jhay78;1343319 wrote:Make it harder for people to get guns, and deranged nuts intent on murder will find a way to get them or use something else.

Ok, that is intuitive and I might be inclined to believe it...but where is the evidence for that? Again, countries who've enacted gun control on a national level have not encountered this problem it appears.

bases_loaded;1343300 wrote:How about you compare stabbings to shootings instead. Ya see, if I want to kill alot of people fast, I'm gonna use a gun. Not because the gun told me to, but because I'm a nut job and want to use something that will facilitate my craziness.

It's not the damn gun.

the gun is the reason they are able to carry out these mass killings

gut;1343311 wrote:Take away guns and these crazies will just use a home-made bomb...or their car.

Sounds intuitive but where's the evidence. The guy with the knife in China didn't kill any of those kids despite his best efforts. Guns designed to kill people do a much better than job than a concoction by a MacGuyver wannabe.

The goal shouldn't be be to limit the tools but rather effect the culture and behavior.

Impacting culture and behavior in a positive direction would have even greater impact than reducing gun violence.

gosh a ruddies the enormous majority of automobile deaths are accidents, the majority of gun deaths are not
train people to be better drivers, the driving deaths go down
train gun owners to be better shooters, gun deaths go up

BoatShoes;1343325 wrote:Sounds intuitive but where's the evidence. The guy with the knife in China didn't kill any of those kids despite his best efforts. Guns designed to kill people do a much better than job than a concoction by a MacGuyver wannabe.

See Bath School Disaster.

LJ;1343331 wrote:See Bath School Disaster.

44 people killed by a car bomb blowing up a school building. I get it. That doesn't in any way make the case against gun violence that is rampant when it's not clear what tangible benefit widespread gun ownership is granting society and you can get guns in the time it takes for Pornhub to load. Also, in the age of FBI surveillance pursuant to the patriot act it is easier to stop people who are conspiring to do damage with bombs than it is with guns currently weakly regulated.

gosh people bring up all these devises that were used for an incident, but guns are used again and again to slaughter innocent Americans.

BoatShoes;1343337 wrote:44 people killed by a car bomb blowing up a school building. I get it. That doesn't in any way make the case against gun violence that is rampant when it's not clear what tangible benefit widespread gun ownership is granting society and you can get guns in the time it takes for ****hub to load. Also, in the age of FBI surveillance pursuant to the patriot act it is easier to stop people who are conspiring to do damage with bombs than it is with guns currently weakly regulated.

The point is re-actively chasing and eliminating the tools doesn't eliminate the evil violence.

The tangible benefit that gun ownership provides is the it being one of many symbols reflecting the belief in the process we choose to have as our determinant of what can expect the rules of our society to be determined by.

isadore;1343341 wrote:gosh people bring up all these devises that were used for an incident, but guns are used again and again to slaughter innocent Americans.

Gosh a ruddies, just like these devices and knives are used again and again to slaughter innocent Americans.

And when you take my gun, who will stop the criminal coming into my home with his illegal gun knowing I don't have one and knowing a 911 call gives him at least 10 minutes to do what he wants.

BoatShoes;1343337 wrote:44 people killed by a car bomb blowing up a school building. I get it. That doesn't in any way make the case against gun violence that is rampant when it's not clear what tangible benefit widespread gun ownership is granting society and you can get guns in the time it takes for Pornhub to load. Also, in the age of FBI surveillance pursuant to the patriot act it is easier to stop people who are conspiring to do damage with bombs than it is with guns currently weakly regulated.

It takes way longer to buy a gun than it take pornhub to load.

Again, the u.s. has a violence problem. What do you suggest be done, in detail.

LJ;1343351 wrote:...

Again, the u.s. has a violence problem. ...

...which is the real issue.

bases_loaded;1343349 wrote:And when you take my gun, who will stop the criminal coming into my home with his illegal gun knowing I don't have one and knowing a 911 call gives him at least 10 minutes to do what he wants.

Keep a pile of rocks beside your bed!

GoChiefs;1343347 wrote:Gosh a ruddies, just like these devices and knives are used again and again to slaughter innocent Americans.

gosh
take a year

Firearm

7,812

Sharp instrument

754

Fire/Burns

74

Poisoning and other method type§§

108

and gosh a ruddies just about any home has a knife in it
http://www.ohiochatter.com/forum/showthread.php?38206-The-CT-shooting-and-gun-control/page4


fewer guns = more children

LJ;1343351 wrote:It takes way longer to buy a gun than it take pornhub to load.

Again, the u.s. has a violence problem. What do you suggest be done, in detail.

Not really if you have Tor downloaded and you can get to the Silk Road.

I'm not an expert but other countries have done a good job so it wouldn't hurt to try what they've tried, no? If it doesn't work then I eat crow and we go back to the way it was and people are dying either way right?

But, I'll give it my best shot.

If I were king, 1st you try to pass a police power amendment to the Constitution. Our national government functionally already has a police power and for many things conservatives think the federal government should do but it would go a long way to build up national support for gun control and appeasing the genuine concerns of conservatives.

Then you begin to heavily tax or regulate bullets like Gut (and Daniel Patrick Moynihan before him) suggested. A much more deliberate effort to secure the national border would be in order. I also think that a robust national healthcare program that provides coverage for mental health couldn't hurt.

The U.S. may have a violence problem indeed but widespread and readily available guns exacerbate the problems from violence...battered wives become dead wives...bystanders to bank robberies become victims of felony murder....would be wounded knife victims become executed corpses...foiled bomb plotters become successful riflemen.

ccrunner609;1343364 wrote:If you add a gun to that office you might prevent him from ever killing anyone?

gosh a ruddie if we had armed the kids, they could have picked him off.

again and again guns used to slaughter the innocent

BoatShoes;1343371 wrote:Not really if you have Tor downloaded and you can get to the Silk Road.

so illegally, nice. So new laws of ant kind would have no effect on that what so ever.

I

'm not an expert but other countries have done a good job so it wouldn't hurt to try what they've tried, no? If it doesn't work then I eat crow and we go back to the way it was and people are dying either way right?

I need to see hard numbers that country with the population and socio economic make up like ours has drastically reduced the overall murders and violence from strict gun control.

Then you begin to heavily tax or regulate bullets like Gut (and Daniel Patrick Moynihan before him) suggested.

and hurt a demographic that reliea on hunting to feed their families.

A much more deliberate effort to secure the national border would be in order. I also think that a robust national healthcare program that provides coverage for mental health couldn't hurt.

nothing wrong with those

BoatShoes;1343371 wrote:Not really if you have Tor downloaded and you can get to the Silk Road.

...

Is that legal?

LJ;1343376 wrote:so illegally, nice. So new laws of ant kind would have no effect on that what so ever.

Illegally within the United States. Hence the emphasis on national/federal efforts. And, the concentration on bullets mitigates against problems of guns already being out there. You go on there and the guys from the UK for example can't get guns cus they have to get through customs. A trip on the turnpike with nobody batting an eye is a lot easier.

Con_Alma;1343383 wrote:Is that legal?

Not at all

BoatShoes;1343371 wrote:...

I'm not an expert but other countries have done a good job so it wouldn't hurt to try what they've tried, no? If it doesn't work then I eat crow and we go back to the way it was and people are dying either way right?
,,,.

It's not your decisions. It's the people's decision collectively through their representatives. What it would "hurt" doing it your way would be to circumvent that which we hold true which is our legislative process.

ccrunner609;1343382 wrote:All females in the office....maybe a man could of stopped him?

and maybe this would have stopped him

LJ;1343376 wrote:hurt a demographic that reliea on hunting to feed their families. nothing wrong with those

Yes. We have an extensive welfare state as well as a widespread system of interstate commerce that would allow them other means to feed their families. If it takes more subsidies to help these folks get food then we can bear that burden greater than we can bear the burden of systematic widespread, unnecessary and persistent loss of life at the hands of guns.