Mass shooting in Aurora, Illinois

[rrayy]

I'm pretty sure noone wants to ban guns, they just want to increase regulation to them.

YOu undersetimate one section of the country. There absolutely are people who want all guns banned.

- - - Updated - - -

Bullshit the main purpose of a gun is to kill a person. a gun is used to kill or try to kill a person/people.....more than anything else in this world.

It was the reason it was invented, its the reason why its manufactured.

Bullshit THe main purpose of a gun is to be shoot animals for food. So what anti-gun nut is paying you to spread this propaganda?

[Maxilian]

YOu undersetimate one section of the country. There absolutely are people who want all guns banned.

That's true.

But that's not the majority, as far as i heard, the group that's anti-gun (at least most of them) just want to put more regulations on it.

I mean... people are not that silly

Right? *Watch people who don't believe in global warming*

RIGHT? *Watch people think that vaccines cause autism*

Oh....

I guess you got a point

[Coolthulhu]

Bullshit the main purpose of a gun is to kill a person. a gun is used to kill or try to kill a person/people.....more than anything else in this world.

It was the reason it was invented, its the reason why its manufactured.

So guns are sentient beings now? They control us and not vice versa? Weird. Well, at least my guns are aesthetic enough for me to accept them as my new overlords.

[Bigbamboozal]

Ok, so what's your solution? Ban guns eh?. Typical braindead answer from people.

You really think sensible people with guns do these shootings?. It's the criminals. Even if you ban guns, what do you think will happen?. It will only punish people who follow the law.

Why not ban cars while you're at it??. So many accidents happen.

It worked for Australia, they had mass shootings and made firearms much harder to own, no more shootings.
Canada has lots of guns, a tougher to access licensing system, and WAY lower gun related crime per capita.
Japan? Same story.
We have lots of examples of how to do it right, you're just absolute in your unwillingness to not see it.
Sorta narrows it down.

The current solution in america?
You teach your kindergarden children to run around and throw shit at an active shooter, so that their deaths can buy others an extra few seconds.
That's a thing.
That's THE thing and your answer.
Teaching 5 year old's to be moving sandbags.
That's how you value life in your country.
Because mah guns an freedoms...
FYI your freedoms have been sliding down the shitter for years now and yet you think your most important point of contention is gun ownership for every psycho without question or stricter policy? Shit man, I'm not even talking about NO guns, just better consideration on how you license people and who gets to be licensed for gun ownership.
But no....lets teach kids to be moving sandbags instead.
How's that working out?

I have no more sympathy for a country that clings to their bullshit and makes zero change.
Another mass shooting did you hear about it? Which one?
That one that happened in x
Which one?
Such and such one
Which one this time?
Over and over.
And you still say "don take muh guns"
How about stop giving them to idiots?
How about do better mental health checks?
How about a graduated licensing system that limits peoples access to guns that aren't for hunting?
How about the majority of school shootings are NOT done by criminals but by people who were able to access legal firearms because your system is lax at best?

How about finding a solution that DOES work instead of just saying "that's just how it is, don't take my guns"
There ARE options other than guns for everybody and no guns for anybody.
Your assertion that those are the options is absolutely false.

Lots of other countries have tackled this.
We have found ways to limit the potential for this sort of thing, AND STILL MANAGE TO OWN GUNS, so what are you doing that isn't working?
Enough with the self serving bullshit already, none of us on the rest of the entire planet are buying your garbage anymore.
Just stop with the garbage rhetoric and start looking for solutions.
And pro tip: the solution shouldn't be moving sandbag children.

[Zan15]

YOu undersetimate one section of the country. There absolutely are people who want all guns banned.

- - - Updated - - -

Bullshit THe main purpose of a gun is to be shoot animals for food. So what anti-gun nut is paying you to spread this propaganda?

ahahah, even 100 years ago that was not the main purpose.

maybe if you said game hunting maybe it might come close to the number of guns and bullets used in armed conflict and crimes.

You sir are full of shit.

99+% of all animals for food are killed in production facilities or on farms by means other than guns so that there is no damage to the product.


Want to try that again?

- - - Updated - - -

So guns are sentient beings now? They control us and not vice versa? Weird. Well, at least my guns are aesthetic enough for me to accept them as my new overlords.

Yawn, nice try tho

[rrayy]

ahahah, even 100 years ago that was not the main purpose.

maybe if you said game hunting maybe it might come close to the number of guns and bullets used in armed conflict and crimes.

You sir are full of shit.

99+% of all animals for food are killed in production facilities or on farms by means other than guns so that there is no damage to the product.


Want to try that again?

- - - Updated - - -



Yawn, nice try tho

You are the one who needs to try again. Guns were invented for hunting for food. Repeating the same false propaganda doesn't make it true. So what a anti-gun nut is paying you to spread this BS?

- - - Updated - - -

It worked for Australia, they had mass shootings and made firearms much harder to own, no more shootings.
Canada has lots of guns, a tougher to access licensing system, and WAY lower gun related crime per capita.
Japan? Same story.
We have lots of examples of how to do it right, you're just absolute in your unwillingness to not see it.
Sorta narrows it down.

Where you fail is that the US has 10 times more people living here and has 100 times more guns. Far easier to have no shootings when you have a population equal to one city in the US.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, because wanting to actually address the issue like our bought off politicians isn't the crux of the problem to passing real gun reform..

I'm actually very 2nd amendment and have owned rifles and hunted as far back as I can remember, but we can't even have an honest discussion because the second you do some jerk off spout of crap about Chicago, Vehicle dealth, or a number of other strawman agruments.

THere is a difference between wanting to have an honest discvussion and immediately pointing to the NRA as the big bad boogeyman and spouting the same anti-gun BS like you did. You're living in a glass house right now.

[Coolthulhu]

Yawn, nice try tho

Yawning won't turn guns into sentient beings, or the lack of an argument into an argument.

[Kaleredar]

You are the one who needs to try again. Guns were invented for hunting for food. Repeating the same false propaganda doesn't make it true. So what a anti-gun nut is paying you to spread this BS?

It doesn't matter what guns were initially invented to do. It matters what they are primarily used for now.

Guns are primarily for self defense (with the intent to stop with lethal force,) stop being dense.

Where you fail is that the US has 10 times more people living here and has 100 times more guns. Far easier to have no shootings when you have a population equal to one city in the US.

So you're saying that having senseless homicidal rampages is "part and parcel" of living in the US?

Seeing as strict gun control works in every other western country in the world, I'd say it's worth a shot, contrasted with the current republican "do absolutely nothing" mantra. Which, shocker, is doing... absolutely nothing to curb gun violence.

Repeating the same actions and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. Apparently you feel that the number of mass shootings in the US is an "appropriate" number, if you are unwilling to do anything about it.

Again, "part and parcel," right?

THere is a difference between wanting to have an honest discvussion and immediately pointing to the NRA as the big bad boogeyman and spouting the same anti-gun BS like you did. You're living in a glass house right now.

...The NRA, which in the 90s campaigned successfully to prevent the CDC from researching the causes of gun violence?

The NRA, who has been found to have accepted money from Russian government interests, themselves intent on weakening the US, to contribute to the republican party?

That NRA?

Like, neither of those things are even debatable. Those both happened.

[Draco-Onis]

You are the one who needs to try again. Guns were invented for hunting for food. Repeating the same false propaganda doesn't make it true. So what a anti-gun nut is paying you to spread this BS?

But guns aren't very good for hunting for food, efficient for killing the food but it doesn't lend to the flavor of the meat besides we have these things called super market. Aside from that guns were made to kill people just like every other weapon in the history of man from bows to swords sure you can have other use for them but that is their primary purpose. You don't have to believe me look up the history of guns their first use was for armies.

[urasim]

...The NRA, which in the 90s campaigned successfully to prevent the CDC from researching the causes of gun violence?

What exactly are they supposed to research? Everything is documented in every shooting that's committed in the US. We know what guns they use, we know how many die, we typically know their motive(sometimes it's unclear but the CDC can't investigate motive better than the fucking FBI)... What exactly is the CDC supposed to do? Why do people still bring up this stupid, irrelevant point?

[Dellis0991]

A pussy with a gun.

[rrayy]

It doesn't matter what guns were initially invented to do. It matters what they are primarily used for now.

Guns are primarily for self defense (with the intent to stop with lethal force,) stop being dense.

The person I responded to claimed that guns were invetned to kill people. That is complete BS. I am not the one being dense here.

So you're saying that having senseless homicidal rampages is "part and parcel" of living in the US?

Seeing as strict gun control works in every other western country in the world, I'd say it's worth a shot, contrasted with the current republican "do absolutely nothing" mantra. Which, shocker, is doing... absolutely nothing to curb gun violence.

NO, what I am saying is that it is far easier to control guns in a country that has the population of New York City that has far less guns in ciructation then it is in a country that has 330+ million people and has at least twice that amount in legal guns registerd + the sheer amount of illegal weapons laying around. No amount of gun control is going to stop it anymore. ANd it is not that nobody is unwilling when one political party wants sensible gun control and the other wants to make as close to completely impossible to own a gun without completely banning it. So stop with the stupid strawman about how many mass shootings are accepatable

Repeating the same actions and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. Apparently you feel that the number of mass shootings in the US is an "appropriate" number, if you are unwilling to do anything about it.

Again, "part and parcel," right?

Read the above and spare me the unwilling nonsense. Everyone is willing. Everyone just has a different definition of how it should be done.

...The NRA, which in the 90s campaigned successfully to prevent the CDC from researching the causes of gun violence?

The NRA, who has been found to have accepted money from Russian government interests, themselves intent on weakening the US, to contribute to the republican party?

That NRA?

Like, neither of those things are even debatable. Those both happened.

So? Everyone on all sides has taken from the Russians. And that CDC research attempt was going to be a waste of time. We know what causes of gun violence are. We don't need to be wasting billions of dollars to find out what we already know.

[NihilSustinet]

Ok, so what's your solution? Ban guns eh?. Typical braindead answer from people.

You really think sensible people with guns do these shootings?. It's the criminals. Even if you ban guns, what do you think will happen?. It will only punish people who follow the law.

Why not ban cars while you're at it??. So many accidents happen.

yet its funny how countries with strict gun control have less gun crime. its almost like it actually works.

[rrayy]

What exactly are they supposed to research? Everything is documented in every shooting that's committed in the US. We know what guns they use, we know how many die, we typically know their motive(sometimes it's unclear but the CDC can't investigate motive better than the fucking FBI)... What exactly is the CDC supposed to do? Why do people still bring up this stupid, irrelevant point?

Because it supports their anti-NRA stance. That it would have been a complete waste of tax dollars and would tell us exactly nothing that we don't already know is irrelevant.

- - - Updated - - -

yet its funny how countries with strict gun control have less gun crime. its almost like it actually works.

Funny how a country with the population = New York City has less gun crime than a country 50 times that size with 100+ times more guns per capita.

- - - Updated - - -

But guns aren't very good for hunting for food, efficient for killing the food but it doesn't lend to the flavor of the meat besides we have these things called super market. Aside from that guns were made to kill people just like every other weapon in the history of man from bows to swords sure you can have other use for them but that is their primary purpose. You don't have to believe me look up the history of guns their first use was for armies.

They are if you know what the hell you are doing. Where I live people love to hunt. It's puts a ton of food in their freezers which will save a bunch of trips to the super market. ANd the meat is always delicious. So spare me that nonsense.

And stop it with guns were made to kill people. It's BS no matter how many ties you say it. They were invented to be a more efficient way to kill for food. Period.

[Draco-Onis]

They are if you know what the hell you are doing. Where I live people love to hunt. It's puts a ton of food in their freezers which will save a bunch of trips to the super market. ANd the meat is always delicious. So spare me that nonsense.

And stop it with guns were made to kill people. It's BS no matter how many ties you say it. They were invented to be a more efficient way to kill for food. Period.

You can bathe the meat in slime and it will be fine doesn't mean it's how you get the best flavor, you are basically saying history is a lie, guns were made as weapons of war not because of hunting.

[Zaktar]

I'm not unfavorable towards Swiss/Italian model gun control. I actually like it very much. I feel extremely safe when walking into a range, knowing that everyone there has been deemed sane by a team of state and/or military (never private) doctors and psychiatrists, has undergone extremely thorough police checks to ensure an immaculate record, and has succesfully completed military service and/or weapons safety training with state-sanctioned instructors.

Oh cool, on similar pages then - personally I just don't agree with the "why bother with gun control when we have a 2nd amendment protecting us" argument.

So guns are sentient beings now? They control us and not vice versa? Weird. Well, at least my guns are aesthetic enough for me to accept them as my new overlords.

Weird argument, nothing in the quoted statement comes even close to the implication that guns are sentient. "A gun is used," not "guns choose to..." Just nitpicking though.

[Steelcryo]

I'm not bothering reading the first 4 pages as it's always the same nonsense.

Fact: Most guns are designed to kill people, not animals. They can be used effectively to defend against large animals like bears but that doesn't mean they were designed for that.

Fact: Most mass shootings are using those weapons. Not hunting weapons. No-one needs more than a single shot rifle to hunt. If you do, you're a shitty hunter/marksman.

Fact: Most mass shootings are committed using legally purchased weapons. Whether they were the shooters or taken by the shooter from friends/family/whoever.

Fact: Less shootings could occur is there were less guns. Yes people could still commit them with illegally obtained weapons but your average school shooter isn't going to be able to get hold of them. How hard is it to understand that if they're harder to get hold of, less people will have them to be misused. Not to even get into the whole thing that many shootings are acts of passion and if someone has to make real effort to get weapon, more often than not, they won't go through with it because they've calmed down before that can act rashly.

Fact: There are plenty of crimes committed with illegal weapons. That doesn't mean legal weapons aren't often used as well.

Fact: Gun control works. Look at every nation that has implemented it, it's been a success at reducing if not flat out stopping gun violence and mass shootings. If you say it doesn't, you're using the same logic as anti vaxxers and flat earthers. Ignoring hard evidence is insane and anyone that does it should be classed as not mentally stable enough to even own a weapon.

Fact: A handgun or a shotgun is enough to defend your home. If you need anything bigger or faster firing, you're either likely to hurt innocent people via collateral damage or you're a terrible aim and again shouldn't be handling a gun.

Fact: Gun control doesn't mean taking away all the guns. Only the ones that are unnecessary for sensible purposes like hunting and home defense.

Fact: The second amendment wasn't written with modern guns in mind. If you really want to shout about it, be authentic and limit yourself to the weapons around at the time and go buy a musket.

Fact: The second amendment CAN be changed. It's not a law of god. That doesn't means it would be easy to change or that it ever will be changed, just that it can be. I don't know why so many think it flat out can't ever be changed.


There's a few facts. Argue over them or deny them all you want but it doesn't mean they aren't true. Sure there are more specifics than what I have given but that's the outline. I can even admit I see the appeal of guns, they're fun. We're humans and strangely a lot of us love things that are loud, scary and destructive. I totally get it.

What I don't get is how people can hear about people dying, see pictures of dead children and still think things are fine as they are. American school children are going to school wondering if today will be the day they get shot while they walk around with their bulletproof backpack or wondering if their parents know they love them in case they never get the chance to tell them again. I don't give a fuck what your stance is on guns themselves. Anyone that can see that going on in their country and not want change is fucked up. So maybe instead of selfishly crying about "muh guns" "muh rights" think about what those kids are going through, what shooting victims are going through and the families that have to bury their children because you think your right to own a gun is more important than their lives.



On the actual topic of this shooting, there isn't much to say other than it's horrible it happened and I feel so sorry for the victims and their families. Unfortunately though while it shouldn't be, gun control is the only conversation that can come from it.

[rrayy]

Fact: Less shootings could occur is there were less guns. Yes people could still commit them with illegally obtained weapons but your average school shooter isn't going to be able to get hold of them. How hard is it to understand that if they're harder to get hold of, less people will have them to be misused. Not to even get into the whole thing that many shootings are acts of passion and if someone has to make real effort to get weapon, more often than not, they won't go through with it because they've calmed down before that can act rashly.

Where you fail is that you don't stop to consider how may guns are already in circulation and are already legally registered. YOu also don't take into account just how large of a population the US has. No amount of legislstion will reduce the number of guns already in the country legal or illegal and you ceratinly aren't going to go around and take guns away from people because that is just not feasible in a country of this size.

Fact: There are plenty of crimes committed with illegal weapons. That doesn't mean legal weapons aren't often used as well.

So how does more gun lwas stop the crimes committed with illegal weapons or with guns that are alreadly legally reigstered? Hint: It doesn't.

Fact: Gun control works. Look at every nation that has implemented it, it's been a success at reducing if not flat out stopping gun violence and mass shootings. If you say it doesn't, you're using the same logic as anti vaxxers and flat earthers. Ignoring hard evidence is insane and anyone that does it should be classed as not mentally stable enough to even own a weapon.

Again, you are ignoring US populations size and number of guns it has. Of course gun control will work in countries which had barely any guns to begin with and is 1/100th the population of the US. The two situations are not remotely the same. Your "it works for x so it will work for y" nonsense doesn't work here.

Fact: A handgun or a shotgun is enough to defend your home. If you need anything bigger or faster firing, you're either likely to hurt innocent people via collateral damage or you're a terrible aim and again shouldn't be handling a gun.

Fact: Gun control doesn't mean taking away all the guns. Only the ones that are unnecessary for sensible purposes like hunting and home defense.

Agagin it is not feasible to take away legally registered guns form a population of the US and the amount of guns out there. The US Govenment does not have the resources or man power to do it, not to mention the ability to completely control things from becoming a riot.

Fact: The second amendment wasn't written with modern guns in mind. If you really want to shout about it, be authentic and limit yourself to the weapons around at the time and go buy a musket.

Fact: The second amendment CAN be changed. It's not a law of god. That doesn't means it would be easy to change or that it ever will be changed, just that it can be. I don't know why so many think it flat out can't ever be changed.

If you actually research what it takes to get an amendment changed or repealed, you can reasonably claim it can't be changed because you will never get the requirements fulfilled. Also, after the last time something was completely prohibited in this country. Things actually got worse to the point where it was repealed. Finally, even if you managed to get the 2nd Amendment repealed, good luck trying to confiscate every single gun in this country. It is basically impossible. So, yeah it ain't happening.

What I don't get is how people can hear about people dying, see pictures of dead children and still think things are fine as they are. American school children are going to school wondering if today will be the day they get shot while they walk around with their bulletproof backpack or wondering if their parents know they love them in case they never get the chance to tell them again. I don't give a fuck what your stance is on guns themselves. Anyone that can see that going on in their country and not want change is fucked up. So maybe instead of selfishly crying about "muh guns" "muh rights" think about what those kids are going through, what shooting victims are going through and the families that have to bury their children because you think your right to own a gun is more important than their lives.

Show me one person who thinks things are perfectly fine. You won't find one. Everyone knows things aren't fine. Everyone wants change. It's just that everyone disagrees on how to go about it. Also, American school children aren't going around wondering if they are going to get shot or doing anything you said in this paragraph. That is complete nonsense.

On the actual topic of this shooting, there isn't much to say other than it's horrible it happened and I feel so sorry for the victims and their families. Unfortunately though while it shouldn't be, gun control is the only conversation that can come from it.

No amount of gun control is going to stop someone if they want to shoot someone else. And no amount of gun control is going to reduce or eliminate the amount of guns already in circulation. No amount of effort to ban guns will stop that either in this country at this point. The only thing that truly has a chance of stopping it in this country is keeping them out of the hands of people who shouldn't be holding ANY gun in the first place. That means strict background checks including mental health screenings.

[The King in Yellow]

The person I responded to claimed that guns were invetned to kill people. That is complete BS. I am not the one being dense here.

Actually it is not... the first instances and mentions/depictions of firearms was in China, used to kill people during a siege. Firearms being used to hunt is something which started occuring somewhere around the late 1800's.

And more control would not matter indeed, as living in a country where guns are effectively banned; gun violence still happens. Geez I wonder why. Maybe because criminals with malicious intend do not abide the law.

[Bigbamboozal]

You are the one who needs to try again. Guns were invented for hunting for food. Repeating the same false propaganda doesn't make it true. So what a anti-gun nut is paying you to spread this BS?

- - - Updated - - -

Where you fail is that the US has 10 times more people living here and has 100 times more guns. Far easier to have no shootings when you have a population equal to one city in the US.

- - - Updated - - -

THere is a difference between wanting to have an honest discvussion and immediately pointing to the NRA as the big bad boogeyman and spouting the same anti-gun BS like you did. You're living in a glass house right now.

Did you not read the per capita part? Are you saying there is a connection between population size and the ability for control over licensing?
Because again, I call bullshit. Japan has higher density and still manages.