Quote by DevildudePeople who buy guns
for self protection/whatever reason should have been taking a chill pill before
thinking of that, hence why I will never stay in America, much less visit the
bloody place.
That's probably the most ridiculous thing I've heard for a person not wanting to
visit a place. If you look at things in such an overly stereotyped manner you're
just as screwed living in the UK. Everyplace has stupid people that overreact to
things, but buying a gun to protect yourself can have alot to do with where you
live (I still don't see it as a great idea for many reasons, but it's easy to
see why some people would be concerned and want one for self-defense).
Anyways, I see far too much whining on both sides of the fence with this issue.
Lets look at few things:
1. Guns don't kill people, but they make it a heck of a lot easier for a person
to kill several at once.
2. People who want to kill someone will find the means necessary to do so, but
why make it easier on them? Also, it doesn't seem like a bank robber's first
choice would be a knife... (not that this is unheard of, but you have better
chance of disarming them if it isn't a gun).
I'll be honest, I don't see a very effect solution for this issue because
criminals unfortunately will come by guns whether or not we make them illegal,
but as I said before there's no reason to make it easier for them. But on the
other hand, banning them all together would mean the criminals have guns, and
that everyone else is defenseless. Devildude's remark seems rather biased and
ignorant, considering that having a gun for self defense at home can actually
save lives (as it did for my friend when a man broke into her house and tried
unloading some rounds on her & her father). People who buy them for self
defense just need to be responsible.
Quote by maverickmechanicthere
needs to ba a serious mental health check before the weapon can be issued. i'm
not saying that we should not have any gun laws, all i'm trying to do is keep
guns from being banned to the public.
As I've said in the VT shooting thread. Virginia has a law on the books
preventing the purchase of a handgun by a person ordered by the state or doctors
to get pyschiatric help. In short Cho should have failed a background check and
have been denighed the handgun.
Something in the system failed. More laws aren't needed, enforceing current laws
are. Some one some where here broke the law by failing to put Cho's name in the
system. There needs to be further investigation to find out who failed to do
their job and why.
Quote by DuuzAs I've said in the VT shooting
thread. Virginia has a law on the books preventing the purchase of a handgun by
a person ordered by the state or doctors to get pyschiatric help. In short Cho
should have failed a background check and have been denighed the
handgun.
Something in the system failed. More laws aren't needed, enforceing current laws
are. Some one some where here broke the law by failing to put Cho's name in the
system. There needs to be further investigation to find out who failed to do
their job and why.
Cho didn't fail the background check. He lied on the application about requiring
to get psychiatric help: when asked was he ever referred or needed psychiatric
counseling, he said "no". Obviously he knew what he wanted to do. He
wasn't looney, just plain smart.
After what happened in Virginia, I think we have a definitive answer.
A database of medical history should be consultated obligatory when a gun is
sold. After all, it's not candies what is being sold, it's a thing that can kill
people.
If you're not insane, you don't have to worry. You'll get your weapon for
self-defense anyway.
The problem is that the weapon sellers are interested only in their bussiness,
and sometimes they're as looney as little Cho.
Yes, I said looney. And lying is not being smart. Just someone who wanted to buy
went to someone who wanted to sell.
You have your reason, quite interesting. I also thought like you. For example, a
person used liquid to activate a bomb on the airplane and then after that the
police prohibit everyone to bring any liquid things. That's just so stupid. They
think they can stop the bomber by prohibit that? The bomber is intelligent
enough to use other ways. I'm tired how people get panicked and make the problem
bigger but it doesn't solve anything, in fact it worsens the matter.
Well, with that point of view, Would you use a gun for anything but shoot? I
think It's the same situation with driving a car. You should'nt use it if you
don't know how to use it, cause you can get hurt, or hurt someone else, so, if
there's no control over it, imagine the disaster could do someone who doesn't
know how to use them... And you know there are some unconscious people that
would do it.
I suppose gun bans in some countries are a waste of time but there are some
countries that come down hard on gun laws, like Australia. But there are ways of
getting these weapons. The bikey gangs over there seem to be able to get their
hands on jus about anything.
I will use the Philipines as an example. Where I was deployed to last year in
the south, any purchase of guns is illegal. However you could go out in to
market places and buy an old WW2 .45 pistol and no one there would say anything.
So having laws doesnt work, its enforcing them that is the issue.
That's probably the most ridiculous thing I've heard for a person not wanting to visit a place. If you look at things in such an overly stereotyped manner you're just as screwed living in the UK. Everyplace has stupid people that overreact to things, but buying a gun to protect yourself can have alot to do with where you live (I still don't see it as a great idea for many reasons, but it's easy to see why some people would be concerned and want one for self-defense).
Anyways, I see far too much whining on both sides of the fence with this issue. Lets look at few things:
1. Guns don't kill people, but they make it a heck of a lot easier for a person to kill several at once.
2. People who want to kill someone will find the means necessary to do so, but why make it easier on them? Also, it doesn't seem like a bank robber's first choice would be a knife... (not that this is unheard of, but you have better chance of disarming them if it isn't a gun).
I'll be honest, I don't see a very effect solution for this issue because criminals unfortunately will come by guns whether or not we make them illegal, but as I said before there's no reason to make it easier for them. But on the other hand, banning them all together would mean the criminals have guns, and that everyone else is defenseless. Devildude's remark seems rather biased and ignorant, considering that having a gun for self defense at home can actually save lives (as it did for my friend when a man broke into her house and tried unloading some rounds on her & her father). People who buy them for self defense just need to be responsible.
^ has the right idea
As I've said in the VT shooting thread. Virginia has a law on the books preventing the purchase of a handgun by a person ordered by the state or doctors to get pyschiatric help. In short Cho should have failed a background check and have been denighed the handgun.
Something in the system failed. More laws aren't needed, enforceing current laws are. Some one some where here broke the law by failing to put Cho's name in the system. There needs to be further investigation to find out who failed to do their job and why.
i noe i agree they should tighten up the laws for guns in USA a LONG time ago
oh and huv u heard about the shotting incident in virginia about the uni shotting thing
i think that that guys a psycho
it is quiet a pitty hope that made the president to tighten up the laws about guns i USA u noe i mean its too easy to get a gun in the US .....
Cho didn't fail the background check. He lied on the application about requiring to get psychiatric help: when asked was he ever referred or needed psychiatric counseling, he said "no". Obviously he knew what he wanted to do. He wasn't looney, just plain smart.
After what happened in Virginia, I think we have a definitive answer.
A database of medical history should be consultated obligatory when a gun is sold. After all, it's not candies what is being sold, it's a thing that can kill people.
If you're not insane, you don't have to worry. You'll get your weapon for self-defense anyway.
The problem is that the weapon sellers are interested only in their bussiness, and sometimes they're as looney as little Cho.
Yes, I said looney. And lying is not being smart. Just someone who wanted to buy went to someone who wanted to sell.
someone made a good point on penn & tellers show. all of the major mass gun killings have all been in "Gun Free Zones".
Guns are good for you soul !
amen.
There could be nothing more patriotic, in my opinion.
You have your reason, quite interesting. I also thought like you. For example, a person used liquid to activate a bomb on the airplane and then after that the police prohibit everyone to bring any liquid things. That's just so stupid. They think they can stop the bomber by prohibit that? The bomber is intelligent enough to use other ways. I'm tired how people get panicked and make the problem bigger but it doesn't solve anything, in fact it worsens the matter.
Well, with that point of view, Would you use a gun for anything but shoot? I think It's the same situation with driving a car. You should'nt use it if you don't know how to use it, cause you can get hurt, or hurt someone else, so, if there's no control over it, imagine the disaster could do someone who doesn't know how to use them... And you know there are some unconscious people that would do it.
I suppose gun bans in some countries are a waste of time but there are some countries that come down hard on gun laws, like Australia. But there are ways of getting these weapons. The bikey gangs over there seem to be able to get their hands on jus about anything.
I will use the Philipines as an example. Where I was deployed to last year in the south, any purchase of guns is illegal. However you could go out in to market places and buy an old WW2 .45 pistol and no one there would say anything. So having laws doesnt work, its enforcing them that is the issue.