A Prayer

**erezb** · Posted On: 12/17/2012 9:39am

Originally Posted by Swollen Elf Goon

I posted all the US murder stats in the armory, you know.

9300 murders with guns in 2010 in the US. That is half as many as dead by STD's.

Firearms murder is .39% of preventable death in the US. "gun control" is a red herring. The US murder rate is 85th in the world (Smack in the middle) but our suicide rate is 11th. 90 people committed suicide in the US on Friday, but only one made the news.

The problem is mental health, not guns.

Guns laying around make it easier to carry out a spontaneous lethal attack caused by a psychosis breakdown. You can only compare two parallel incidents in China and the USA, one ended with 22 wounded and the other with 27 killed. The only difference is the weapon used.
For example, why does one even need a gun? self protection, fine, why than can he buy more than one? What is the justification of owning a semi or full automatic rifle?

Saying guns are the problem is oversimplifying things, but ignoring the impact of such an abundance of firearms on the nature of those murderous attacks is plain stupid.

I think the criteria of owning a firearm should be much harsher and a privilege rather than a right. I also think you shouldn't be able to own more than one, and no assault rifles ffs.

Finely, to my understanding you can't just carry a gun with you everywhere, and it can't be concealed. This indicates the government does not trust the gun holders at all, and does not want to see them carrying guns everywhere. So how would it help that "good people" would own guns, if there are laws against taking them out side the house?

P.S. you can do a recall for guns, for example this guy's mother would have returned hers. You have a registration of all the legal ones. And you pass a law that states you can return a gun no question asked to certain collection points up to a date (maybe get some money). If you couple it to serious punishment if a gun is found on your person and or possessions after those recalls. You can drastically lessen the amount of free ranging guns.
Now you might counter and say that career criminals will still own guns, true, how many of those hoodlums went on those killing sprees in schools?
You do give the option for choice members of society to own and CARRY guns . Cups, Army ex LEO, paramedics and people that actually need a gun because of their job and pass those hard criteria. If you are still afraid something like that can happen unchecked have an armed guard at every school (happens here).

**DCS** · Posted On: 12/17/2012 10:00am

Originally Posted by Swollen Elf Goon

The problem is mental health, not guns.

Seconded.

**DCS** · Posted On: 12/17/2012 10:06am

Originally Posted by erezb

Guns laying around make it easier to carry out a spontaneous lethal attack caused by a psychosis breakdown. You can only compare two parallel incidents in China and the USA, one ended with 22 wounded and the other with 27 killed. The only difference is the weapon used.

Now compare the numbers of east asians going nuts with the numbers of usanians going nuts per total population in their respective countries.

**Devil** · Posted On: 12/17/2012 10:07am

Originally Posted by erezb

Guns laying around make it easier to carry out a spontaneous lethal attack caused by a psychosis breakdown. You can only compare two parallel incidents in China and the USA, one ended with 22 wounded and the other with 27 killed. The only difference is the weapon used.
For example, why does one even need a gun? self protection, fine, why than can he buy more than one? What is the justification of owning a semi or full automatic rifle?

Saying guns are the problem is oversimplifying things, but ignoring the impact of such an abundance of firearms on the nature of those murderous attacks is plain stupid.

I think the criteria of owning a firearm should be much harsher and a privilege rather than a right. I also think you shouldn't be able to own more than one, and no assault rifles ffs.

Finely, to my understanding you can't just carry a gun with you everywhere, and it can't be concealed. This indicates the government does not trust the gun holders at all, and does not want to see them carrying guns everywhere. So how would it help that "good people" would own guns, if there are laws against taking them out side the house?

P.S. you can do a recall for guns, for example this guy's mother would have returned hers. You have a registration of all the legal ones. And you pass a law that states you can return a gun no question asked to certain collection points up to a date (maybe get some money). If you couple it to serious punishment if a gun is found on your person and or possessions after those recalls. You can drastically lessen the amount of free ranging guns.
Now you might counter and say that career criminals will still own guns, true, how many of those hoodlums went on those killing sprees in schools?
You do give the option for choice members of society to own and CARRY guns . Cups, Army ex LEO, paramedics and people that actually need a gun because of their job and pass those hard criteria. If you are still afraid something like that can happen unchecked have an armed guard at every school (happens here).

Your post is so full of fail I'm not even sure where to begin.

I'll give you a 9.5 on the retardometer for your question about why you would need more than one gun for self defense. Let's see - in my house....One upstairs. One downstairs. Three for concealed carry depending on what I'm wearing. A couple to meet the wife's carry needs. One in each vehicle. That's a start.

What's the justification for having a semiautomatic rifle? Well, obviously to kill bad guys more effectively and in larger quantities if necessary. This is where the gun Nazi canoe really starts to take on water. You don't get to dictate the level of conflict I'm allowed to prepare for. If you think a single snub nosed .38 revolver is adequate for any possible self defense situation, it only proves you don't understand violent conflict. I want high capacity rifles because I might have to kill a whole fucking mob. That's why. Can you comprehend that?

What else? Oh, there's no such thing as an "assault rifle." That's a mythical term. Learn proper gun terminology before arguing about guns. Semiautomatic, fully automatic, bolt action, single shot, revolver, etc. Those are real terms that mean something. Use them.

Your information about concealed carry is incorrect. Read more.

As for your ingenious recall idea - it won't fucking work. U.S. history. It is your friend. We love our guns. We're not giving them up. Attempts to do so would be fucking disastrous. I'm not making this **** up off the top of my head. More thinking and reading. Less talking.

**submessenger** · Posted On: 12/17/2012 10:10am

Originally Posted by Scut Farkus

Now it's time for the discussion about school security. Again, the threat hasn't changed but our understanding of the threat has. Honestly, I'm surprised it hasn't happened before now. It's been on my mind since 9-11 because what's more terrifying than the fear of your children being murdered?

Yes, why are we talking about general gun control measures, here, rather than addressing the most relevant issue? Opportunists are using this tragedy as a rallying cry to ban "assault weapons." Solving the school violence problem has less to do with access to weapons and more to do with the fact that schools are a vulnerable and relatively unprotected target.

**Devil** · Posted On: 12/17/2012 10:15am

Originally Posted by Nutcracker, sweet

Yes, why are we talking about general gun control measures, here, rather than addressing the most relevant issue. Opportunists are using this tragedy as a rallying cry to ban "assault weapons." Solving the school violence problem has less to do with access to weapons and more to do with the fact that schools are a vulnerable and relatively unprotected target.

For the sake of fairness, I feel obliged to point out that both sides are guilty of politicizing this event just like every other event.

**DCS** · Posted On: 12/17/2012 10:28am

Originally Posted by Nutcracker, sweet

Solving the school violence problem has less to do with access to weapons and more to do with the fact that schools are a vulnerable and relatively unprotected target.

Vulnerable and unprotected from who? from common criminals, from political terrorists or from mentally disturbed individuals?

What kind of people are the usual perpetrators of massacres of these kind?

**NeilG** · Posted On: 12/17/2012 10:37am

Originally Posted by Scut Farkus

We love our guns. We're not giving them up.

That's the root of the pro-gun position in the US. Guns == religion. The rest of the world just shakes its head.

**submessenger** · Posted On: 12/17/2012 10:38am

Originally Posted by DCS

Vulnerable and unprotected from who? from common criminals, from political terrorists or from mentally disturbed individuals?

What kind of people are the usual perpetrators of massacres of these kind.

Security is more than fences and sign-in sheets. Such physical controls are easily subverted, especially by those that, for whatever reason, don't play by the same morals as the majority. Our security is generally about "keeping honest people honest." The problem is that our greatest threats never come from "honest people." I don't proclaim to have the answer, but I know we're asking the wrong questions.