You're like every gun defender, you are getting facetious, which doesn't help at all proving your point. Besides, the only argument I read is 'Gun control won't reduce the chances of mass shooting because if someone wants to kill someone else, they'll find a gun anyway'. Alright, that's your argument. Then how to do you explain that this kind of things does not happen as often in gun controlled countries than it does in the US? There's only two answers to that question. 1/ Guns are indeed the problem or 2/ USA hold a massive pool of crazy maniacs, more than in other civilized countries. One of them is less plausible than the other.

No, I'm not specifically defending guns as a whole. I'm defending the fact that there needs to be actual change and not just a bare bones harsher gun law. As in, why are there so many mentally ill/extremist people getting through literally everything? There is a deeper solution to the entire problem than just strictly imposing a harsher law. Cutting back psychiatric help isn't going in the right direction, parents and teachers turning a blind eye on those who show a great threat to everyday normal human beings is also a problem. The key ingredient in all these shootings happens to be either one or both of these things 1: the person committing the shooting is mentally ill. Or 2: that the person is an extremist based on religion or anti government. The Oregon shooting happens to have both of these two ingredients, he was mentally ill and was a religious extremist. 

c13 said it best, a unique approach will be needed to curb the gun violence, violence in general of this magnitude. I just don't think people nor the Government care enough, it would be easier to just slap a gun law on than for example giving proper treatment to those who need it and better screening for those who show red flag signs of problems that just cannot be fixed, whether it's extremism or anti-everything. 

Although, we (as in North America), keep letting immigrants into the country(s) rather than fixing internal problems and instead, bringing in new ones, so I guess we can see where the governments focus is. But, that is entirely a different subject, topic, can of worms altogether. 

Edited October 9, 201510 yr by Solidefiance

Enjoy the video.

 

Edited October 9, 201510 yr by Hystery

 

Excellent find. I wonder where I've seen the store owner before... 

Neat statistic to go along with this: Getting a gun increases the chance of killing yourself or another family member by a factor of 10.

A good panel on Bill Maher discussing this issue:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsdH40gANlk

Not all great points, but some very good ones here.

Isn't it apparent that 2 people is quite low compared to dozens of them every week? You're just willingly ignoring all the blatant arguments many people brought to the discussion, which is why a real debate about guns can't happen.

I know this isn't comparable to the shooting deaths in America, but it disproves your argument that banning guns will stop criminals from getting them.

Enjoy the video.

 

Right. So apparently buying a gun used in a shooting will somehow make you turn into a killer. It is very unfortunate that people and children are killed, I am not arguing against that. But who wouldn't want to be able defend themselves?

There's also the fact that if there were gun laws like there is in the UK, it would essentially start a 2nd Civil War in the United States, not only the fact is it also extremely unconstitutional, but that in areas like mine (Douglas County) the police would not enforce them. Our current Sheriff, John Hanlin explicitly said in an email to the Vice President that him and his deputies will never enforce gun laws like those in the UK or any extreme laws like those. The fact of the matter is people over in Europe that don't understand that Guns are deeply embedded into rural societies like DC, and that no legal gun owner will willingly give up their firearms. Ever.

Edited October 9, 201510 yr by McKinnion

Right. So apparently buying a gun used in a shooting will somehow make you turn into a killer. It is very unfortunate that people and children are killed, I am not arguing against that. But who wouldn't want to be able defend themselves?

No, again you're being facetious instead of facing the point of the video. Basically, your sentence can be translated by that: "It's very unfortunate that people are killed by guns we ourselves bought, but who wouldn't want to buy more guns to defend ourselves against our own guns, resulting in even more guns and even more chances to actually make use of it resulting in more tragic deaths?"

Can you feel the irony of this? People use guns to kill people, as a result you get more guns, and so on, it's an endless loop. I'm wondering how you'll react if one day a country nukes another. Will you retaliate by more nukes? Best way to fuck up literally everyone. That's the same thing for guns, just on a smaller scale.

The fact of the matter is people over in Europe that don't understand that Guns are deeply embedded into rural societies like DC, and that no legal gun owner will willingly give up their firearms. Ever.

Which is the core of the problem. Being addicted so much to killing machines would almost be up to an addiction of psychiatric level, because it makes no logical sense whatsoever.

Edited October 10, 201510 yr by Hystery

Which is the core of the problem. Being addicted so much to killing machines would almost be up to an addiction of psychiatric level, because it makes no logical sense whatsoever.

You're telling me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTpCUAK4ypA

"The thing about gun culture is that there's not a lot of culture."

Edited October 10, 201510 yr by unr3al

 

Which is the core of the problem. Being addicted so much to killing machines would almost be up to an addiction of psychiatric level, because it makes no logical sense whatsoever

If it gun owners who did not want to give up their guns were psychopaths, Douglas County would be a hellhole, but no it is not. It's one of the best places in the state of Oregon. Yeah a person shot up a school, but that was because he did not have a proper mental state, he was fucked up as a kid and was when he went into UCC. There needs to be better mental health facility's to help disgruntled people like him, and I do agree to mental checks when you buy some kind of firearm. Most people in this area buy those weapons for recreation, because shooting at trees or melons if fun as hell, and for hunting because it helps people in this area fill up their freezers with meat to last the year since it is much cheaper and more fun to hunt then buy from the market and the final reason why people here buy firearms is for personal/family protection, because this is mainly a rural area if someone were to try and break into their house, it would take at least 45 minutes for police to get to their house in the country, and that is enough time for someone to get through a window and attack you, but if you have a form of protection i.e a Shotgun or AR, you can warn the intruder to leave and if needed, shoot them in self defense. 

If it gun owners who did not want to give up their guns were psychopaths, Douglas County would be a hellhole, but no it is not. It's one of the best places in the state of Oregon. Yeah a person shot up a school, but that was because he did not have a proper mental state, he was fucked up as a kid and was when he went into UCC. There needs to be better mental health facility's to help disgruntled people like him, and I do agree to mental checks when you buy some kind of firearm. Most people in this area buy those weapons for recreation, because shooting at trees or melons if fun as hell, and for hunting because it helps people in this area fill up their freezers with meat to last the year since it is much cheaper and more fun to hunt then buy from the market and the final reason why people here buy firearms is for personal/family protection, because this is mainly a rural area if someone were to try and break into their house, it would take at least 45 minutes for police to get to their house in the country, and that is enough time for someone to get through a window and attack you, but if you have a form of protection i.e a Shotgun or AR, you can warn the intruder to leave and if needed, shoot them in self defense. 

The problem is that the kid didn't use an AR or a shotgun, he used a bunch of pistols which are easy to obtain for any number of legitimate reasons. Some were purchased, and some were given to him. Rather than mental health checks I think there should be mental health restrictions. As in people with certain disorders cannot own or possess a firearm, ever (especially anyone with a social disorder). This certainly wont vet out every potential attacker, since some people can develop a mental condition or suffer a breakdown at any point in their lives, but it will at least help. Maybe require yearly regular mental evaluations of every gun owner on top of that to assess for competency to safely own and use a weapon. What about armed police (not guards, police) in every school, no matter how small or big the campus is? There are any number of suggestions people can make about better gun control. But we're still sitting at square one, where America still doesn't give enough of a shit to do anything new. The question is how high the death toll will have to climb before something finally gets done.

Edited October 10, 201510 yr by unr3al

I do agree with the Mental health thing that you stated, and it's hard to do the police in each school is a very good idea, which I think is happening in Oregon now, since I've noticed that there's always this one cop at my High school that walks around, but it still needs to happen everywhere in the States, not just a county of a single state

I do agree with the Mental health thing that you stated, and it's hard to do the police in each school is a very good idea, which I think is happening in Oregon now, since I've noticed that there's always this one cop at my High school that walks around, but it still needs to happen everywhere in the States, not just a county of a single state

There actually has generally been one police officer per high school for many years now. They're called the school resource officer. But I'm talking about hiring at least two or more full time police officers to patrol a campus of every college. College tuition has increased over 600% since the 1980's, so I know the universities can afford to form their own police department. Some universities have one already. If they refuse, the government could task each department with hiring on a minimum of two extra officers (depending on the size of the school) plus a minimum of one new squad car and have them enforce the law at the campus instead. Really this should fall upon the schools, in my opinion. The amount of money the kids have to pay is beyond belief.

Yeah I know about the Resource Officer, but we have a new guy here that nobody has seen before along with our Resource Officer

Probably a replacement in training.

No, again you're being facetious instead of facing the point of the video. Basically, your sentence can be translated by that: "It's very unfortunate that people are killed by guns we ourselves bought, but who wouldn't want to buy more guns to defend ourselves against our own guns, resulting in even more guns and even more chances to actually make use of it resulting in more tragic deaths?"

Can you feel the irony of this? People use guns to kill people, as a result you get more guns, and so on, it's an endless loop. I'm wondering how you'll react if one day a country nukes another. Will you retaliate by more nukes? Best way to fuck up literally everyone. That's the same thing for guns, just on a smaller scale.

If I bought a gun, the only thing it would be used for it for recreational shooting and self defense. I want to be prepared to save innocent lives if need be. We don't buy guns to defend ourselves from our own guns. We buy guns to defend ourselves against people with guns who have bad intentions.

If I bought a gun, the only thing it would be used for it for recreational shooting and self defense. I want to be prepared to save innocent lives if need be. We don't buy guns to defend ourselves from our own guns. We buy guns to defend ourselves against people with guns who have bad intentions.

I think you're missing his point. When he says "our own guns" he doesn't mean other guns you have in your personal possession. He's speaking of America in general, and their idea that fighting fire with fire is the best method to stop crime. Buying a gun to defend against home invasions or robberies in progress is a fantasy at best. Having that scenario happen to you is extremely unlikely. It certainly happens, but not to most people. You're 10 times more likely to kill yourself or a family member with that gun, and unless you happen to be ex-military or a police officer, you'll never be properly trained in how to use it in a combat scenario anyway. You also may end up using it when its not legal to do so, like shooting someone in the back or without the clear and present threat of danger when a witness sees it. And that can land you in jail for a murder charge.

Edited October 10, 201510 yr by unr3al

I think you're missing his point. When he says "our own guns" he doesn't mean other guns you have in your personal possession. He's speaking of America in general, and their idea that fighting fire with fire is the best method to stop crime. Buying a gun to defend against home invasions or robberies in progress is a fantasy at best. Having that scenario happen to you is extremely unlikely. It certainly happens, but not to most people. You're 10 times more likely to kill yourself or a family member with that gun, and unless you happen to be ex-military or a police officer, you'll never be properly trained in how to use it in a combat scenario anyway. You also may end up using it when its not legal to do so, like shooting someone in the back or without the clear and present threat of danger when a witness sees it. And that can land you in jail for a murder charge.

I don't believe that I am 10 times more likely to shoot a family member or myself. I know how to use a gun and it's pretty much common sense not to aim it at myself or someone else unless I am acting in self defense. I feel a lot safer, actually. Even though a home invasion is unlikely, I like the comfort to know that I can defend myself.

It's not only a matter of knowing how to use a gun. It also depends on where it's put away, if kids around can have easy access to it, how it's maintained, in what cases the gun is pulled out, and so on.

Besides, let's take this example of someone invading your home. First, you can't shoot the guy if he doesn't show an immediate death threat to you if you want to call it self-defense. Self-defense must always be of the same degree as the one assaulting you. If he goes to punch you, shooting him with a gun will make you guilty in a court. Second, if he actually has a gun, he could perfectly shoot you or someone of your family. So you, or someone of your family, would die, just because you wanted to prevent a random dude to steal your TV. A life, for physical belongings. Truly worth it, right there.

It's not only a matter of knowing how to use a gun. It also depends on where it's put away, if kids around can have easy access to it, how it's maintained, in what cases the gun is pulled out, and so on.

Besides, let's take this example of someone invading your home. First, you can't shoot the guy if he doesn't show an immediate death threat to you if you want to call it self-defense. Self-defense must always be of the same degree as the one assaulting you. If he goes to punch you, shooting him with a gun will make you guilty in a court. Second, if he actually has a gun, he could perfectly shoot you or someone of your family. So you, or someone of your family, would die, just because you wanted to prevent a random dude to steal your TV. A life, for physical belongings. Truly worth it, right there.

I'm not sure about the other states, but if someone is invading your home and attacks you in any way, you have the right to shoot and kill them. And if the person did have a gun and shot your family when they entered, why not shoot back? They already hurt one of your family? So you're just going to let them walk all over you while you wait 30 minutes for police to arrive? No. In some cases having a firearm in your house will save you or someone else's life.

It's not only a matter of knowing how to use a gun. It also depends on where it's put away, if kids around can have easy access to it, how it's maintained, in what cases the gun is pulled out, and so on.

Besides, let's take this example of someone invading your home. First, you can't shoot the guy if he doesn't show an immediate death threat to you if you want to call it self-defense. Self-defense must always be of the same degree as the one assaulting you. If he goes to punch you, shooting him with a gun will make you guilty in a court. Second, if he actually has a gun, he could perfectly shoot you or someone of your family. So you, or someone of your family, would die, just because you wanted to prevent a random dude to steal your TV. A life, for physical belongings. Truly worth it, right there.

My goal is to stop him/her before he/she does anything to my things or my family. If someone breaks into your home, you can shoot.

I don't believe that I am 10 times more likely to shoot a family member or myself. I know how to use a gun and it's pretty much common sense not to aim it at myself or someone else unless I am acting in self defense. I feel a lot safer, actually. Even though a home invasion is unlikely, I like the comfort to know that I can defend myself.

It doesn't matter if you believe it or not, it's a fact, not an opinion. What I said is a measured statistic. Comfort is coming at a cost that others have to pay with their lives.