Kentucky High School shooting...seriously? Another shooting?

[tanksin the enhance shamy]

america will learn that they need less guns one day...right?...right?

[Tech614]

Terror attacks and school shootings are part and parcel of living in a big city. In London they cant ban trucks, like they cant ban guns in Usa. Trucks and guns are required tools for daily life.

Hand Guns are not a required tool for everyday life, and they make up the vast majority of gun related deaths in the country. Literally their only purpose is to kill another human being.

It's one thing to own some hunting rifles and teach a useful hobby to your kids. Those aren't the weapons killing people in 9/10 gun deaths. There is no place for handguns in society, yet here we are where far too many households own a tool that was designed to kill humans and humans only.

[Deleted]

Seems like when terrorists attack people in the US then there's endless call for blood, bombings or actual invasions of other countries, literally trillions of dollars spent.

When it is a US citizen doing the killing no one does anything.

The only commonality is the solution to everything in the US seems to be violence. Even when it comes to violence itself.

The us was formed out of violence and they've been inflicting it on others world wide for more than 100 years.

[Tech614]

The us was formed out of violence and they've been inflicting it on others world wide for more than 100 years.

The world has been inflicting violence on the world as far back as written history tracks, and obviously long before that even.

Almost every modern country had their current borders formed out of war results or conquests.

Your post literally holds no value.

[Hooked]

Yes, we should pass a law that only people who can pay 5000 dollars can own a firearm. Anyone caught with an illegal firearm will be put to death. Sounds good huh, I got my 5 grand right here also.

[Deleted]

The world has been inflicting violence on the world as far back as written history tracks, and obviously long before that even.

Almost every modern country had their current borders formed out of war results or conquests.

Your post literally holds no value.

Except that it's factually correct.

[Tech614]

Except that it's factually correct.

I just took a shit. Factually correct, still holds no value.

[Cruor]

Nothing can happen that will change my view on the 2nd amendment, yes even if I am shot. I own guns and guns should be a world wide right to those without criminal backgrounds.

It doesn't matter how many crimes are committed by a "certain group" or how many terrorist acts are committed by another "certain group" and liberals won't change their views on them. Why then ban guns because .000001% of gun owners shoot people?

[Cruor]

Yeh, maybe, but if you compare Glasgow to a US city of similar population size you’ll find that Glasgow isn’t very dangerous. Both Glasgow and Milwaukee have a population of around 600k, in 2015-2016 Glasgow had 14 murders while Milwaukee had 154 murders in 2015. The US could only dream of such a low murder rate in their most dangerous city.

Look at the demographics of the two cities... that's your answer. "They" are to blame, not guns. I hope you are smart enough to Google Milwaukee demographics and undersrand. If you had 40% of Belfast being you know who, then Belfast would have the same issues. Maybe less guns but they would just use knives or clubs.

[Machismo]

Look at the demographics of the two cities... that's your answer. "They" are to blame, not guns. I hope you are smart enough to Google Milwaukee demographics and undersrand. If you had 40% of Belfast being you know who, then Belfast would have the same issues. Maybe less guns but they would just use knives or clubs.

Who is the "you know who" you are talking about?

I ask, because my city is 50% black, and has a crime rate that is less than half the national average. It's about 40% white, and white people have caused literally all the murders in my city in the past 11 years.

[s_bushido]

Who is the "you know who" you are talking about?

In the past, I suspect people like this would have been more comfortable just saying "niggers."


I just never understood this implication (or direct assertion) that there's something about being black that increases criminality from the same people who will flatly deny that there's something about being a US citizen that increases the likelihood of mass shootings. If you want to argue that there are cultural/societal reasons for one, you cannot claim that there are no cultural/societal reasons for the other.

[Tasttey]

Who is the "you know who" you are talking about?

Voldemort obviously.

[ipaq]

What legislation could we have put in place that would have stopped Sandy Hook?

In this instance where did the kid get the handgun?

It took Australia 1 mass shooting and they fixed it since them.

But they don't have to compensate for their small dicks.

[Pawstruck]

I actually seriously debated on posting this.... seriously.

You should have "debated" (I think you mean "deliberated") more carefully. You're making a mockery of the dead, injured, and traumatized because you want attention and to start a "conversation" (read: clusterfuck of shared ignorance) about the Second Amendment.

Get the hell out.

[Ghostpanther]

More people have been killed with single shot pistols every two days since that happened. So since 58 people were killed with a bump stock, near 5,000 people have been killed with pistols.

- - - Updated - - -

It is true handguns overall contribute more to gun death's than rifles with bump stocks have. But it does not take much reasoning to figure out there is no need for them and in a shorter time period a shooter who is using one, can do much more damage than one can with just a handgun. There is no reason they should be legal. Even for self defense, you would not need one unless you are afraid of a zombie invasion. :P

- - - Updated - - -

Fair point. But it's harmful, and anything harmful should be abolished.

- - - Updated - - -



And then there are tenfold more where a gun has just been a liability and had someone killed.

Your argument is like praising Nazism because it brought Germany out of it's depression, which is one good thing. Then you look on the flip side of what is actually happening and you realize "Oh shit this is causing a lot of problem". I don't know if this is actually true but it wouldn't surprise me if the 2nd amendment has had more people kill that WW2.

Sorry, but you have no input into if the Second should be abolished or not. Unless you are a US citizen, but with your tone, I seriously do not think so. I mean maybe we should abolish freedom of religion based on the number of death's caused by a few religious radicals. :P

Once again, that is a false narrative. And you seriously think the Second Amendment has resulted in more deaths than WW2? lol! At this point, it is hard to take you seriously if you think the right to defend yourself in the US has resulted in 50 million deaths here.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, you have an undemocratic country so you can't really be sure what works for everyone and what doesn't with things like gerrymandering that even arnold swarzgenger someone in the winning party from that gerrymandering is aganist and the fact that polling has shown many gun owners believe in further regulation not to mention none gun owners you also have a system that meant the person with less votes (because of some gibberish about country people deserving extra voting power for being seperate areas) is president

So in essence, you just want to bash the US. I am sure we will be just fine here without you.

[chubbybunny]

wait for trump to say that the shooter was a radicalized muslim.

[Ghostpanther]

Hand Guns are not a required tool for everyday life, and they make up the vast majority of gun related deaths in the country. Literally their only purpose is to kill another human being.

It's one thing to own some hunting rifles and teach a useful hobby to your kids. Those aren't the weapons killing people in 9/10 gun deaths. There is no place for handguns in society, yet here we are where far too many households own a tool that was designed to kill humans and humans only.

Another false narrative. They are a tool which exists for other things than killing people. Some are specifically designed for competitive target shooting and suck for self defense carry. Also when the Founding fathers created the Constitution, pistols existed then and were considered to be arms also. So it is a Constitutional right to keep and bare handguns. Which the city of Chicago found out when they tried to outright ban them.

- - - Updated - - -

It took Australia 1 mass shooting and they fixed it since them.

But they don't have to compensate for their small dicks.

They also did not have a amendment in their Constitution which gave the right to their citizens to keep and bare arms. This is so common with some who have no clue how you change a Constitutional amendment in the US and it was purposely made hard to do because rights are something which should never be easy to change.

[Sunseeker]

Yeah, most of us care, we just have very different definitions of what would fix the problem. The other thing is that it's not the largest cause of deaths, so some people think we should put more focus on saving lives where more lives are impacted. Not to say it's an either/or thing - we should still do what we can to decrease/eliminate gun violence - but that's why 100% of the people aren't' focused 100% of the time on stopping gun violence.

Translation: It's not a big deal, we don't really care.

[Chaelexi]

- Gun laws activists say: "I TOLD YOU SO!"
- Firearm activists say: "SHOULD'VE BEEN ARMED"
- Normal person says: "The child stole his parents' gun and shot two victims. A disturbed kid who went beneath his parents' noses and became a murderer."

Is it going to be every time that we realize that gun control didn't stop this child from stealing his parents' gun to gun down two kids? Is it a tragedy, yes. You bet your ass it is. But his actions do not speak for the gun law debate. He stole his parents' weapon and used it. Either he discovered where they hide it. He stole it from someone else, or miraculously bought it (Highly doubt it.)

Gun laws would not have saved anyone here as it appears that the child stole a handgun.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kentuck...-live-updates/

If the Gun was stored properly locked in a case with the keys only being accessible by the parents. Then yes this would not have happened. Or this would not have happened in Japan where there are almost no handguns.

[Themius]

If we can’t restrict the access to illegal drugs on the street what is the virtue of restricting firearms to people? If somebody wants something they’ll get it. Its society that needs help, not laws that can’t be fully enforced.

Many legal guns end up becoming illegal because of how prevalent they are. Is this difficult to understand or something?