Another US shooting!
Discussion
TheHeretic said:
By fight you mean shoot at each other in a crowded school?
As the school would be a gun free zone what would have happened if one or both of those criminals had decided to shoot a load of kids? Being a gun free zone there would have been nobody to stop them, like the last time & the times before that. Teachers should be armed & everybody should have the choice to arm themselves or not. smartphone hater said:
As the school would be a gun free zone what would have happened if one or both of those criminals had decided to shoot a load of kids? Being a gun free zone there would have been nobody to stop them, like the last time & the times before that. Teachers should be armed & everybody should have the choice to arm themselves or not.
Yes... Like alcohol, if a country has an alcohol problem, the solution is to make sure everyone has alcohol. Have a problem with poor driving skills in a country? Give everyone a car. As has been stated on another thread, you increase your chances of injuring yourself with a gun, or having your gun used against you, rather than defending your family, freinds, etc. Guns for everyone, that will sort out the gun death problem...
smartphone hater said:
What ridiculous comparisons! Didn't really expect anything better though to be honest.
I like how you ignored the actual point, but I never expected any better. 
The stats show you are more likely to be shot with your own gun, or have a gun related incident in the home... You want to give everyone guns, even kids, it seems, so please feel free to explain how giving everyone guns is going to solve the gun problem, when America already has an incredibly high gun owning population, and spree killings are only a small problem within the gun death problem.
The floor is yours.
TheHeretic said:
I like how you ignored the actual point, but I never expected any better.
The stats show you are more likely to be shot with your own gun, or have a gun related incident in the home... You want to give everyone guns, even kids, it seems, so please feel free to explain how giving everyone guns is going to solve the gun problem, when America already has an incredibly high gun owning population, and spree killings are only a small problem within the gun death problem.
The floor is yours.
You didn't make a point worth replying to. I don't want to give anybody anything, I want them to have the choice. You say that "you increase your chances of injuring yourself with a gun, or having your gun used against you, rather than defending your family, freinds, etc". Maybe that's slightly true but without vulnerable people have no protection what so ever, I think it's a far better idea to let those people make their own adult choices knowing the risks.The stats show you are more likely to be shot with your own gun, or have a gun related incident in the home... You want to give everyone guns, even kids, it seems, so please feel free to explain how giving everyone guns is going to solve the gun problem, when America already has an incredibly high gun owning population, and spree killings are only a small problem within the gun death problem.
The floor is yours.
What do you suppose would be a good solution to all these gun free zone shootings in the states, do nothing or abolish gun free zones? which do you think would tackle the problem more effectively bearing in mind that mass shootings always seem to happen in gun free zones. Wonder why that is.
smartphone hater said:
You didn't make a point worth replying to. I don't want to give anybody anything, I want them to have the choice. You say that "you increase your chances of injuring yourself with a gun, or having your gun used against you, rather than defending your family, freinds, etc". Maybe that's slightly true but without vulnerable people have no protection what so ever, I think it's a far better idea to let those people make their own adult choices knowing the risks.
What do you suppose would be a good solution to all these gun free zone shootings in the states, do nothing or abolish gun free zones? which do you think would tackle the problem more effectively bearing in mind that mass shootings always seem to happen in gun free zones. Wonder why that is.
Not a point worth replying to? Well, aren't you just a charming little fellow this early in the morning? What do you suppose would be a good solution to all these gun free zone shootings in the states, do nothing or abolish gun free zones? which do you think would tackle the problem more effectively bearing in mind that mass shootings always seem to happen in gun free zones. Wonder why that is.
You know they had armed guards during the Columbine Shooting? Did you know the 2 folks shot were so in a crossfire? I wonder how many folks would be shot in a bunch of people started shooting at others in an attempt to 'defend' themselves, and how many folks would be shot as a result?
As I said on the other thread... Make gun owners have to secure their weapons in a safe, etc, as they did in the UK. That would mean that someone like Sandy Hook would not simply be able to go and get his mums 'legal' guns, and kill a bunch of people. People need to be more responsible about their guns than just having them in a cupboard where anyone could access them. They need to ensure that background checks are done properly and not in the half arsed way they do now. They need to also include a medical evaluation as well.
If you want to be able to have a concealed permit, the criteria should be FAR, far stricter than just saying 'yes, OK'. It should have to be after an extensive training course, as well as evaluations into drugs they may be taking, and so on, and so forth.
It would probably be a lot better to have a proper system in place if a shooter does end up on school grounds, rather than a free for all shootout. Safe rooms, doors with proper locks, and bullet resistant glass, or perspex or whatever, so folks are protected from an idiot wandering the halls.
So yes, I think these are better solutions than 'give everyone guns'. There is nothing to suggest a 'gun owner' cannot simply go on a rampage, even if others have guns. More often than not they seem to kill themselves anyway, so I'm not sure that is overly a deterrent. There is nothing to suggest the teacher, janitor, cinema-ticket-checker-person would not be the one going postal, you may want to look up 'going postal').
Either way, the solution ,in a gun saturated society, is not more guns.
TheHeretic said:
Not a point worth replying to? Well, aren't you just a charming little fellow this early in the morning?
You know they had armed guards during the Columbine Shooting? Did you know the 2 folks shot were so in a crossfire? I wonder how many folks would be shot in a bunch of people started shooting at others in an attempt to 'defend' themselves, and how many folks would be shot as a result?
As I said on the other thread... Make gun owners have to secure their weapons in a safe, etc, as they did in the UK. That would mean that someone like Sandy Hook would not simply be able to go and get his mums 'legal' guns, and kill a bunch of people. People need to be more responsible about their guns than just having them in a cupboard where anyone could access them. They need to ensure that background checks are done properly and not in the half arsed way they do now. They need to also include a medical evaluation as well.
If you want to be able to have a concealed permit, the criteria should be FAR, far stricter than just saying 'yes, OK'. It should have to be after an extensive training course, as well as evaluations into drugs they may be taking, and so on, and so forth.
It would probably be a lot better to have a proper system in place if a shooter does end up on school grounds, rather than a free for all shootout. Safe rooms, doors with proper locks, and bullet resistant glass, or perspex or whatever, so folks are protected from an idiot wandering the halls.
So yes, I think these are better solutions than 'give everyone guns'. There is nothing to suggest a 'gun owner' cannot simply go on a rampage, even if others have guns. More often than not they seem to kill themselves anyway, so I'm not sure that is overly a deterrent. There is nothing to suggest the teacher, janitor, cinema-ticket-checker-person would not be the one going postal, you may want to look up 'going postal').
Either way, the solution ,in a gun saturated society, is not more guns.
great post..spot onYou know they had armed guards during the Columbine Shooting? Did you know the 2 folks shot were so in a crossfire? I wonder how many folks would be shot in a bunch of people started shooting at others in an attempt to 'defend' themselves, and how many folks would be shot as a result?
As I said on the other thread... Make gun owners have to secure their weapons in a safe, etc, as they did in the UK. That would mean that someone like Sandy Hook would not simply be able to go and get his mums 'legal' guns, and kill a bunch of people. People need to be more responsible about their guns than just having them in a cupboard where anyone could access them. They need to ensure that background checks are done properly and not in the half arsed way they do now. They need to also include a medical evaluation as well.
If you want to be able to have a concealed permit, the criteria should be FAR, far stricter than just saying 'yes, OK'. It should have to be after an extensive training course, as well as evaluations into drugs they may be taking, and so on, and so forth.
It would probably be a lot better to have a proper system in place if a shooter does end up on school grounds, rather than a free for all shootout. Safe rooms, doors with proper locks, and bullet resistant glass, or perspex or whatever, so folks are protected from an idiot wandering the halls.
So yes, I think these are better solutions than 'give everyone guns'. There is nothing to suggest a 'gun owner' cannot simply go on a rampage, even if others have guns. More often than not they seem to kill themselves anyway, so I'm not sure that is overly a deterrent. There is nothing to suggest the teacher, janitor, cinema-ticket-checker-person would not be the one going postal, you may want to look up 'going postal').
Either way, the solution ,in a gun saturated society, is not more guns.
the problem for the terminally stupid is that to them you are saying "ban guns" and they simply cannot hear you
and sadly there are quite a few of them
smartphone hater said:
As the school would be a gun free zone what would have happened if one or both of those criminals had decided to shoot a load of kids? Being a gun free zone there would have been nobody to stop them, like the last time & the times before that. Teachers should be armed & everybody should have the choice to arm themselves or not.
And what about the choice to not be in the vicinity of firearms or people carrying firearms?TheHeretic said:
What if someone, upon seeing the other guy shooting, but not knowing he is shooting at another shooter), shoots the man doing the shooting? Is that legal? 
What about people in a crossfire? Are they allowed to shoot at whomever is shooting at them, regardless of motive?
Duh, you know which cowboys are the good guys and which are the bad guys cos the good ones all look like Clint Eastwood or Kevin Costner and the bad ones are ugly and wear black. What about people in a crossfire? Are they allowed to shoot at whomever is shooting at them, regardless of motive? Oakey said:
Duh, you know which cowboys are the good guys and which are the bad guys cos the good ones all look like Clint Eastwood or Kevin Costner and the bad ones are ugly and wear black.
I head baddies wear black hats, and the goodies white. The baddies always walk in a certain direction, and the goodies the other. I think this is taught in advanced weapons training courses.Blib said:
smartphone hater said:
What ridiculous comparisons! Didn't really expect anything better though to be honest.
I agree, Americans should be allowed to carry on indiscriminately culling each other. So long as it stays over there, it doesn't bother me in the slightest. Oakey said:
TheHeretic said:
What if someone, upon seeing the other guy shooting, but not knowing he is shooting at another shooter), shoots the man doing the shooting? Is that legal? What about people in a crossfire? Are they allowed to shoot at whomever is shooting at them, regardless of motive?
Duh, you know which cowboys are the good guys and which are the bad guys cos the good ones all look like Clint Eastwood or Kevin Costner and the bad ones are ugly and wear black. What about people in a crossfire? Are they allowed to shoot at whomever is shooting at them, regardless of motive? http://www.google.com/imgres?q=have+gun+will+trave...
Edited by Jimbeaux on Thursday 24th January 14:16
Another US shooting - at a high school near Seattle. 2 dead including the shooter.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2014/oct/2...
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2014/oct/2...
BlackLabel said:
Another US shooting - at a high school near Seattle. 2 dead including the shooter.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2014/oct/2...
Seattle? Not possible, they have draconian gun laws. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2014/oct/2...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff