~~~GUN CONTROL~ (Page 7)
Swifty Jamar: I would like someone to tell me exactly how banning guns will help prevent murders or mass killings?
There are so many ways to mass kill without guns.
Powerful bombs can be easily made at home using simple ingredients found in any average home.
Nail guns can be purchased at any hardware store and while not as efficient, can be just as lethal as a regular gun.
Pressurised lethal air guns can easily be made at home by anyone who takes the time to look them up.
Scentless deadly gases can be released into ventilation systems in schools, stores, etc. which would likely result in even more fatalities than a shooting.
Trucks or our other vehicles can be driven into buildings full of people.
The list is endless. Take away guns and you only challenge mass-killers to get the guns illegally from another country or an underground illegal gun manufacturer (something that someone willing to murder people likely wouldn't mind doing, and you can bet you britches such underground gun manufacturers would pop up in the black market industry if gun laws were passed) or come up with new inventive ways to accomplish the same reprehensible killings they have their hearts set on.
So then what? The guns are gone, killings still happen regularly, robberies are easier because there's no fear whatsoever that the innocent law-abiding pedestrians will be armed, and if it comes to violence it will simply come down to a physical fight with either knives or whatever other tool is used, and likely the larger more powerful person will win the violent bloody fight. Unless the pedestrian is lucky enough to have a can of pepper spray nearby.
This is why removing guns from the picture doesn't actually help much when you take a step back and look at it with common sense rather than the natural reaction of disgust we feel after hearing about another senseless killing. Yes, guns kill many people, but that doesn't mean they are the real issue.
Guns may be made for killing but that doesn't mean they should be used for anything but self defence. A person who buys a gun isn't pro-killing anymore than a person who buys a fire extinguisher is pro-arson. In both cases they should be bought in hopes of never having to use them, but having them on hand just in case they could save your life.
The only defence against someone shooting people with a gun is to kill them before they can kill others. In instances where no one has guns to shoot back they can just keep killing for as long as their ammo lasts, like shooting fish in a barrel. It's a horrible and helpless situation, which would instantly be eradicated if another person with a gun enters the picture in the interest of saving everyone else.
If you take away legal guns, you take away that chance and that hope, and people will continue to die until law enforcement arrive on the scene.
Guns have existed for decades, mass shootings have become somewhat of a trend in more recent times.
Glorification of misusing guns and killing in movies certainly may be partly or even significantly to blame. Television used to be censored and even in wild west shows full of shooting and killing, there were limits as to how many killings could appear in each show and the stars often only killed rarely in self defence.
Mental issues are also certainly a serious contributing factor which needs to be addressed.
Lastly but certainly not least, schools need to improve their systems and find better ways to handle issues involving bullying and so on.
Violence should NOT be accepted. Guns should NOT be glorified as dangerous sexy killing machines, but instead as potentially harmful but important tools of self defence which should be kept only for emergencies, or otherwise used (for target practice, hunting etc) with extreme caution and careful thought. People should learn WHY killing is bad, WHY, the lives and well-being of others should matter to them.
If that happened, there would never be another killing again, with any weapon. While sadly killings may never completely stop, I think if we address the actual issues that cause people to even want to do such horrible crimes, and to spread the value of empathy in our societies, it will go so much further than doing nothing to address the underlying condition and simply trying, likely without effect, to remove guns.
The giant midget:
very well written and well explained
common Sense will prevail once again hopefully
zeffur: Utopia thinking leads to cries for banning guns--it's not a tenable proposition.
Wise & sensible people know it isn't possible to eliminate guns--even if you literally got rid of every single gun--people will demand them & make more of them (or pay someone else to do so) to have a gun/s to protect themselves against bad people. The police cannot sufficiently protect law abiding people from bad people who seek to harm, rob, violate, &/ kill them.
The only sensible solution to that ^^ reality is to allow sane, law-abiding people to legally possess & use guns for legal purposes (including defense) & to make it illegal for bad people (criminals, mentally unstable people (including psychos), & irresponsible gun owners) to obtain, possess, & use guns--which of course they won't follow--which leads us again back to the fact that good people need the legal right to protect themselves against bad people. See how that works? It's an inescapable reality.
Like cars--guns are a useful tool--the problem isn't the tool--the problem is bad people misusing the tool.
Gun control is a misnomer--we need to focus on controlling bad people.
(Edited by zeffur)
briansmythe: don't think any ones said any thing of banning guns have they , just more mass Hysteria
glad I don't live in america
ibcallipygous: the one thing all of the hysteria has in common is the media, control the media. don't report the acts of insanity causing more insanity. don't give these idiots the publicity, notoriety or immortality that they seek. will it go away? no, but it'll at least it will not give them credit or make a criminal famous/infamous
Fog Swept Glade: The issue with that is the constant vetting including transfer of solids, obstruction to makes cases work, and Islams ‘gravitational effect‘ on anybody that is mad. I don‘t believe in more than a call from family to the hospital as for missing people. The news should not determine what infamy is and they shouldn‘t be permitted to talk about people without permission. Religion that isn‘t oppressive, petitioning the government for redress of grievences in courts some place else obviously. The property and self defense thing with the 2nd amendment is fine. Being a pedestrian, I have often thought of urban violence, and can morally justify automatic weapons, in rural settings also, the shorter ones are fine for people that walk. Good samaritanship as for following, or ‘just being there‘, no. Life has a natural swing and people getting in the way of that is what real laws get enacted for, period. When law makers do more, it isn‘t a law at all, it‘s just a way to stop people from moving fluidly. That isn‘t conservatism, it‘s basic facts. People are not counted in file and made to drill or arrest or fire on people. You may have to show for these things at a ‘trial‘ or erroneous appearance. The press promotes such trash also.
Fog Swept Glade: That would call for a larger handgun to play it safe or that lovely mac 10. A rifle would be nice, but reversing or stopping should be defensive enough in those times. Home defense is fine with a snub large pistol or a sawed off 12 gauge. I would assume a 10 is off the market like the 8. I‘m not entirely sure about silencers in a time of distress. There is still a use for those with true man and Castle around. It‘s a shame appearances and ‘trials‘ suck.
The giant midget: No need for a silencers with in self defence mode
With a silencer Courts will look at you as more a vigilante thug than protecting your loved one and property