Charleston church shooting.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33190735

New Orleans officer killed while transporting prisoner. Prisoner got access to guns while in the police van/car.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/20/us/new-orleans-police-officer-killed/index.html

Shooting at basketball block party in Detroit.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/21/us/detroit-birthday-party-shooting/index.html?sr=fb062115detroitbirthdaypartyshooting1pVODtopLink

What's happening now with gun violence. I hope nothing more happens. I can't think of a topic to discuss in relation to the shootings. Concealed carry permit was mentioned in relation to the church shooting. If someone can think of one, go ahead and start the conversation. Would the officer shooting be considered gun violence?

Edited June 22, 201510 yr by starcraftguy1

Also, the Dallas Police HQ shooting (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/13/us/dallas-police-shooting.html?_r=0). And I found multiple other recent shootings in Dallas just trying to find this article.

We have the most guns per capita than any other country in the world. The gun industry is huge here, and we have a huge gun culture as well. There's a reason that cops here keep their hands on their gun when they approach a car during a traffic stop. These sorts of things don't happen in other countries, or at least not nearly with the frequency that it happens here.

We're swimming in guns, why are we surprised so many people are getting shot?

It isn't necessarily gun violence on the rise, it is the media paying more attention to it now. The media focuses on stories that they think the public is interested in at the moment in order to boost their ratings. They all have an agenda to push and it applies to all news outlets, none of them are innocent. There is so much else that is going on in our country and in the world but if police brutality and shootings are trending in social media this week then that is what the media will cover.

It isn't necessarily gun violence on the rise, it is the media paying more attention to it now. The media focuses on stories that they think the public is interested in at the moment in order to boost their ratings. They all have an agenda to push and it applies to all news outlets, none of them are innocent. There is so much else that is going on in our country and in the world but if police brutality and shootings are trending in social media this week then that is what the media will cover.

I agree...
There is hours and hours of coverage of the Charleston church shooting. They usually repeat the same parts of the events, like their trying to drill it in our minds.

Also, the Dallas Police HQ shooting (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/13/us/dallas-police-shooting.html?_r=0). And I found multiple other recent shootings in Dallas just trying to find this article.

We have the most guns per capita than any other country in the world. The gun industry is huge here, and we have a huge gun culture as well. There's a reason that cops here keep their hands on their gun when they approach a car during a traffic stop. These sorts of things don't happen in other countries, or at least not nearly with the frequency that it happens here.

We're swimming in guns, why are we surprised so many people are getting shot?

Thanks, I forgot about that one.

This gives gun owners even more reasons to own and know how to operate a firearm (at least the responsible ones).

This gives gun owners even more reasons to own and know how to operate a firearm (at least the responsible ones).

Or maybe a reason to actually stop to spread weapons all over the country as if it was candies. Check this Guardian interactive map. You have an equal percentage of homicide by firearms to Brazil. Brazil, one of the most criminalized countries. Says a lot.

Check also this graphic:

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2015/06/gun-homicides1.png&w=1484

I mean, it speaks for itself. As a final note, a bit of humor:

Or maybe a reason to actually stop to spread weapons all over the country as if it was candies. Check this Guardian interactive map. You have an equal percentage of homicide by firearms to Brazil. Brazil, one of the most criminalized countries. Says a lot.

Check also this graphic:

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2015/06/gun-homicides1.png&w=1484

I mean, it speaks for itself. As a final note, a bit of humor:

Hidden Content

Taking away guns will only leave responsible citizens vulnerable to criminals. This has been debated many times before. Criminals will not turn in their guns. They are criminals, they don't follow the law. But I find that Simpsons meme quite hilarious. 

Or maybe a reason to actually stop to spread weapons all over the country as if it was candies. Check this Guardian interactive map. You have an equal percentage of homicide by firearms to Brazil. Brazil, one of the most criminalized countries. Says a lot.

Check also this graphic:

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2015/06/gun-homicides1.png&w=1484

I mean, it speaks for itself.

As much as I agree with you, you have to understand that guns are so entrenched in American society that I don't think there will ever be a time where Americans will give up their guns. Unlike most other societies we don't care for our fellow man as much and we are not as courteous, we are a lot less likely to give up something to better society as a whole. The attitude of people in the US today is nothing but "I want it so I should have it because it is my right" and they are absolutely right, it is their right according to our laws. I think when you look at other well developed countries that have much stricter rules on guns the amount of gun violence is a lot less. Australia is a perfect example of a country that used to have relaxed gun laws and made a huge change after a huge shooting in their country. The key difference though is people in those countries realized that there was an issue and agreed the best way of fixing it was to give up some of their rights to help their fellow man, this is something you will not likely see in the US.

As much as I agree with you, you have to understand that guns are so entrenched in American society that I don't think there will ever be a time where Americans will give up their guns. Unlike most other societies we don't care for our fellow man as much and we are not as courteous, we are a lot less likely to give up something to better society as a whole. The attitude of people in the US today is nothing but "I want it so I should have it because it is my right" and they are absolutely right, it is their right according to our laws. I think when you look at other well developed countries that have much stricter rules on guns the amount of gun violence is a lot less. Australia is a perfect example of a country that used to have relaxed gun laws and made a huge change after a huge shooting in their country. The key difference though is people in those countries realized that there was an issue and agreed the best way of fixing it was to give up some of their rights to help their fellow man, this is something you will not likely see in the US.

"The Americans will always do the right thing... after they've exhausted all the alternatives." - Winston Churchill

"The Americans will always do the right thing... after they've exhausted all the alternatives." - Winston Churchill

I actually don't see how that's supposedly a bad thing. Good to weigh all of your options. Also, just because someone from history says something, doesn't mean that it's correct or true. I can create a quote right now. "Always eat your boogers". Does that mean it will go down in history as an important quote? Not at all.

I'd also like to say that having a gun debate again is kind of pointless. There have been several topics on the gun situation in America, and each has ended with the anti-gun supporters being completely invalidated. Here is a topic where we've already had this discussion. Having it again here will only be redundant. Worse case scenario, I'll just copy and paste some of the past arguments from that topic to this topic.

http://www.lcpdfr.com/forums/topic/39784-american-gun-control/#comment-284136

Edited June 23, 201510 yr by TheDivineHustle

I actually don't see how that's supposedly a bad thing. Good to weigh all of your options. Also, just because someone from history says something, doesn't mean that it's correct or true. I can create a quote right now. "Always eat your boogers". Does that mean it will go down in history as an important quote? Not at all.

I'd also like to say that having a gun debate again is kind of pointless. There have been several topics on the gun situation in America, and each has ended with the anti-gun supporters being completely invalidated. Here is a topic where we've already had this discussion. Having it again here will only be redundant. Worse case scenario, I'll just copy and paste some of the past arguments from that topic to this topic.

http://www.lcpdfr.com/forums/topic/39784-american-gun-control/#comment-284136

Actually that topic didn't end in anyone getting "invalidated"; there is no right or wrong answer when it comes to gun control.

And Riley used that quote because it related to what my post was about. You are making it sound as if he just picked a random quote that had nothing to do with anything and was from some random person and posted it on here.

Edited June 24, 201510 yr by l3ubba

Actually that topic didn't end in anyone getting "invalidated"; there is no right or wrong answer when it comes to gun control.

And Riley used that quote because it related to what my post was about. You are making it sound as if he just picked a random quote that had nothing to do with anything and was from some random person and posted it on here.

Now can I ask you to elaborate when you say there isn't any right or wrong answer? I don't think I understand what you mean by that. From how I understand it, you are saying that there is no simple or definite solution to make the whole gun situation better? If this is true, then why are there people that believe completely banning guns would actually work? 

I understood what he meant when he gave the quote, I was simply saying that just because someone quotes something doesn't necessarily mean that it really matters, even if it is relevant. 

When I said someone was invalidated, it's because the last post was by a gun supporter that brought up several correct points, and he never received a response from ANY of the anti-gun supporters. And there were several of them in that topic. 

Edited June 24, 201510 yr by TheDivineHustle

Now can I ask you to elaborate when you say there isn't any right or wrong answer? I don't think I understand what you mean by that. From how I understand it, you are saying that there is no simple or definite solution to make the whole gun situation better? If this is true, then why are there people that believe completely banning guns would actually work? 

I understood what he meant when he gave the quote, I was simply saying that just because someone quotes something doesn't necessarily mean that it really matters, even if it is relevant. 

When I said someone was invalidated, it's because the last post was by a gun supporter that brought up several correct points, and he never received a response from ANY of the anti-gun supporters. And there were several of them in that topic. 

Yes I am saying there is no simple or definite solution. Completely banning guns would not reduce the gun violence to 0, but it may be more effective than current laws (or maybe not).

Whether the quote mattered or not is the opinion of the reader. It was relevant to the post I made and personally I thought it was a fitting quote based on what I had said.

Just because somebody has the last word in a debate doesn't mean that every counter point before that is invalidated. The topic dies out eventually, people get tired of making posts. There are good points made by lots of people in that topic, just because they decided (for whatever reason) to stop posting doesn't mean they were wrong or that their points are no longer valid.

Yes I am saying there is no simple or definite solution. Completely banning guns would not reduce the gun violence to 0, but it may be more effective than current laws (or maybe not).

Whether the quote mattered or not is the opinion of the reader. It was relevant to the post I made and personally I thought it was a fitting quote based on what I had said.

Just because somebody has the last word in a debate doesn't mean that every counter point before that is invalidated. The topic dies out eventually, people get tired of making posts. There are good points made by lots of people in that topic, just because they decided (for whatever reason) to stop posting doesn't mean they were wrong or that their points are no longer valid.

I just thought the suddency at which the debate ended was a bit interesting. It went from a hardcore debate to absolutely nothing, and nobody responding. A lot of the debate topics here don't end that way, and those that participate in them know this, especially me lol. You might be right, maybe people just got tired of debating; but I personally think it was because no one had any valid arguments left. Both are possibilities and only the people that didn't respond truly know why they stopped responding. 

I just thought the suddency at which the debate ended was a bit interesting. It went from a hardcore debate to absolutely nothing, and nobody responding. A lot of the debate topics here don't end that way, and those that participate in them know this, especially me lol. You might be right, maybe people just got tired of debating; but I personally think it was because no one had any valid arguments left. Both are possibilities and only the people that didn't respond truly know why they stopped responding. 

When you keep repeating the same things over and over, and you get the same answers over and over, there is a moment when you eventually give up and carry on. This kind of debate is sterile, one side will shout "Guns should be banned!", the other will respond "Guns should be allowed!", it becomes a routine, and just like every routine, it gets boring. I've participated in this thread, but that was the reason why I didn't respond after a moment. I made my point, repeating it ten times in a row because people can't read previous posts in the same thread or because they can't tolerate that someone can have a different opinion from theirs is not my cup of tea. I believe many people felt the same way. There was no side invalidated by the other. As it was stated above, just because someone gets the final word doesn't mean they hold the ultimate truth. If it was the case, all political debates held by politics would be in favor of the one having the final word, and it's not necessarly the case.