Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Jägermeister

27 Dead in Connecticut Elementary School Shooting

Recommended Posts

The US wants to dictate who has those weapons. If there was someone you don't like, and you're a fairly aggressive person, you wouldn't want others that might actually stand up to you to have the same strengths you have.. then you might actually be forced into trying to get along with them rather than bully and threaten them.

The concept is similar.

If a robber believes you have a gun, chances are he might think twice about going into your house to rob/kill you (chances are he still might do it as well), but chances are if he comes in with a gun you have a higher chance of defending yourself than trying to call 911 and hoping the cops get there on time to save you. If you were a robber common sense dictates you'd have a preference to commit a crime when you would have the highest chance of getting away with it. The less dangerous repercussions you face, the more willing you are to do something. I'm in bewilderment that I have to explain this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny, but I hope you can differentiate cartoon caricature from reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US wants to dictate who has those weapons. If there was someone you don't like, and you're a fairly aggressive person, you wouldn't want others that might actually stand up to you to have the same strengths you have.. then you might actually be forced into trying to get along with them rather than bully and threaten them.

The concept is similar.

If a robber believes you have a gun, chances are he might think twice about going into your house to rob/kill you (chances are he still might do it as well), but chances are if he comes in with a gun you have a higher chance of defending yourself than trying to call 911 and hoping the cops get there on time to save you. If you were a robber common sense dictates you'd have a preference to commit a crime when you would have the highest chance of getting away with it. The less dangerous repercussions you face, the more willing you are to do something. I'm in bewilderment that I have to explain this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

guns kill people...

people kill people...

actually. who cares who kills who? the weapon isn´t important. a car can be a weapon, a knife, a gun, a bottle of beer. anything can be turned into a weapon...

the question is. why this coward, why this insane, why this piece of scum get permition to buy a rifle? it´s clear that if anybody does a psychological examination on people like this guy will be clear that people like this are not able to carry even a toy gun!

the guy buy 3 weapons and the Police didn´t suspected why he is buying so many guns? really?! why you need 3 diferent types of guns? do you live in rural Alaska or in a war zone? a gun isn´t enought to protect yourself? do you need hunt everyday to eat because you never heared the word "supermarket" on your life?

buy a weapon is so easy in USA, you just have to me an USA citizen over 18! go to Wallmart and buy 1,2,3 or how many guns you want, for hunt, self protection, "others"? they don´t care! they don´t understand that if you turn a weapon a "simple" tool that you can buy on a supermarket the society is telling that "kill is normal" and "natural death and muder the same thing, but to kill somebody you need to go to wallmart first..."

it´s silly try compare other countries, the education is diferent, the society is diferent. but it´s clear that the society in USA must say "that´s enought", a maniac with a rifle? yeah. "for those who want feel the power of a military weapon on a civil use". WTF is this?! if you want feel the power of a military weapon join the army, navy or airforce!  you will travel aroung the globe to kill as much terrorist you want without be in charge of something...

but yeah. this "creature" was so coward, he killed himself, he wasn´t man enought to fight, to see the kids, the parents, the society, the world looking at him. he destroyed many and many lifes and in the end he killed himself to do not face a real punishment...

if a guy like this one hurt my family and for some miracle he survives, better run because I will hunt him like an animal, and after I find this coward I will punish maniacs like this in a proper way, scum must be treated like scum...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isreal and Switzerland have easy access to guns for civilians and the rate of guns in homes is the same as the US, and their murder rates are not anywhere near as high as the U.S. So strict gun laws don't automatically = less violence because both those countries don't have strict laws, yet don't have high gun violence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the double standard is clearly stated in your explanation. They give the same equal rights to average joes and psychos to bear arms but god forbid if other countries had the arsenal capability that they do. They definitely have their priorities straight. Am amazed that you can't see through this flawed logic. So Iran is in the right if it wants to protect itself from Israel and US. They could always point to the second US amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what you're saying, but from what I keep reading / hearing, shooter was denied when he tried to buy a gun. That was "gun control" at work. He used his mother's. Not being able to legally purchase a weapon won't stop someone from attaining one, or a means to commit such acts. (<- that's where we agree)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By your logic, we shouldn't have knives, or anything potentially dangerous because it's the "inanimate object's" fault for the way people use it. Blaming objects for the way people use them is the smart thing to do, people are just so dumb aren't they? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By this ridiculous logic, we should add up all the causes of deaths around the world, choose the #1 cause, and divest 100% of our resources towards it while ignoring everything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So lets just not do anything?

No it will never stop violence or such acts but it will make them harder. What if he couldn't get his hands on the guns he had because his mother didn't have one? What if the Aurora guys couldn't? What if it wasn't so god damn easy to be able to do this. Do you think maybe it might make a difference?

What if questions are a crappy argument I know but what if his mother had to take a class about gun safety and what if there were regulations around storage of firearms.

Acting as if piss poor gun regulations don't play a part in this is as silly as saying guns are 100% responsible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that your chance of being attacked in your home is significantly less than the chance that the firearm could accidentally kill or wound a family member or guest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.