evolve slowly as does its society! The time has come for action against guns in suburbia, you cant deny that!

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

Well clearly, if its competition weapons, it can be managed and handled a better way. Perhaps, storage at home is forbidden and they are protected somewhere?
I know 20k of ammo isn't uncommon.. However, I also know that there has been enough massacres (with some significant ones very recently) from the psychopathic aspect of your society to justify a reasonable resolution!

I'm sorry, but perhaps if it had been managed better from the beginning, rules and regulations might not be nessecary! I would however expect a functioning society to 're-adjust' with the times, its laws evolve slowly as does its society! The time has come for action against guns in suburbia, you cant deny that!

Storage at home forbidden? That's where my practice range is.

Time has come? Hardly. The actions of a handful of # ups should never be justification for broad sweeping changes to society at large.

And if we're all supposedly feeling this call to action why are we so focused on changes that have been proven ineffective? We know that all the background checks in the world wouldnt have prevented any of these things. We know that magazine capacities would not affect these things. Especially when it takes cops 20 minutes to travel 2 miles.

We also know that these events are relatively new to society however the gun is ancient to society and access to them has been consistently restricted since 1934. So what does that tell us? More restricted than ever yet these events go on. So we just need a few more restrictions and they'll stop? That's just idiotic.

reply to post by Jeremiah65


And how would a 48 hour blackout stop the wild speculation? In my opinion it would make it even worse....

PA

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by godofme

Originally posted by camaro68ss
just bought more ammo, 2nd amendment will be gone soon at this rate. :-(

Point proven

How does that even make any sense?

If ever took a holiday to the US I would want to be given a Light Machine Gun at the airport. Every street would be like walking through an army weapon surplus store.

Actually you have fallen for the media brain wash. You would be more likely to get attacked in Britain then the US. Gun related deaths only account for 1.5% of deaths in the US. In fact the drive to the airport and flight over here would be more hundreds of time more risky. But the media reports something and all the sheeple fall to pieces... Sigh!

I had a look - I found this on Wikipedia (not necessarily correct!)

In 2009, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 66.9% of all homicides in the United States were perpetrated using a firearm.[5] There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.[6] Just over half of all gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides,[7] with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 suicide deaths, and 12,632 (40.5%) homicide deaths.[8][dead link]

23,237 accidental injuries !! :-(

reply to post by CALGARIAN


Something is up with all these school shootings...something more than what meets the eye.
School now means a war zone. First it was and still is bullying, now ducking a dodging bullets.
I feel really bad for kids today, they can't go anywhere or play freely outside because they may get abducted by some child molester and now this....smdh
I can't even begin to imagine how it must feel to be a kid these days! The fear.

reply to post by ted4d


And 2.8 million children are sent to emergency rooms every year for falls. cdc

If you want to play the numbers game anything to do with firearms is pitifully small.

Mold is rotting the house down yet we focus on the coffee stain on the counter.

reply to post by Agit8dChop


Just out of curiosity, how many of those guns do you think one person could shoot at any one time? How many could one person carry around? Look Mr. Obama, I get where you and your lackey Biden are coming from, you want to destroy the american way of life. The problem is, we as Americans kind of like the way of life we have.

Somehow, we have millions of gun owners, and only a small handful of mentally ill kids our there gunning down people at random. Wait, ......did I just identify the problem? Mentally ill? Wow.

Perhaps if we looked at fixing the PROBLEM instead of pushing an agenda, we might actually be able to stop the next one from killing. Or is that not what your end game is about?

Originally posted by roughycannon

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

Originally posted by roughycannon

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by roughycannon

 

So? Doesn't change the fact that it happens.

I don't think a teenager sitting in bed bored see's the news and thinks "I know what I can do!" NO just NO! that's stupid the kind of people that do this are nutters its not the MSM get over it, the US shootings are all over our news everyday too remember.

So youre admitting its not the guns causing these shootings......

Fantastic.......now we can start moving forward.........

This shooting was caused by gangbangers, who more then likely got their guns illegally ( go figure) and carried out the crime trying to kill each other.......

Again.....another issue with the culture they are brought up to be around.....

And what do you think would happen if guns were banned and the new generation were brought up in a culture without guns...

... then I think 20,000 + accidental gunshot wounds per year wouldn't happen! If you didn't own the gun in the first place how could you accidentally shoot someone with it!

However, that assumes all the people gave their guns back which would never happen. Presumably whatever your stance on gun control, it's too late?! If a criminal wants a gun he can get one, regardless of gun laws, it just might cost a bit more. Or does everyone think the criminals will also give up their Uzi's etc?

Uzi's aren't legal in the UK but you can buy one - just costs more money that's all.

But your point about a new generation without guns - on that point, less people accidentally shooting their toes off would be progress. And what about suicides? My thinking is that less people would kill themselves without access to firearms.

I bet you that countries that don't have guns have less suicides, regardless of the fact that you could still use something else. Just a guess though. Mebbe I'll should Google it...