No - I'm an American
Yes - I'm an American
No - I'm Not an American
Yes - I'm Not an American
Just because you blame the killer doesn't mean you can't also try to prevent future occurrences. Event has happened, how do we prevent it again. If we only blame the killer 100%, don't look at any outside motivation or preventative measures, does that mean we just say oh well and move on? or do we kill everyone we see so they don't kill us first? How about instead of saying it's "fail logic" to want to save lives, you offer some constructive conversation in this thread?
People are not talking about preventing future occurences, they are talking about lowering body counts. People who oppose the pointless "ban" understand that having smaller magazines and tougher background checks do absolutely nothing to prevent mass killings. Lower body counts, maybe, but prevention? Nope.
But whether you save 10 lives from one shooting or 10 lives from 10 separate shootings, you're still saving lives, and that should be the goal.
Altough the longer magazine is more pleasant to hold onto if you don't have a foregrip on an ak-47 style weapon (non issue for people with ar-15's).
Last edited by Diurdi; 2013-01-16 at 10:04 PM.
No, guns should not be banned in the U.S. According to the 2nd amendment of the Constitution that this country is based off of, U.S. citizens have the right to bear arms.
Nothing but a constitutional amendment is going to change that, and I don't see that happening anytime soon, even with all the recent shootings.
I am all for promoting gun safety, making it harder to get them, better management of who actually is able to get the guns, but removing guns from the public is a very bad idea in my opinion, and also something that could probably never happen.
"Then we have found, as it seems, that the many beliefs of the many about what's fair and about the other things roll around somewhere between not-being and being purely and simply." - Plato: Republic
I'd say it's quite likely that most jaywalkers care about laws when it comes to violent crimes.
Unless we're talking career criminals (irrelevant to the issue) or repeat offenders (the one place where your statement actually fits in)
Are we all forgetting that the Virginia Tech shooter used hand guns and still managed to kill more then at Sandy Hook?
1. Virginia Tech Massacre--33 dead, 23 injured
2. Virginia Tech couple murdered assassination-style off campus, shot point blank, no explanation as to their deaths
3. Virginia Tech graduate student DECAPITATED in a SCHOOL CAFETERIA by a fellow graduate student, no one does anything to stop it from happening.
If I believed in curses, I'd swear that place is cursed...
Do we have less of a clue, about the right to defend our selves?
My country, has been under 2 unions, + we were occupied by the nazis during the second world war...
does this make us, not having a damn clue about how to defend our self?
Honestly, weapons are not the best way to defend one self.
And sure as hell, ain't the smartest way, to protect your house hold.
Last edited by Insigna; 2013-01-23 at 01:35 AM.
If you want to see an example of a world where Militia's stood up against a government, watch revolution.. ignore the bit about no electricity just focus on what the world is like after the government fell. Looks like a really friendly place - The militia confiscates all guns, anyone who owns a gun and is not part of the militia is sentenced to death.. tbh i don't think that would be far from reality if there was a civil war and a winner emerged.
You say europe doesnt know jack for not having everyone armed to the teeth. Youd also say that North Korea is underdeveloped because it still has communism. Now consider what North Korea thinks of your way of life and realise gun banning is the next natural step. Everyday joes are too damn stupid to have weapons, nevermind those bestowed with below-average intelligence.
To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.