Guns don't kill people

Lots of arguments here. I think the one thing that (hopefully) everybody can agree on is that there is no possible reason for any american civilian to own a an assault rifle. If automatic weapons were banned, it would make the act of killing lots of children harder.

It must be difficult for anybody to construct a viable argument against that…

bwaarp + 1
I wonder what happened to that kid at that school when he was little.

As to the desensitised argument – I’d like to see how these “desensitised” kids react to killing & butchering a rabbit.

I heard that most parenting that affects behaviour is done before 5. Might be wrong.

It must be difficult for anybody to construct a viable argument against that.

Well the argument goes that criminals will always have the guns, so you need ‘good guys’ with guns to prevent them shooting people.

Which does have merit as an argument, in theory. However it also has major holes in it as outlined above.

I heard that most parenting that affects behaviour is done before 5. Might be wrong.

I would say that’s wrong.

Banning firearms from schools, cinemas hospitals has just turned them into hunting (Killing)grounds for nutters.

Are you seriously suggesting that teachers be armed when teaching? Because if that’s the case, if I had kids I wouldn’t be sending them to school. I hate guns with a passion, it might be quite simplistic but guns are for killing things and there is absolutely no reason what so ever to have them. At all. I don’t even get the ‘pest control’ argument – there are other ways to control vermin. In my opinion of course.

On another note, as mentioned above about one size fits all not working – maybe the US is too big to govern as one nation.

The US is not meant to be governed as one nation though. That’s why states are called “states”, they are meant to be like nation states with a federal government having some power over all of them.

Banning firearms from schools, cinemas hospitals has just turned them into hunting (Killing)grounds for nutters.

You’d just end up with a gunman in every single classroom every day instead of just very occasionally. What if one of the teachers went nuts? It happens.

If automatic weapons were banned, it would make the act of killing lots of children harder.

It must be difficult for anybody to construct a viable argument against that…

When was a legally held automatic weapon (or even a legally manufactured automatic weapon) last used in a killing in the US?

you fooking know that they’ll be pro armed police in schools as appossed to strict gun laws.

the people off america believe that by owning firearms ‘the people’ have the power to overturn government if needs be. that’s what one chap on a recent documentary said.

When was a legally held automatic weapon last used in a killing in the US?

er, last week?

who cares if its legal or not? this is happening and will continue.

er, last week?

Er, no!

who cares if its legal or not? this is happening and will continue.

so you think the answer to gun crime is the US, is to outlaw guns that are already illegal?

I thought the gun was legally held by his mother, happy to be corrected…

When was a legally held automatic weapon last used in a killing in the US?

Wasn’t the gun used in this tragedy legally held by the killers mother? Claiming it wasn’t legally held by the killer is just a technicality.

Most of the illegal guns in the states have gone to market legally and them moved on.

When was a legally held automatic weapon last used in a killing in the US?

Put it another way: What place do fully automatic weapons have in civilian society?

The guns laws in the US are not going to change over night, and therefore banning semi and fully automatic weapons is a good start. If they went straight for hand guns, or all guns, then it would get nowhere, leaving them back at square one.

Also, if the nutters can’t get hold of semi-automatics, then they are going to reach for the fullys, so just ban them both.

Semi automatics were used in Columbine.

Everything I’ve read on the subject suggests that being aggressive and being capable of wantonly murdering innocent people are unrelated traits.

What so folk who wantonly murder are not aggressive – what are they peace givers having an off day?

Research consistently shows that those who watch aggressive games/films/cartoons are more aggressive in their play afterwards. How causal this I dont know but it seems that it is more likely to be unhelpful than helpful in reducing violence.

Zulu that research is rubbish – really rubbish

Firstly he selects what data to study – come on you know how bad that is for data analysis- he cherry picked it so its meaningless.

Even after this his murder spree data includes this gem

David Hernandez Arroyo Sr. opened fire on a public square from the steps of a courthouse in Tyler, Texas. The shooter was armed with a rifle and wearing body armor. Mark Wilson fired back with a handgun, hitting the shooter but not penetrating the armor. Mark drew the shooter’s fire, and ultimately drove him off, but was fatally wounded. Mark was the only death in this incident.

Not a spree and the only dead person was the civilian shooter- not really sure how that one help or what we are meant to conclude.
The majority were overpowered by unarmed folk and of you fire its 50/50 whether you die from that data set but in 3 cases a gun was with them but not used

therefore if you have a gun dont use it as its safest – well the evidence is there 😕
Of course I dont think that its just another rubbish conclusion drawn from that data that is equally “valid”

When was a legally held automatic weapon last used in a killing in the US?

Okay, so his weapon was semi-automatic rather than fully automatic. I doubt that offers much comfort to anybody and not really a a useful contribution

Okay, so his weapon was semi-automatic rather than fully automatic. I doubt that offers much comfort to anybody and not really a a useful contribution

So, you think that a bunch of kids would have had a better chance against someone armed with a bolt action rifle with a ten round clip and a pump action shotgun that can both be reloaded in seconds

Because I think the type of weapon used bears little or no significance.

Most of the illegal guns in the states have gone to market legally and them moved on.

any figures on that? From what I’ve read, theft of a legally held full auto is extraordinarily rare, and there are about 240k registered legal ones (about half of them in the hands of law enforcement)

at some point these illegal guns where purchased legally (probably with a driving licence).

some mentally ill kid probably knows a handfull of places to get a gun (his dads, older brothers, the old one at the back of the garage etc etc)

bullshit – how can anyone expect anything different, its like fooking groundhog day.

I heard that most parenting that affects behaviour is done before 5. Might be wrong.

But, even if so, there is no point giving them all the love & attention at primary / pre primary, and then cutting them adrift / not giving the support through adolescence – arguably when we are all at our most vulnerable.

For all these attrocities that I remember (and that goes back to Ryan in Hungerford), the common theme is male, loner / “personality disorder”….

Nope, it wasn’t automatic, it was a semi

So what, he still killed 26 people with it!

So why were you pontificating on the importance of banning automatic weapons then?

and there are about 240k registered legal ones (about half of them in the hands of law enforcement)

do you mean that when it is difficult to access weapons they dont get used 💡
However when its easy to get hold of them they are more likely to be used

Interesting

I think casual gun owners of America have blood on their hands!

‘what do you **** expect’?

Guns don’t kill people, rappers do.

I can’t believe that hasn’t been pointed out yet.

So why were you pontificating on the importance of banning automatic weapons then?

Okay Lordy one. Semi – automatic / automatic. Both are effective killing machines that make the act of killing people easy. I would ban both and I apologise for confusing you by not mentioning semi-automatic in my post. I didn’t realise you would pick apart such detail. I thought you might be slightly more considerate of the bigger argument but I was clearly mistaken.

Hey, I was only trying to put forward a valid argument on the points of reference that you laid out…

don’t shoot the messenger 😉

don’t shoot the messenger

If I did, it would be with a fully automatic.

Even in California, home of gun crime, use of either ‘assault’ type weapons, let alone full auto weapons, in crime is extraordinarily rare

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/publications/Firearms_Report_09.pdf

I’m also worried about loners all being deemed potential mass killers as the mother did in that link i posted. Thats a great message to send to the kids that is in no way going to make them feel resentful and go on a spree. You can bet no one will give a thought to bullying as if the shooting was soley the work of a dehumanized deranged monster and not a human being or partly the result of how society has treated that individual. Heaven forbid we create the monsters instead of them being born and being beyond the realms of explanation.

Semi Automatics were used at Columbine, semi-automatics (handguns) were used at Virginia tech.

Ban semi-automatics as a start. If you are going to ban semis, then ban fullys as well as they would most likely be the next choice of your average loon.

It’s not the goal, just the first step on the ladder.

Even in California, home of gun crime, use of either ‘assault’ type weapons, let alone full auto weapons, in crime is extraordinarily rare

Why not replace every hand gun with an assault rifle on the grounds of safety/ gun crime reduction?

I also object to journalists describing semi – automatic rifles as “machine guns” but its hardly germane.

The problem in America is actually handguns, they account for well over 90% of all gun deaths

Well said.

Also, look at how New York has massively reduced violent crime.
Increased enforcent and the determination to make a safer environment help.

The problem in America is actually handguns, they account for well over 90% of all gun deaths

You do realise handguns can be semi-automatic as well, don’t you?

Are the auto / semi-autos just the metaphor for the mindset? Bang in a clip, lock & load….

… As Molly said, there’s a great big streak of machismo (and underlying fear*) running through American society. Hand guns migh be the problem, but assault rifles are the shorthand for the mentality – an ar probably th easiest political quick fix

* just look at the election commentary and fallout….

You do realise handguns can be semi-automatic as well, don’t you?

Of course and that’s one of the problem with handguns and why the focus on “assault weapons” is pointless.

Its probably easier to kill a room full of people with a Glock than it is to kill them with a semi auto M-16 copy

The type of gun is pretty much irrelevant. They are all designed for one thing – to kill. If a guy walks into a room with a break-action double barrel (fairly easily obtainable here in the UK) and takes out two people and then gets stopped while he’s reloading, dare I say it, its just as bad as if 26 people die. The fact is human life has been taken.

As a slight side note I find it chilling that technicians sit in a laboratory performing experiments with bullets to make them do as much damage to human tissue as possible.

Its not the gun, as the title of this thread initally points out. Its the mind controlling the finger that pulls the trigger. ‘Ban this or that type of gun’ reactions are just the very beginning and the tip of the iceberg of the problem.

takes out two people and then gets stopped while he’s reloading, dare I say it, its just as bad as if 26 people die

Tell that to the 24 people who are still alive, and their families.

ts not the gun, as the title of this thread initally points out. Its the mind controlling the finger that pulls the trigger. ‘Ban this or that type of gun’ reactions are just the very beginning and the tip of the iceberg of the problem

The problem is that the US has got itself in a right mess with guns and there is little political will to address it. Some weapons make mass killings easier than others, therefore it makes sense to ban these types of weapons first. They have no justifiable need for them and it may be something that is actually achievable to deliver without having to amend their constitution