(08-20-2013, 04:20 AM)Skizzy Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 03:31 AM)Harvey Wrote: Maybe because gun control eliminates mass shootings? Maybe there's some relation between the fact that the US has 14 times the population of Australia and somehow 104 times the firearm-caused death rate? Please watch all of this to realise how stupid you sound.



And then part two.

Gun control does not eliminate mass shootings because criminals aren't going to get their guns legally.... I mean look at that elementary school shooting, that kid stole the guns he used.

---

(08-20-2013, 04:05 AM)Guardian Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 03:07 AM)Skizzy Wrote: I think that everyone should be required to carry a gun so that people would fear attacking one another as there could be an equal and opposite reaction.

I don't think they should be required. Honestly, I would be terrified for everyone to be carrying. I'm talking about clumsy and irresponsible people. It should not be limited in any way however.

Well I mean look at it from this stand point. You know they have a gun so you'd be less inclined to attack them and they know you have a gun so they would be less inclined to attack you. It just meets an equilibrium of fear.

(08-20-2013, 04:23 AM)Harvey Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 04:20 AM)Skizzy Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 03:31 AM)Harvey Wrote: Maybe because gun control eliminates mass shootings? Maybe there's some relation between the fact that the US has 14 times the population of Australia and somehow 104 times the firearm-caused death rate? Please watch all of this to realise how stupid you sound.



And then part two.

Gun control does not eliminate mass shootings because criminals aren't going to get their guns legally.... I mean look at that elementary school shooting, that kid stole the guns he used.

---

(08-20-2013, 04:05 AM)Guardian Wrote: I don't think they should be required. Honestly, I would be terrified for everyone to be carrying. I'm talking about clumsy and irresponsible people. It should not be limited in any way however.

Well I mean look at it from this stand point. You know they have a gun so you'd be less inclined to attack them and they know you have a gun so they would be less inclined to attack you. It just meets an equilibrium of fear.

Did you even watch the video(s)? You can't steal guns to massacre people if there are none...

Quote:These massacres could have been prevented if more people carried weapons.

Quote:Also if guns are banned these criminals / psychos will just find other weapons. Didn't some college kid just go crazy with a box cutter at a college? Guns don't kill people or serve a threat to them, people kill people.

(08-20-2013, 04:33 AM)Harvey Wrote:

Quote:These massacres could have been prevented if more people carried weapons.

...

Quote:Also if guns are banned these criminals / psychos will just find other weapons. Didn't some college kid just go crazy with a box cutter at a college? Guns don't kill people or serve a threat to them, people kill people.

You can't massacre people with a box cutter, I'm sorry.

The facts are the facts. There were 13 mass shootings in 18 years in Australia before gun control was implemented, almost one a year. Since then there has been zero. You can't argue with that. Obviously it's not the guns that kill, it's the people using them. But the fact is, the more people who have access to guns, the more psychotic/murderers will be able to kill. These people are present in both the US and AUS in the same proportion (say, x% out of our total population). The fact is, when these people aren't given access to guns, the number of murders and massacres plummets.

Quote:That's why giving guns to sane people would help prevent the mass killing of innocent people because another person could jump in and shoot the person going on a rampage.

Quote:Gun control will simply not stop mass murders as the guns aren't legally obtained most of the time.

(08-20-2013, 04:56 AM)Harvey Wrote:

Quote:That's why giving guns to sane people would help prevent the mass killing of innocent people because another person could jump in and shoot the person going on a rampage.

That's not how it works. Law enforcement officers should be the ONLY ones allowed to wield a gun in public.

Quote:Gun control will simply not stop mass murders as the guns aren't legally obtained most of the time.

You seem to be missing the point. Gun control DOES stop mass murders. The statistics aren't made up. The whole point is that there are so few guns that it is too difficult to obtain them illegally.

(08-20-2013, 05:00 AM)Skizzy Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 04:56 AM)Harvey Wrote:

Quote:That's why giving guns to sane people would help prevent the mass killing of innocent people because another person could jump in and shoot the person going on a rampage.

That's not how it works. Law enforcement officers should be the ONLY ones allowed to wield a gun in public.

Quote:Gun control will simply not stop mass murders as the guns aren't legally obtained most of the time.

You seem to be missing the point. Gun control DOES stop mass murders. The statistics aren't made up. The whole point is that there are so few guns that it is too difficult to obtain them illegally.

Under the second amendment of the united states constitution we have the rights to bear arms. That amendment wasn't made up so we can go on rampages. It was created so we can defend ourselves from others and from our government who is trying to take away our rights. We use guns to protect our country, ourselves from our country, and our families from others. Guns play an important part in our history and society and shouldn't be removed or limited. Also statistics have show that areas with more guns have lower crime rates that ones with fewer guns.

Quote:On one of the alleged killers' Facebook pages investigators said they later found the message: "Bang. Two drops in two hours."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/senseless-death-of-australian-baseball-player-20130819-2s68h.html#ixzz2cTlDt1vl

Quote:We use guns to protect our country, ourselves from our country, and our families from others.

Quote: Also statistics have show that areas with more guns have lower crime rates that ones with fewer guns.

Quote:Australia had 13 gun massacres in the 18 years before the 1996 gun reforms, but has not suffered any mass shootings since.

Studies found a marked drop in gun-related homicides, down 59 percent, and a dramatic 65 percent drop in the rate of gun-related suicides, in the 10 years after the weapons crackdown.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/03/us-usa-guns-australia-idUSBRE9320C720130403

(08-20-2013, 05:16 AM)Harvey Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 05:00 AM)Skizzy Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 04:56 AM)Harvey Wrote: That's not how it works. Law enforcement officers should be the ONLY ones allowed to wield a gun in public.


You seem to be missing the point. Gun control DOES stop mass murders. The statistics aren't made up. The whole point is that there are so few guns that it is too difficult to obtain them illegally.

Under the second amendment of the united states constitution we have the rights to bear arms. That amendment wasn't made up so we can go on rampages. It was created so we can defend ourselves from others and from our government who is trying to take away our rights. We use guns to protect our country, ourselves from our country, and our families from others. Guns play an important part in our history and society and shouldn't be removed or limited. Also statistics have show that areas with more guns have lower crime rates that ones with fewer guns.

Sorry to say it, but your second amendment is a little dated. Guns are cool and interesting and everything, but the fact is, too many innocent people die because of the sheer number of firearms in circulation.

Just this week actually, an Australian baseball star was out jogging when he was shot to death by teenagers in the US. These teenagers had got a gun and decided they'd "go out and kill someone". Literally. Just for the fun of it.

Quote:On one of the alleged killers' Facebook pages investigators said they later found the message: "Bang. Two drops in two hours."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/senseless-death-of-australian-baseball-player-20130819-2s68h.html#ixzz2cTlDt1vl

It's fucking senseless. They had no business killing anyone. They murdered someone because they could. I'm against the death penalty but I'm so glad that these dumb children will be executed for first degree murder.

Quote:We use guns to protect our country, ourselves from our country, and our families from others.

And to occasionally murder innocent people because you feel like it. And to massacre as many people as possible because your life sucks and it seemed like the right thing to do.

Quote: Also statistics have show that areas with more guns have lower crime rates that ones with fewer guns.

You're kidding me right? I would love to see your facts to support this. Here's mine, where's yours?

Quote:Australia had 13 gun massacres in the 18 years before the 1996 gun reforms, but has not suffered any mass shootings since.

Studies found a marked drop in gun-related homicides, down 59 percent, and a dramatic 65 percent drop in the rate of gun-related suicides, in the 10 years after the weapons crackdown.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/03/us-usa-guns-australia-idUSBRE9320C720130403

(08-20-2013, 05:31 AM)Skizzy Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 05:16 AM)Harvey Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 05:00 AM)Skizzy Wrote: Under the second amendment of the united states constitution we have the rights to bear arms. That amendment wasn't made up so we can go on rampages. It was created so we can defend ourselves from others and from our government who is trying to take away our rights. We use guns to protect our country, ourselves from our country, and our families from others. Guns play an important part in our history and society and shouldn't be removed or limited. Also statistics have show that areas with more guns have lower crime rates that ones with fewer guns.

Sorry to say it, but your second amendment is a little dated. Guns are cool and interesting and everything, but the fact is, too many innocent people die because of the sheer number of firearms in circulation.

Just this week actually, an Australian baseball star was out jogging when he was shot to death by teenagers in the US. These teenagers had got a gun and decided they'd "go out and kill someone". Literally. Just for the fun of it.

Quote:On one of the alleged killers' Facebook pages investigators said they later found the message: "Bang. Two drops in two hours."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/senseless-death-of-australian-baseball-player-20130819-2s68h.html#ixzz2cTlDt1vl

It's fucking senseless. They had no business killing anyone. They murdered someone because they could. I'm against the death penalty but I'm so glad that these dumb children will be executed for first degree murder.

Quote:We use guns to protect our country, ourselves from our country, and our families from others.

And to occasionally murder innocent people because you feel like it. And to massacre as many people as possible because your life sucks and it seemed like the right thing to do.

Quote: Also statistics have show that areas with more guns have lower crime rates that ones with fewer guns.

You're kidding me right? I would love to see your facts to support this. Here's mine, where's yours?

Quote:Australia had 13 gun massacres in the 18 years before the 1996 gun reforms, but has not suffered any mass shootings since.

Studies found a marked drop in gun-related homicides, down 59 percent, and a dramatic 65 percent drop in the rate of gun-related suicides, in the 10 years after the weapons crackdown.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/03/us-usa-guns-australia-idUSBRE9320C720130403

That's Australia. I live in America. Things are different here.

(08-20-2013, 05:40 AM)Harvey Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 05:31 AM)Skizzy Wrote:

(08-20-2013, 05:16 AM)Harvey Wrote: Sorry to say it, but your second amendment is a little dated. Guns are cool and interesting and everything, but the fact is, too many innocent people die because of the sheer number of firearms in circulation.

Just this week actually, an Australian baseball star was out jogging when he was shot to death by teenagers in the US. These teenagers had got a gun and decided they'd "go out and kill someone". Literally. Just for the fun of it.


It's fucking senseless. They had no business killing anyone. They murdered someone because they could. I'm against the death penalty but I'm so glad that these dumb children will be executed for first degree murder.


And to occasionally murder innocent people because you feel like it. And to massacre as many people as possible because your life sucks and it seemed like the right thing to do.


You're kidding me right? I would love to see your facts to support this. Here's mine, where's yours?

That's Australia. I live in America. Things are different here.

Australia had the same gun laws as the US before 1996. It is absolutely no different.

Washington Post Wrote:Let’s review: The Newtown killer was a mentally disturbed young man living with his mother. She had legally purchased her arsenal and had even taught her son how to responsibly handle firearms.

What she did not do was: (1) deal appropriately with her son’s mental illness; (2) safely contain her guns so that her son could not access them.