|
US School Shooting (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| arek |
| quote: | Originally posted by tribu
No, and rightfully so. People should have a moderate distrust of their government, which is why the 2nd amendment existed.
If the goverment starts using excessive force to unfairly suppress their people, it's nice for the people to have the same weapons as the goverment to try to revolt. Saying no one can have guns (but surely, letting cops and military keep them) is potentially very dangerous. It has worked in other countries, but not here.
As far as school shootings go, its sad but if guns were outlawed, it might be different, perhaps, school stabbings, poisonings, or explosions. People need to teach their kids how to express and cope with anger, not just totally ignore them while they try to make enough money to retire. This is just my view, youre all free to disagree with it... |
i doubt you have nuclear missiles and precison target rockets.
you are given pretty much a toygun compared to the power the guvernment has against its people. |
|
|
| guster |
guns aren't the problem no matter how much you (i had europeans here, but it looks like it's more-so our northern neighbours) like to think it. my dad has a 16 guage, 25-06 799 bdl, and a 9mm beretta sitting right next to their ammo. he knew to teach me not to mess with them and i knew it'd be my ass if i did.
i knew not to go grab a gun and shoot up my school.. and i was a pretty unhappy little kid. these kids that do this have to be FUBAR. |
|
|
| staticblue |
problem is, it's so much easier to kill somebody with a gun than with a knife or something else. I think guns should be outlawded. Even if it's probably not the real cause of the problem.
The thing is, 30 pupils can stop a guy if he only has a knife. So that guy will have to be really desperate before trying to attack his class. But 30 pupils can't do anything in front of a gunman.
Also, alot of people should understand that owning a gun won't stop them from getting killed.
Also, i think that the people who own a gun can't blame that pupil gunman for owning a gun too. He had the right to have a gun, it's in the US law. IF YOU HAVE A GUN YOURSELF, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE RISK THAT DESPERATE/MAD PEOPLE CAN OWN ONE ASWELL. |
|
|
| guster |
gun control really is touchy. i love target shooting. however, gun laws are way too lax here. with so many psychotic rednecks and gangstarrrr homies wanting to shoot up people, thorough background checks need to be instated. i mean, if i wanted to, i could go into a store and buy any kind of semi-automatic rifle i wanted to and i'm only 18. that's just kind of an odd thought to me. i don't feel old enough to take responsibility for a gun and the people who might get a hold of it.
and since guns won't be banned here, strict laws really should be enforced. but, even if citizens' gun rights were nulled, this shooting still feasibly would've happened since it was a police gun.
sad but true. |
|
|
| Orbax |
lol what an enlightened bunch of people you are. Try arguing with your 
and not your
although a few of you found a pretty solid combo  |
|
|
| kamil |
| quote: | Originally posted by guster
gun control really is touchy. i love target shooting. however, gun laws are way too lax here. with so many psychotic rednecks and gangstarrrr homies wanting to shoot up people, thorough background checks need to be instated. i mean, if i wanted to, i could go into a store and buy any kind of semi-automatic rifle i wanted to and i'm only 18. that's just kind of an odd thought to me. i don't feel old enough to take responsibility for a gun and the people who might get a hold of it.
and since guns won't be banned here, strict laws really should be enforced. but, even if citizens' gun rights were nulled, this shooting still feasibly would've happened since it was a police gun.
sad but true. |
ah, finally, an american with a brain! |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by chavs
You are totally missing the point, americans don't want guns because criminals have it, but because the government (army and police) have them, and they know that the government will come after them, like it's doing in any other country who has a fireamr ban... :rolleyes:
And seriously, this time we shouldn't be talking about guns and such because the grandfather was a policeman or something. |
This is one of the biggest problems with the US. You people have zero trust in your citizens or government. Your entire political system is set up to ensure that no one entity has any real control. While this is good in theory (for protecting the rights of the citizens) it doesn't work in reality. This is what leads to your government's stagnation and inability to effect legislation. Moreover, this has created a mentality where all citizens are principly concerned with themselves and insulating themselves for the imagined threats posed by their neighbours and government.
FYI, do you really think that having a rifle at home is going to protect you when the military expropriates your house to build a base? Is it likely that one home owner with a shot gun will really be able to prevent the police from searching their property be it legally or not?
Additionally, please to advise which country's citizens are being unduely persecuted because they do not have "the right to bear arms". I know that we have some pretty tough gun laws in Canada and I've never noticed our government oppressing anyone. Britain has some to the toughest gun laws in the world and I doubt you will find too many Brits that live in fear of their government. Oddly enough, of the industriallised world the US is the only country I know of where the government is so distrusted that people form groups to protect themselves from it.... coincidently, you have the least stringent gun laws in the G8. You're argument holds no water. |
|
|
| chavs |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
This is one of the biggest problems with the US. You people have zero trust in your citizens or government. Your entire political system is set up to ensure that no one entity has any real control. While this is good in theory (for protecting the rights of the citizens) it doesn't work in reality. This is what leads to your government's stagnation and inability to effect legislation. Moreover, this has created a mentality where all citizens are principly concerned with themselves and insulating themselves for the imagined threats posed by their neighbours and government.
FYI, do you really think that having a rifle at home is going to protect you when the military expropriates your house to build a base? Is it likely that one home owner with a shot gun will really be able to prevent the police from searching their property be it legally or not?
Additionally, please to advise which country's citizens are being unduely persecuted because they do not have "the right to bear arms". I know that we have some pretty tough gun laws in Canada and I've never noticed our government oppressing anyone. Britain has some to the toughest gun laws in the world and I doubt you will find too many Brits that live in fear of their government. Oddly enough, of the industriallised world the US is the only country I know of where the government is so distrusted that people form groups to protect themselves from it.... coincidently, you have the least stringent gun laws in the G8. You're argument holds no water. |
Are you really referring to my post? Well, I'm not american and I was trying to be sarcastic... Here in Spain you can't have guns and I don't see the army taking over the citizens, hence the sarcasm. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by tribu
No, and rightfully so. People should have a moderate distrust of their government, which is why the 2nd amendment existed.
|
Why is it that most US residents (I refuse to use the term American to describe a person residing in the United States as the term American more correctly means any thing having its origin in either North or South America) who decide to talk about gun control and resort to the 2nd ammendment only bother to read part of that ammendment. Please continue reading..... the second ammendment states that all citizens have the right to bear arms for the purpose of maintaining a well armed millitia..... Good idea, the only problem is that the well armed millitia has been standardized in the form of state controled National Guards. Since each state's National Guard is that states millitia (to protect against the evil centralized government) there is no longer a valid right for individual citizens to have weapons as this right has been delegated from the citizenry to the state. This was the intent of the ammendment and the establishment of the National Guard system. It is a pitty your courts have not regarded it in this manner. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by chavs
Are you really referring to my post? Well, I'm not american and I was trying to be sarcastic... Here in Spain you can't have guns and I don't see the army taking over the citizens, hence the sarcasm. |
Sorry about that, sarcasm doesn't come through in text too well. My argument is still valid if directed at US residents who feel the same as your post if it were to be taken at its litteral meaning.
Interestingly, you have the opposite of what the Yankies are afraid of.... you have citizen groups (terrorists/seperatists, whatever you want to call them) trying to destabalize the government. How much worse do you figure that would be if they had a constitutionally guarenteed right to stockpile weapons? |
|
|
| chavs |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Sorry about that, sarcasm doesn't come through in text too well. My argument is still valid if directed at US residents who feel the same as your post if it were to be taken at its litteral meaning.
Interestingly, you have the opposite of what the Yankies are afraid of.... you have citizen groups (terrorists/seperatists, whatever you want to call them) trying to destabalize the government. How much worse do you figure that would be if they had a constitutionally guarenteed right to stockpile weapons? |
Speaking only about terrorism it wouldn't be any worse, since they get all the guns they "need" to threaten people, plus they don't have enough courage to face people and kill them with a gun, they just prefer using bombs to kill some not important guys. |
|
|
| Orbax |
| Werent the spanish one of the world powers when they had guns back in the day? :toothless |
|
|
|
|
