I had no idea that so many of you Americans was pro guns..
Yes, this is something deeply rooted in your ethics and what not. It's about your right to defend your family from nutjobs or to defend your self from a robber on the street. It's just that violence give birth to violence. It's a vicious circle, and maybe you'r right. A law forbidding guns wouldn't necessarily play out in less fear or less killings, and I guess that is cause of how your society is built. I'm sorry, but from an outsiders perspective that is a society in alot of cases built on fear.
And I guess that's the real problem, if "he" can get a gun, I need one to.
I saw someones comment about Norway some posts up. The guy who did that owned his gun with a license. A semi automatic rifle, with a huge magazine. He became a "farmer" so that he could state that he was also a hunter, thus getting a semi automatic rifle. That to me is just twisted. the only reason you would have a big gun like that is for killing intelligent beings, not dears.
But yeah, crazy people is always going to find a way, sure. Though that drunk guy that wasn't let in to the club won't be able to go home and get his gun to get back at the guards or what ever..
I'm glad, no offence, that I don't live in a country which is built on fear of your neighbor. Maybe that's just me. Silly me..
@sltrOlsson, think peoples points are that there have been mass shootings in countries like Canada, Sweden and Norway, that all have restrictions on guns.
having less legal guns around might stop simple "in the moment" fights for escalating. But when it comes to anything premeditated, it will largely have no effect since it wont be a big deal for someone intending to commit murder to obtain illegal weapons would it?
also look at ban on illegal weapons like the ban on illegal substances, how well is that going? Any day i could get my hands on any drug of my choice, and i doubt that it would take much more to get my hands on a banned weapon.
You forget that Norway is another country of gun freaks like USA (i think it's one of the few in EU where you can get any weapon you like). You can have a military arsenal at your home.
It's incredible noone noticed he was heavily armed with weapons...
In Spain we DON'T have this problems. In USA, the easy access to weapons just give wings to crazy murderers. With a knife he could not have killed too many people at once.
A huge power to kill is what they have there. nonetheless, USA is well known as the country of FEAR. All the people have fear of the others, so they need weapons in order to protect their lives...
BTW, in spain there are ways to get illegal weapons (but it's very very difficult or almost impossible), but as much you only can get a glock and some bullets for more than 3000 euro.
I guess one real question is how a medical student could afford tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipmnent purchases over a few months. 6000 rounds of ammunition don't come particularly cheap.
I guess one real question is how a medical student could afford tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipmnent purchases over a few months. 6000 rounds of ammunition don't come particularly cheap.
that's another question i asked myself, and i found it incredible.
i agree with everyone that has said "with tighter gun control, these things will still happen". i would counter that by saying "it will happen far less frequently".
but whatever, it's your country. it's your life...
American gun laws only work correctly if everyone owns a gun. Sadly this is not the 1800s and if our founding fathers saw the type of guns that existed today im pretty sure they would strictly limit the type of gun you can have.
And if they used a knife or baseball bat, who cares? He could easily be tackled and he wouldn't have the mobility and range a gun lets him have.
I guess one real question is how a medical student could afford tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipmnent purchases over a few months. 6000 rounds of ammunition don't come particularly cheap.
It's been mentioned that he had just dropped out of the med school's program, maybe he took the money he was going spend on tuition and spent it on the weapons instead?
you want guns as self defence... against other guns?
circular logic.
The problem with this statement is that if a country were to ban guns, it would prevent law abiding citizens from getting them. The people that commit robberies, rapes, beatings, murders, car jackings, kidnappings, hold ups, and religious radicalism obviously do not care about the law and will get guns on the black market, which is a lot easier then you might think. Guns also serve the purpose for giving us a way to fight back against tyrannical governments and also allow for militia groups to be created if we were to ever be invaded. I know this is extremely unlikely, but it acts almost as an insurance if you will. For my sake please don't think I am a nut-job who thinks the commies will invade :poly136:. Its almost the same thing with other countries building nuclear weapons. It prevents or decreases the chance foreign nations to preform an act of war while allowing a means to stop the aggression.
Also, I have been seeing a lot about this AR-15. Did the news say it was fully automatic because that seems highly unlikely. Most AR-15 that I know of are semi automatic because regulations make it hard and expensive to get fully automatic weapons.
Also, I have been seeing a lot about this AR-15. Did the news say it was fully automatic because that seems highly unlikely. Most AR-15 that I know of are semi automatic because regulations make it hard and expensive to get fully automatic weapons.
Its almost the same thing with other countries building nuclear weapons. It prevents or decreases the chance foreign nations to preform an act of war while allowing a means to stop the aggression.
So, whos fault is it when nuclear war starts? The country that built the first bomb forcing all the other big nations the build there own, or the country that used it the first time?
A huge power to kill is what they have there. nonetheless, USA is well known as the country of FEAR. All the people have fear of the others, so they need weapons in order to protect their lives....
I'm not scared, like the studies show, crime has been on a steady decline since the 70's. Spain has more gun homicides than England, are you scared?
Its tempting to wag the finger but i think we europeans need to acknowledge that the american culture has it roots in the so called "wild west". We all know that was no easy time back then to survive in america. Even though Government took more and more control and established security in all kinds of forms people still feel their is the need to own a gun.
I can understand that its hard to throw your gun away when every person you come across could carry a gun and point it at you when he is pissed off.
If i knew my neighbors own guns for sure it would scares the shit out of me. You yell at the guy because he's poorly parked, he breaks a fuse and bam !
But i get you're very attached to individual liberties, like individual justice while in europe, we rely more on our institutions.
there have been mass shootings in countries like Canada, Sweden and Norway, that all have restrictions on guns.
I can't recall any mass shootings in Sweden but I might be wrong. Usually, a police officer having to unholster his gun makes the news and headlines over here.
I guess one real question is how a medical student could afford tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipmnent purchases over a few months. 6000 rounds of ammunition don't come particularly cheap.
It sounds like his family in San Diego lived in an up-scale neighborhood so perhaps he had a lot of money. His mother also was worried it was him that did it as soon as she heard about it.
So she knew he was fucked in the head and capable of this. Then she should be held liable.
Also this guy shouldn't have been taken alive... Yeah he surrendered but he shouldn't have been given an option. Nothing is to be gained by this worthless pile of meat being allowed a trial.
As far as bans on guns go. More people die every day due to traffic accidents, drunk drivers, then gun violence. If someone wants to kill someone or a large group of people there are literally hundreds of ways they can do it... This guy also built explosives. He EASILY could have set that theater on fire and planted explosives at the exits as well.
He also had body armor, tear gas, riot helmet and other tactical gear. He prepared a long time for this. Quite sad that no one picked up on it...
Here is an article talking about how bad his apartment was rigged with explosives. Where did this guy get aerial shells? (Artillary?)
Also this guy shouldn't have been taken alive... Yeah he surrendered but he shouldn't have been given an option. Nothing is to be gained by this worthless pile of meat being allowed a trial.
The fact that he didnt kill himself or be killed means that he can be questioned and tbh that he can be "taken care of" by the FBI and they have a chance at finding out why he did it and where he got the weapons, gear, and explosives from
Errr, those lists consist almost exclusively of those involving firearms, except for the special lists. That's not really helping your argument.
Edit: Your deliberate abuse of statistics is disgusting. Norway's firearm related homocide rate was higher last year - because of a single event. September 11 indeed did not involve firearms - but it's a single event. Firearms related massacres are not a single event in the USA, they are recurrant.
If you look at the overall stats at the top of the page you can see Europe, Asia and the Americas are all about even for rampage attacks. It is because it is essentially random, so if you have a huge population like the US does of course you are going to have more incidences. Based on population alone, the US has a 50 times greater chance of having a rampage killing than Norway.
I'm not trying to twist the statistics, but explain them to people who don't understand them.
Its only going to keep happening. Its like a dead cert given recent history and the laws haven't changed the bit.
The problem with the American law makers/ policy makers logic on this they think "bad people have guns so everyone should have guns". So by that logic people should be breaking into gunfights in public areas. The only reason its happening is because its so easy for nutters with a dodgy history to buy crates of ammunition without a single vender getting suspicious.
If the rest of the world bet America couldn't go 5/10 years without another event like this happening, the rest of the world would be quids in. It just frustrates me when I read news stories from America on this events titled "Town searches for answers" the answers are old and obvious.
I really hate myself for posting in this thread (I'm not really sure why this thread is even open on Polycount, sorry) but I just wanted to ask a question to those that are in favour of firearm possession:
Most arguments that say there should be LESS gun control or "restricting gun control won't solve anything" cite the fact that you can use these guns for self defense, therefore "evening out the playing field".
How exactly do you justify needing an AR-15 military-style semi-automatic rifle for self defense? That's an honest question, because I personally cannot fathom why any citizen living in the United States or Canada would ever need a weapon of that power...
This is a pretty thorny issue but normally the justification goes something like this...
The 2nd amendment to the US constitution states:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
We won't take your guns, you will use them for hunting, personal, state and local defense. The reasoning goes that citizens still play an active role in defense if it should ever come to that. It also saves the nation from having to maintain a costly army that wasn't always needed. This is our country it belongs to every citizen and we will all defend it. Which very different than "this is the kings land you will do what you're told and you will defend it for the king, or the king will punish you".
A well trained, well armed citizenry that is willing to fill in any gaps should something happen could make all the difference.
We saw this in WW2 with the French resistance and other countries that where overwhelmed by the German war machine, it was literally if you can find a gun, go fight your country needs you. How effective they where directly correlated to how well armed those citizens where. Should it ever come to that, American citizens who favor gun rights think that is critically important in defending America from whatever that threat maybe.
To quote Tallahassee from Zombieland: I]Upon finding a Hummer filled with rifles[/I Thank God for rednecks!"
Most people have no use for guns until they need one and normally when you do there isn't much time for training... fictional zombie apocalypses aside, you don't want to screw yourself or other people over in the future by limiting guns.
The logic is...
...a bit like what you find in some countries like Israel and Finland, with every citizen serving in the military. If something ever happens you can mobilize a lot of people very quickly without having to spend a lot of time on training.
Now there is something to be said for America being a relatively isolated place with very few enemies able to invade so the threat of ground/troop based combat is very very low. And there is a lot to be said about what roll American citizens can actually play in supporting one of the largest armies in history, other than through taxes... but I won't get into that now, you aren't asking for the counter argument(s), just what the justification is.
There is a second component to why gun nuts cling to their AR-15's.
It dates back to a strong distrust of a strong centralized government. Militias where seen as another check to the president/congressional powers. Without an army the president and congress wouldn't have any teeth to start oppressing its well armed citizens. "We aren't going to screw with the citizens, we will lose and they will replace us at gun point."
Every generation needs a new revolution.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive.
If once the people become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions.
I have no fear that the result of our experiment will be that men may be trusted to govern themselves without a master.
Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
-Thomas Jefferson
There was a sense that government should be as minimal as possible and should be kept in check by its citizens either by voting or if necessary armed revolution. A well armed citizenry played a heavy roll in keeping the balance of power in check. Now with such a strong army such overthrow is nearly impossible, but some people still cling to it as a means of maintaining freedom. Any movement to remove those guns is viewed as an encroachment by government to make sure that it can't be ruled by its people.
You use your vote to maintain freedom and balance, FIRST! If They take your vote, you use your gun to get it back.
If they take both you're a conquered slave under the thumb of a tyrant that would rather see you dead than happy. Any American worth their citizenship would rather go down fighting than surrender their freedom.
More or less both votes and the threat of armed revolution have pretty much been taken away by now. They haven't taken away the guns but the government carries a bigger stick, so it's kind of pointless, unless you like going down David Koresh style in a blaze of glory, there isn't a way for the citizens to overthrow the American government even if it was the only way to restore freedom.
Because this is such a useless fight, there is a strong movement in certain parties to shrink the government to a size that it can be strangled if needed and to put the teeth back in the citizenry both in voting and in firepower.
There is a strong sense in both parties right now that the government has been highjacked and is not representing the average citizen and for the most part they are both right. I tend to agree more with Chris Hedges than Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh. Never the less something needs to be done, hopefully that can be done through voting and civic debate, which has been made increasingly hard with the lack of focus on education...
Eisenhower after WW2 talked about the raise of the Military Industrial Complex.
He said in a famous speech that the MIC is a threat to actual freedom and to our economy. For the most part he was dead on and the world is a worse place because no one kept the MIC in check.
How do you justify the outrageous military spending when there isn't a war? If you're a congressperson, how do you protect war based jobs/economy in your district if there isn't war? The Bush administration was widely quoted that the war in Afghanistan and Iraq would help lift the US out of an economic slump, but they didn't want to realize that Eisenhower was right and that a military based economy will ultimately ruin the nation. The US military is the exact opposite of what the founding fathers envisioned but yet it is widely supported by those that miss-quote the founding fathers the most... sigh...
Freedom, sovereignty and respect for differing views.
There is some merit to a few of the arguments but it is a VERY American discussion and a very American solution. It doesn't fit well when applied into other countries. I totally respect the views of other citizens in other countries, what works for you should be what you use. But it is not up to you to tell us what to do, just like it isn't up to us to force our decisions on you, even if those in power do differently than they are supposed to do...
On or off, all or nothing...
I'm not saying I agree with all of the justifications people use for gun rights, because I think American has moved out of the 1700's and we have evolved as a society to function differently and in some regards more effectively than what they envisioned. I also think that the gun lobby is trying to quell any kind of meaningful discussion because it would lead to a loss in profit and in America with education being the way it is, things are very black and white, on or off, you either support unfettered guns or you want them all melted down, there isn't room for honest debate and thoughtful solutions.
The future?
I don't know what it will be like in the future and there might be a time when the citizens might need use weapons and I would rather make sure they have the tools they need to do what they have to do than to turn them into casualties, horrified spectators or an oppressed population.
Education and a focus on fixing education
I would much rather educate the public and have a active and vibrant social safety net so people can get the help they need before things like this happen. Society should be able to care for its citizens to the point that there could be guns under every pillow case and in every mailbox but no one needs to use them and everyone is responsible enough to use them correctly. In the military everyone has a gun and you don't worry about your buddies pulling a gun on you and taking your wallet. You understand when and where to use your gun and you only carry it around when needed.
Long way to go...
BUT America is incredibly far away from having a functioning society that will be able to handle the number of guns that are currently floating around. I think the work needs to be done to make sure society is up to the task before we push guns into everyone hands so we've put the cart before the horse and we have a lot of work to reverse that tread. I think its counter productive to try and take away peoples guns, it will only be as effective as prohibition was in controlling booze, or the war on drugs is in keeping it out of our cities. I would much rather see us focus on getting society to the point that we can handle the guns without a problem rather than chase the wind trying to round up the guns. The solution as I see it
I actually favor restricting guns and enforcing a lot of laws that are already on the books. It should be harder to get a gun than it is to get a drivers license, which isn't saying much... Clamping down on guns will help us get to the goal, its a stop gap measure until we can fix our society.
If you go the other way and spend your time trying to get rid of the guns you spend a lot of time and resources not fixing society which still has to be fixed even if you succeed in rounding up all the guns.
The solution is hard but it is pretty simple in theory. It's the same solution that will win the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war on obesity the war on greed bla bla bla. Education. Honest, open debate. Reason logic and perseverance will win out but you can't back off and you can't get distracted like America has allowed itself to do. The countries that have low violence are this way because they focus on the right things, they have strong social safety nets, they educate their people and teach them to use reason and logic, they have empathy and compassion for each other and they share a common sense of unity. They spend their money on education so they don't have to spend it on police and the military. Right now American priorities are as follows (and they are upside down) 20 million over 30 years on the shuttle program and all the science and engineering that goes into it. It provides a focal point for education, cooperation and puts a focus on a productive peaceful future aimed at making the lives of everyone on the planet, better. NASA takes up .5% of the national budget yet everyone wants to cut it as if that is where the wasteful money is being spent.
20 million per year to Air condition tents in Iraq, no one bats an eyelash. That isn't counting the 2 trillion we've spent to fight the wars, money we never had and had to barrow. In 11 years we've spent 11 shuttle programs just to keep some generals ass from getting sweaty. Also after 9 years they figured out they could save 2 million per year by sealing the tents in foam insulation, 9 years... NASA would have had that figured out before a boot ever hit the ground.
What a monumental waste of borrowed money.
Our society would be so much better off just giving that money to education and to NASA. It's the reason the American government is so upside down right now, its one of the reasons we are so slow to pull out of the recession, our backwards priorities and backwards spending is killing us.
So, I think a lot of Europeans/Australians don't really understand the situation of gun ownership in the US, which is why they are always so shocked.
In the US all the criminals already have guns, which is no surprise considering half of Americans have a gun at home. There are enough guns in circulation in the US to arm every single person. What are we doing with all these guns? We are going on family outings to shoot guns at targets together, or we are collecting guns -- some of which have been passed down for generations. It is not at all unusual to buy hundreds of rounds of ammunition. It's because shooting is fun, and we like to go out shooting together.
You could just as well make the argument that since penises serve no practical function for normal people, the government should confiscate them to prevent rape and overpopulation.
@Ninjas
Go Shooting? Okay! in my land you can not carry weapons in daily life, and at home they must be in locked safe. When you only go shooting thats no problem or?
I think the number of guns in the usa make bad situations very bad or deadly.
In the usa every criminal must think that his victim has a gun. To win this situation you need a gun yourself. First shoot => win, every move can be you last because the criminal feared your "maybe non existant" weapon.
In other countries criminals use less fatal weapons, fists or knives and dont think that the victims have guns or other weapons. The criminality is simply less deadly because of the nature of guns.
sarcastic:
When in my country i a rob people i use a knive, let me gave the money and run.
In america i rob people use a gun and shoot them down because i fear that the shoot me in the back when i run away.
Americans dont Fear the criminals, they Fear the armed criminals. And a criminal fear is a armed victim. The society win nothing. Its not safer only more deadly.
@Ninjas
Go Shooting? Okay! in my land you can not carry weapons in daily life, and at home they must be in locked safe. When you only go shooting thats no problem or?
I think the number of guns in the usa make bad situations very bad or deadly.
In the usa every criminal must think that his victim has a gun. To win this situation you need a gun yourself. First shoot => win, every move can be you last because the criminal feared your "maybe non existant" weapon.
In other countries criminals use less fatal weapons, fists or knives and dont think that the victims have guns or other weapons. The criminality is simply less deadly because of the nature of guns.
sarcastic:
When in my country i a rob people i use a knive, let me gave the money and run.
In america i rob people use a gun and shoot them down because i fear that the shoot me in the back when i run away.
Americans dont Fear the criminals, they Fear the armed criminals. And a criminal fear is a armed victim. The society win nothing. Its not safer only more deadly.
Target shooting is very popular in the US, its a recreational activity for many families. When you know how to use a gun and use it safely there's no problem. People collect guns just like they collect cars because they're cool and they like them.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I don't want to sound like a broken record but if you ban guns, criminals will still find a way to get them. Its easy enough for them to get a hold of illegal drugs, what makes you think guns will be different?
Guns dont kill people, people kill people, i totally agree 100% for this -- but what are guns designed for if not killing?
Guns are tools created specifically to kill, primarily to kill people, from a relative distance and with minimal effort. The fact that people want those around their house is an issue of either ethics or education.
Ninjas, im super respectful of people's rights -- my household has a gun, due to an urgent and specific threat on its safety at a certain point in the past... I dont really think they should be illegal, persay, just on philosophical grounds.
But are guns really such a cavalier thing to you?
Penises were not invented, engineered, and perfected to rip people's bodies into crippled, writhing husks. Guns were. What, exactly, is the point of having a bunch of guns around? Why can't your family get into scrabble instead?
I think guns are a big deal, but I also think I still have a right to own and enjoy one so long as I'm not using it to harm other people.
Really, I think Europeans should be glad that Americans have a population of people who know how to use guns and are good at shooting. You never know when we will have to come save them from themselves again.
Ahh all this nonsense about guns not killing people, people kill people. Its such a weak excuse. Guns were invented to kill people, give too many people guns and they will be use these guns to kill people. Its such a stupid and wrong thing to say that its a shame not everyone in theater had a gun because its counter productive, if guns and ammo had been made more difficult to get in the first place it probably wouldn't of happened, he bought thousands of rounds of ammo before it happened, a civilian yet not one raised the alarm, background check? how hopelessly stupid!. Its a policy that works in Europe, no reason why it shouldn't work elsewhere.
Either way, if you try to remove the guns or not, you have to fix society.
Trying to remove the guns could easily go down just like prohibition, the war on drugs, the war on obesity and every other "war-on" and at the end of the day you are still left having to fix society.
I'm not saying there doesn't need to be tighter controls on guns, because I think it should be harder to get a gun than to get a drivers license. There should be a monumental amount of training and preparation that goes into getting a gun. But at the end of the day I would rather have a society where there could be guns under every rock and there is no violence because everyone is properly educated and able to take care of themselves and if not they are properly taken care of.
It's the same logic behind legal booze and legal drugs. If people are smart and taught to make the right choices it isn't an issue. America has a long way to go to get there and tighter gun control is part of that but you get there by fixing society because ultimately you have to do that anyway and its better to get started now rather than after you've been beaten down and fought the wind for 3-5 decades and found its an winnable battle.
You guys act like people weren't killed prior to guns being created. If it wasn't guns today it would be bows and arrows, swords or some other shit killing people...
As for this guy talking to authorities to gain info I call bs... he wont because he has lawyered up and I am sure will be told not to talk. Now label him a terrorist and have the FBI interview him and see what we can gain.
and yes I was serious about him being a worthless pile of meat.... What else is he?
Also him claiming insanity. NO FUCKING WAY! Crazy yes... but not insane. He thought this out VERY well. He had been planning for a VERY long time. This was well planned and a coordinated attack. It wasn't a spur of the moment I flipped because my wife left and I shot up my work... No... he bought stuff, stockpiled it, set his apartment to kill people that went into it, went into a theater, bought a ticket, propped open the back door, donned his gear and attacked. Yeah that is about as coordinated as it can get.
You guys act like people weren't killed prior to guns being created. If it wasn't guns today it would be bows and arrows, swords or some other shit killing people...
As for this guy talking to authorities to gain info I call bs... he wont because he has lawyered up and I am sure will be told not to talk. Now label him a terrorist and have the FBI interview him and see what we can gain.
and yes I was serious about him being a worthless pile of meat.... What else is he?
Americans do not have legal rights to carry halbreds in most states
are you fucking kidding?
Are you sure you aren't a psychopath too? Murder really isn't cool! It doesnt matter who you're saying should be murdered. God damn, dude.
I guess you guys are still a bit sore that we kicked the shit out of you, and then you had to beg us for help to save you from the Nazis? Forgive me if I don't think the British should tell us how to run our country -- we tried that and thought it sucked. Then came up with something way better.
The only culturally important thing you guys have come up with in the last 30 years is Top Gear. It's a great show and all, but seriously you should try harder.
I guess you guys are still a bit sore that we kicked the shit out of you, and then you had to beg us for help to save you from the Nazis? Forgive me if I don't think the British should tell us how to run our country -- we tried that and thought it sucked. Then came up with something way better.
Basically, history goes like this:
AMERICA!
Ninjas dude I get the impression you're an intelligent dude, but you're looking uncultured and uneducated as hell right here. Surely you understand that america 'saved' Europe due to a ridiculous unbalance of industrial power, and a lot of genius from our ALLIES' intelligence agencies?
Americans do not have legal rights to carry halbreds in most states
are you fucking kidding?
Are you sure you aren't a psychopath too? Murder really isn't cool! It doesnt matter who you're saying should be murdered. God damn, dude.
I'm not going to debate this with you. The point is so many people are blaming the guns like that is the problem here. It was just his tool. How many guns did Dahmer use? Bundy?
Unless he talks with authorities and co-operates there will be nothing learned from this guy.
I'm a psychopath for thinking this guy is a worthless pile of meat? Really? Because he went into a movie theater and shot innocent people with no regard for human lives. If a pitbull attacks people and goes nuts what do we do with it? We put it down because it is obviously not fixable. What is the difference between a crazy dog and this person? Because he is human? You could say a dog doesn't know any better at all and should be given the chance but this guy knew exactly WHAT he did.
So yeah. Interview him. Gain as much as info as you can by any means necessary and then put two to the back of his head.
Why make the tax payers fund this guys food, daily life, lawyer fees, appeals, etc when he has not a single thing to give back to society.
I guess you guys are still a bit sore that we kicked the shit out of you, and then you had to beg us for help to save you from the Nazis? Forgive me if I don't think the British should tell us how to run our country -- we tried that and thought it sucked. Then came up with something way better.
Holy shit Ninjas, you fought in the Revolutionary War and in WWII? You so bad ass.
I'm not scared, like the studies show, crime has been on a steady decline since the 70's. Spain has more gun homicides than England, are you scared?
I don't know where do you get the info, but the fact is that we can stay in the street at 3am without worries (in usa, if they see you at late night, be sure that someone will call the police cuz "there is a weirdo out there, i'm scared sir!"), and we haven't got fear of other people.
In Texas, and in another state, you can bring your gun to the university campus. Do you think that's good? That's astonishing!. How in the hell they can tolerate that? where's the need?
There are gun freaks owning tanks... and all kind of military weapons. I'm flipped out with all this.
There are too many gun freaks in USA, and it's like a religion their passion for guns. Without guns, i'm sure there won't be such massacres.
BTW, It would be very difficult to ban guns in USA. That country make billions of dollars selling guns, is a country that lives from war, and that's a pity, because all that money should go to investigation and sanity.
They should learn from Japan, but they are not japanese...
Neither dahmer or bundy were spree killers, but that's aside the point --
Championing the unnecessarily death of another human being is a pretty disgusting thing for a person to do for any reason, so: That's not fucking cool. People like you need to civilize themselves, and failing that, be locked up with the other kooks like this guy who think there's justification for ending human life.
I guess you guys are still a bit sore that we kicked the shit out of you, and then you had to beg us for help to save you from the Nazis? Forgive me if I don't think the British should tell us how to run our country -- we tried that and thought it sucked. Then came up with something way better.
The only culturally important thing you guys have come up with in the last 30 years is Top Gear. It's a great show and all, but seriously you should try harder.
I'm referring to you posting in a thread about a senseless gun massacre on your own home soil, and then stating that the world should be grateful that your country has raised gun nuts. You fucking mong
Championing the unnecessarily death of another human being is a pretty disgusting thing for a person to do for any reason, so: That's not fucking cool. People like you need to civilize themselves, and failing that, be locked up with the other kooks like this guy who think there's justification for ending human life.
How is this guys death unnecessary? He took lives. He has nothing to give to society and he should be punished to the maximum. Since that is death. There you go.
People like me? What does that even mean? Because I am ok with the death penalty? Need to civilize/educate (since you changed it) ourselves or be locked up. Seriously? Get a fucking clue
What works for one country doesn't always work for another. American solutions don't always work for Europe and vice versa, so this whole "your doing it wrong do it like we do" is garbage, from both sides.
Education and an active social safety net make a bigger dent in violence than trying to lock up all the booze, burn all the drugs and take away all the guns. The countries in Europe that enjoy low violence shouldn't fool themselves into thinking that its the lack of guns that keeps violence at bay. Especially as they face some very tough decisions and face monumental doses of austerity.
Make your decisions carefully and protect what is important, don't think that it is the lack of guns that keeps you safe.
People like me? What does that even mean? Because I am ok with the death penalty? Need to civilize/educate (since you changed it) ourselves or be locked up.
Pretty much, yeah. Cheering on the death of another human being from your computer screen, you should be pretty ashamed of yourself.
You really think it's cute to talk about ending another human being's life? Would the big bad Jesse Moody champion of poor downtrodden murder victims like to kill the murderer himfself, so it's even? You said you wanted him shot to death when he surrendered, unarmed. That's appalling, dude.
It's not too much for me to ask you to quit wishing death on other human beings.
I don't know where do you get the info, but the fact is that we can stay in the street at 3am without worries (in usa, if they see you at late night, be sure that someone will call the police cuz "there is a weirdo out there, i'm scared sir!"), and we haven't got fear of other people.
That is a pretty distorted view and not my experience at all. I'm sure that is true for some areas, just like its true all over the world everywhere. It isn't true where I live and I by no means live in a swanky gated community or even in a well to do town. I feel perfectly safe walking around my neighborhood at 3am and I don't believe in carrying a gun or even owning one.
Your perception and attitude are killing any honest debate that could take place and will lead to a thread lock, so chill out, calm down and try not to view things so concretely.
I think people should calm down on asking others to be ashamed of themselves and all that bullshit. Even if you don't agree with someone's views, whether on gun control or capital punishment, surely you can rationalise why that person has that view. It's not just through some kind of blind belief, but perhaps through considered and well-thought out reasoning, just like your own views. You just came to different conclusions is all.
Replies
Yes, this is something deeply rooted in your ethics and what not. It's about your right to defend your family from nutjobs or to defend your self from a robber on the street. It's just that violence give birth to violence. It's a vicious circle, and maybe you'r right. A law forbidding guns wouldn't necessarily play out in less fear or less killings, and I guess that is cause of how your society is built. I'm sorry, but from an outsiders perspective that is a society in alot of cases built on fear.
And I guess that's the real problem, if "he" can get a gun, I need one to.
I saw someones comment about Norway some posts up. The guy who did that owned his gun with a license. A semi automatic rifle, with a huge magazine. He became a "farmer" so that he could state that he was also a hunter, thus getting a semi automatic rifle. That to me is just twisted. the only reason you would have a big gun like that is for killing intelligent beings, not dears.
But yeah, crazy people is always going to find a way, sure. Though that drunk guy that wasn't let in to the club won't be able to go home and get his gun to get back at the guards or what ever..
I'm glad, no offence, that I don't live in a country which is built on fear of your neighbor. Maybe that's just me. Silly me..
having less legal guns around might stop simple "in the moment" fights for escalating. But when it comes to anything premeditated, it will largely have no effect since it wont be a big deal for someone intending to commit murder to obtain illegal weapons would it?
also look at ban on illegal weapons like the ban on illegal substances, how well is that going? Any day i could get my hands on any drug of my choice, and i doubt that it would take much more to get my hands on a banned weapon.
It's incredible noone noticed he was heavily armed with weapons...
In Spain we DON'T have this problems. In USA, the easy access to weapons just give wings to crazy murderers. With a knife he could not have killed too many people at once.
A huge power to kill is what they have there. nonetheless, USA is well known as the country of FEAR. All the people have fear of the others, so they need weapons in order to protect their lives...
BTW, in spain there are ways to get illegal weapons (but it's very very difficult or almost impossible), but as much you only can get a glock and some bullets for more than 3000 euro.
that's another question i asked myself, and i found it incredible.
but whatever, it's your country. it's your life...
And if they used a knife or baseball bat, who cares? He could easily be tackled and he wouldn't have the mobility and range a gun lets him have.
It's been mentioned that he had just dropped out of the med school's program, maybe he took the money he was going spend on tuition and spent it on the weapons instead?
The problem with this statement is that if a country were to ban guns, it would prevent law abiding citizens from getting them. The people that commit robberies, rapes, beatings, murders, car jackings, kidnappings, hold ups, and religious radicalism obviously do not care about the law and will get guns on the black market, which is a lot easier then you might think. Guns also serve the purpose for giving us a way to fight back against tyrannical governments and also allow for militia groups to be created if we were to ever be invaded. I know this is extremely unlikely, but it acts almost as an insurance if you will. For my sake please don't think I am a nut-job who thinks the commies will invade :poly136:. Its almost the same thing with other countries building nuclear weapons. It prevents or decreases the chance foreign nations to preform an act of war while allowing a means to stop the aggression.
Also, I have been seeing a lot about this AR-15. Did the news say it was fully automatic because that seems highly unlikely. Most AR-15 that I know of are semi automatic because regulations make it hard and expensive to get fully automatic weapons.
Handgun crime 'up' despite ban in UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1440764.stm
It was reportedly semi-automatic.
So, whos fault is it when nuclear war starts? The country that built the first bomb forcing all the other big nations the build there own, or the country that used it the first time?
I'm not scared, like the studies show, crime has been on a steady decline since the 70's. Spain has more gun homicides than England, are you scared?
I can understand that its hard to throw your gun away when every person you come across could carry a gun and point it at you when he is pissed off.
But i get you're very attached to individual liberties, like individual justice while in europe, we rely more on our institutions.
I can't recall any mass shootings in Sweden but I might be wrong. Usually, a police officer having to unholster his gun makes the news and headlines over here.
It sounds like his family in San Diego lived in an up-scale neighborhood so perhaps he had a lot of money. His mother also was worried it was him that did it as soon as she heard about it.
So she knew he was fucked in the head and capable of this. Then she should be held liable.
Also this guy shouldn't have been taken alive... Yeah he surrendered but he shouldn't have been given an option. Nothing is to be gained by this worthless pile of meat being allowed a trial.
As far as bans on guns go. More people die every day due to traffic accidents, drunk drivers, then gun violence. If someone wants to kill someone or a large group of people there are literally hundreds of ways they can do it... This guy also built explosives. He EASILY could have set that theater on fire and planted explosives at the exits as well.
He also had body armor, tear gas, riot helmet and other tactical gear. He prepared a long time for this. Quite sad that no one picked up on it...
Here is an article talking about how bad his apartment was rigged with explosives. Where did this guy get aerial shells? (Artillary?)
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/21/us/colorado-shooting-suspect-apartment/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
are you kidding me, dude?
If you look at the overall stats at the top of the page you can see Europe, Asia and the Americas are all about even for rampage attacks. It is because it is essentially random, so if you have a huge population like the US does of course you are going to have more incidences. Based on population alone, the US has a 50 times greater chance of having a rampage killing than Norway.
I'm not trying to twist the statistics, but explain them to people who don't understand them.
Only because of all the Brit criminals on the run there
The problem with the American law makers/ policy makers logic on this they think "bad people have guns so everyone should have guns". So by that logic people should be breaking into gunfights in public areas. The only reason its happening is because its so easy for nutters with a dodgy history to buy crates of ammunition without a single vender getting suspicious.
If the rest of the world bet America couldn't go 5/10 years without another event like this happening, the rest of the world would be quids in. It just frustrates me when I read news stories from America on this events titled "Town searches for answers" the answers are old and obvious.
The 2nd amendment to the US constitution states: We won't take your guns, you will use them for hunting, personal, state and local defense. The reasoning goes that citizens still play an active role in defense if it should ever come to that. It also saves the nation from having to maintain a costly army that wasn't always needed. This is our country it belongs to every citizen and we will all defend it. Which very different than "this is the kings land you will do what you're told and you will defend it for the king, or the king will punish you".
A well trained, well armed citizenry that is willing to fill in any gaps should something happen could make all the difference.
We saw this in WW2 with the French resistance and other countries that where overwhelmed by the German war machine, it was literally if you can find a gun, go fight your country needs you. How effective they where directly correlated to how well armed those citizens where. Should it ever come to that, American citizens who favor gun rights think that is critically important in defending America from whatever that threat maybe.
To quote Tallahassee from Zombieland: I]Upon finding a Hummer filled with rifles[/I Thank God for rednecks!"
Most people have no use for guns until they need one and normally when you do there isn't much time for training... fictional zombie apocalypses aside, you don't want to screw yourself or other people over in the future by limiting guns.
The logic is...
...a bit like what you find in some countries like Israel and Finland, with every citizen serving in the military. If something ever happens you can mobilize a lot of people very quickly without having to spend a lot of time on training.
Now there is something to be said for America being a relatively isolated place with very few enemies able to invade so the threat of ground/troop based combat is very very low. And there is a lot to be said about what roll American citizens can actually play in supporting one of the largest armies in history, other than through taxes... but I won't get into that now, you aren't asking for the counter argument(s), just what the justification is.
There is a second component to why gun nuts cling to their AR-15's.
It dates back to a strong distrust of a strong centralized government. Militias where seen as another check to the president/congressional powers. Without an army the president and congress wouldn't have any teeth to start oppressing its well armed citizens. "We aren't going to screw with the citizens, we will lose and they will replace us at gun point."
There was a sense that government should be as minimal as possible and should be kept in check by its citizens either by voting or if necessary armed revolution. A well armed citizenry played a heavy roll in keeping the balance of power in check. Now with such a strong army such overthrow is nearly impossible, but some people still cling to it as a means of maintaining freedom. Any movement to remove those guns is viewed as an encroachment by government to make sure that it can't be ruled by its people.
You use your vote to maintain freedom and balance, FIRST!
If They take your vote, you use your gun to get it back.
If they take both you're a conquered slave under the thumb of a tyrant that would rather see you dead than happy. Any American worth their citizenship would rather go down fighting than surrender their freedom.
More or less both votes and the threat of armed revolution have pretty much been taken away by now. They haven't taken away the guns but the government carries a bigger stick, so it's kind of pointless, unless you like going down David Koresh style in a blaze of glory, there isn't a way for the citizens to overthrow the American government even if it was the only way to restore freedom.
Because this is such a useless fight, there is a strong movement in certain parties to shrink the government to a size that it can be strangled if needed and to put the teeth back in the citizenry both in voting and in firepower.
There is a strong sense in both parties right now that the government has been highjacked and is not representing the average citizen and for the most part they are both right. I tend to agree more with Chris Hedges than Glen Beck or Rush Limbaugh. Never the less something needs to be done, hopefully that can be done through voting and civic debate, which has been made increasingly hard with the lack of focus on education...
Eisenhower after WW2 talked about the raise of the Military Industrial Complex.
He said in a famous speech that the MIC is a threat to actual freedom and to our economy. For the most part he was dead on and the world is a worse place because no one kept the MIC in check.
How do you justify the outrageous military spending when there isn't a war? If you're a congressperson, how do you protect war based jobs/economy in your district if there isn't war? The Bush administration was widely quoted that the war in Afghanistan and Iraq would help lift the US out of an economic slump, but they didn't want to realize that Eisenhower was right and that a military based economy will ultimately ruin the nation. The US military is the exact opposite of what the founding fathers envisioned but yet it is widely supported by those that miss-quote the founding fathers the most... sigh...
Freedom, sovereignty and respect for differing views.
There is some merit to a few of the arguments but it is a VERY American discussion and a very American solution. It doesn't fit well when applied into other countries. I totally respect the views of other citizens in other countries, what works for you should be what you use. But it is not up to you to tell us what to do, just like it isn't up to us to force our decisions on you, even if those in power do differently than they are supposed to do...
On or off, all or nothing...
I'm not saying I agree with all of the justifications people use for gun rights, because I think American has moved out of the 1700's and we have evolved as a society to function differently and in some regards more effectively than what they envisioned. I also think that the gun lobby is trying to quell any kind of meaningful discussion because it would lead to a loss in profit and in America with education being the way it is, things are very black and white, on or off, you either support unfettered guns or you want them all melted down, there isn't room for honest debate and thoughtful solutions.
The future?
I don't know what it will be like in the future and there might be a time when the citizens might need use weapons and I would rather make sure they have the tools they need to do what they have to do than to turn them into casualties, horrified spectators or an oppressed population.
Education and a focus on fixing education
I would much rather educate the public and have a active and vibrant social safety net so people can get the help they need before things like this happen. Society should be able to care for its citizens to the point that there could be guns under every pillow case and in every mailbox but no one needs to use them and everyone is responsible enough to use them correctly. In the military everyone has a gun and you don't worry about your buddies pulling a gun on you and taking your wallet. You understand when and where to use your gun and you only carry it around when needed.
Long way to go...
BUT America is incredibly far away from having a functioning society that will be able to handle the number of guns that are currently floating around. I think the work needs to be done to make sure society is up to the task before we push guns into everyone hands so we've put the cart before the horse and we have a lot of work to reverse that tread. I think its counter productive to try and take away peoples guns, it will only be as effective as prohibition was in controlling booze, or the war on drugs is in keeping it out of our cities. I would much rather see us focus on getting society to the point that we can handle the guns without a problem rather than chase the wind trying to round up the guns.
The solution as I see it
I actually favor restricting guns and enforcing a lot of laws that are already on the books. It should be harder to get a gun than it is to get a drivers license, which isn't saying much... Clamping down on guns will help us get to the goal, its a stop gap measure until we can fix our society.
If you go the other way and spend your time trying to get rid of the guns you spend a lot of time and resources not fixing society which still has to be fixed even if you succeed in rounding up all the guns.
The solution is hard but it is pretty simple in theory. It's the same solution that will win the war on drugs, the war on terror, the war on obesity the war on greed bla bla bla. Education. Honest, open debate. Reason logic and perseverance will win out but you can't back off and you can't get distracted like America has allowed itself to do. The countries that have low violence are this way because they focus on the right things, they have strong social safety nets, they educate their people and teach them to use reason and logic, they have empathy and compassion for each other and they share a common sense of unity. They spend their money on education so they don't have to spend it on police and the military.
Right now American priorities are as follows (and they are upside down)
20 million over 30 years on the shuttle program and all the science and engineering that goes into it. It provides a focal point for education, cooperation and puts a focus on a productive peaceful future aimed at making the lives of everyone on the planet, better. NASA takes up .5% of the national budget yet everyone wants to cut it as if that is where the wasteful money is being spent.
20 million per year to Air condition tents in Iraq, no one bats an eyelash. That isn't counting the 2 trillion we've spent to fight the wars, money we never had and had to barrow. In 11 years we've spent 11 shuttle programs just to keep some generals ass from getting sweaty. Also after 9 years they figured out they could save 2 million per year by sealing the tents in foam insulation, 9 years... NASA would have had that figured out before a boot ever hit the ground.
What a monumental waste of borrowed money.
Our society would be so much better off just giving that money to education and to NASA. It's the reason the American government is so upside down right now, its one of the reasons we are so slow to pull out of the recession, our backwards priorities and backwards spending is killing us.
In the US all the criminals already have guns, which is no surprise considering half of Americans have a gun at home. There are enough guns in circulation in the US to arm every single person. What are we doing with all these guns? We are going on family outings to shoot guns at targets together, or we are collecting guns -- some of which have been passed down for generations. It is not at all unusual to buy hundreds of rounds of ammunition. It's because shooting is fun, and we like to go out shooting together.
You could just as well make the argument that since penises serve no practical function for normal people, the government should confiscate them to prevent rape and overpopulation.
Go Shooting? Okay! in my land you can not carry weapons in daily life, and at home they must be in locked safe. When you only go shooting thats no problem or?
I think the number of guns in the usa make bad situations very bad or deadly.
In the usa every criminal must think that his victim has a gun. To win this situation you need a gun yourself. First shoot => win, every move can be you last because the criminal feared your "maybe non existant" weapon.
In other countries criminals use less fatal weapons, fists or knives and dont think that the victims have guns or other weapons. The criminality is simply less deadly because of the nature of guns.
sarcastic:
When in my country i a rob people i use a knive, let me gave the money and run.
In america i rob people use a gun and shoot them down because i fear that the shoot me in the back when i run away.
Americans dont Fear the criminals, they Fear the armed criminals. And a criminal fear is a armed victim. The society win nothing. Its not safer only more deadly.
Target shooting is very popular in the US, its a recreational activity for many families. When you know how to use a gun and use it safely there's no problem. People collect guns just like they collect cars because they're cool and they like them.
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I don't want to sound like a broken record but if you ban guns, criminals will still find a way to get them. Its easy enough for them to get a hold of illegal drugs, what makes you think guns will be different?
Guns are tools created specifically to kill, primarily to kill people, from a relative distance and with minimal effort. The fact that people want those around their house is an issue of either ethics or education.
Ninjas, im super respectful of people's rights -- my household has a gun, due to an urgent and specific threat on its safety at a certain point in the past... I dont really think they should be illegal, persay, just on philosophical grounds.
But are guns really such a cavalier thing to you?
Penises were not invented, engineered, and perfected to rip people's bodies into crippled, writhing husks. Guns were. What, exactly, is the point of having a bunch of guns around? Why can't your family get into scrabble instead?
I think guns are a big deal, but I also think I still have a right to own and enjoy one so long as I'm not using it to harm other people.
Really, I think Europeans should be glad that Americans have a population of people who know how to use guns and are good at shooting. You never know when we will have to come save them from themselves again.
This. So much this.
Are you mentally ill?
Trying to remove the guns could easily go down just like prohibition, the war on drugs, the war on obesity and every other "war-on" and at the end of the day you are still left having to fix society.
I'm not saying there doesn't need to be tighter controls on guns, because I think it should be harder to get a gun than to get a drivers license. There should be a monumental amount of training and preparation that goes into getting a gun. But at the end of the day I would rather have a society where there could be guns under every rock and there is no violence because everyone is properly educated and able to take care of themselves and if not they are properly taken care of.
It's the same logic behind legal booze and legal drugs. If people are smart and taught to make the right choices it isn't an issue. America has a long way to go to get there and tighter gun control is part of that but you get there by fixing society because ultimately you have to do that anyway and its better to get started now rather than after you've been beaten down and fought the wind for 3-5 decades and found its an winnable battle.
As for this guy talking to authorities to gain info I call bs... he wont because he has lawyered up and I am sure will be told not to talk. Now label him a terrorist and have the FBI interview him and see what we can gain.
and yes I was serious about him being a worthless pile of meat.... What else is he?
Also him claiming insanity. NO FUCKING WAY! Crazy yes... but not insane. He thought this out VERY well. He had been planning for a VERY long time. This was well planned and a coordinated attack. It wasn't a spur of the moment I flipped because my wife left and I shot up my work... No... he bought stuff, stockpiled it, set his apartment to kill people that went into it, went into a theater, bought a ticket, propped open the back door, donned his gear and attacked. Yeah that is about as coordinated as it can get.
I guess you guys are still a bit sore that we kicked the shit out of you, and then you had to beg us for help to save you from the Nazis? Forgive me if I don't think the British should tell us how to run our country -- we tried that and thought it sucked. Then came up with something way better.
The only culturally important thing you guys have come up with in the last 30 years is Top Gear. It's a great show and all, but seriously you should try harder.
Basically, history goes like this:
AMERICA!
Ninjas dude I get the impression you're an intelligent dude, but you're looking uncultured and uneducated as hell right here. Surely you understand that america 'saved' Europe due to a ridiculous unbalance of industrial power, and a lot of genius from our ALLIES' intelligence agencies?
I'm not going to debate this with you. The point is so many people are blaming the guns like that is the problem here. It was just his tool. How many guns did Dahmer use? Bundy?
Unless he talks with authorities and co-operates there will be nothing learned from this guy.
I'm a psychopath for thinking this guy is a worthless pile of meat? Really? Because he went into a movie theater and shot innocent people with no regard for human lives. If a pitbull attacks people and goes nuts what do we do with it? We put it down because it is obviously not fixable. What is the difference between a crazy dog and this person? Because he is human? You could say a dog doesn't know any better at all and should be given the chance but this guy knew exactly WHAT he did.
So yeah. Interview him. Gain as much as info as you can by any means necessary and then put two to the back of his head.
Why make the tax payers fund this guys food, daily life, lawyer fees, appeals, etc when he has not a single thing to give back to society.
Holy shit Ninjas, you fought in the Revolutionary War and in WWII? You so bad ass.
I don't know where do you get the info, but the fact is that we can stay in the street at 3am without worries (in usa, if they see you at late night, be sure that someone will call the police cuz "there is a weirdo out there, i'm scared sir!"), and we haven't got fear of other people.
In Texas, and in another state, you can bring your gun to the university campus. Do you think that's good? That's astonishing!. How in the hell they can tolerate that? where's the need?
There are gun freaks owning tanks... and all kind of military weapons. I'm flipped out with all this.
There are too many gun freaks in USA, and it's like a religion their passion for guns. Without guns, i'm sure there won't be such massacres.
BTW, It would be very difficult to ban guns in USA. That country make billions of dollars selling guns, is a country that lives from war, and that's a pity, because all that money should go to investigation and sanity.
They should learn from Japan, but they are not japanese...
Championing the unnecessarily death of another human being is a pretty disgusting thing for a person to do for any reason, so: That's not fucking cool. People like you need to civilize themselves, and failing that, be locked up with the other kooks like this guy who think there's justification for ending human life.
I used "we" as in "Americans". It is standard English. Learn to read dude.
Just pointing out the ridiculousness of your argument was all, dude.
I'm referring to you posting in a thread about a senseless gun massacre on your own home soil, and then stating that the world should be grateful that your country has raised gun nuts. You fucking mong
While the families of the victims have to go every day knowing this piece of meat is still breathing the air that was stolen from their loved ones.
I don't care if you think it's disgusting.
How is this guys death unnecessary? He took lives. He has nothing to give to society and he should be punished to the maximum. Since that is death. There you go.
People like me? What does that even mean? Because I am ok with the death penalty? Need to civilize/educate (since you changed it) ourselves or be locked up. Seriously? Get a fucking clue
Education and an active social safety net make a bigger dent in violence than trying to lock up all the booze, burn all the drugs and take away all the guns. The countries in Europe that enjoy low violence shouldn't fool themselves into thinking that its the lack of guns that keeps violence at bay. Especially as they face some very tough decisions and face monumental doses of austerity.
Make your decisions carefully and protect what is important, don't think that it is the lack of guns that keeps you safe.
Pretty much, yeah. Cheering on the death of another human being from your computer screen, you should be pretty ashamed of yourself.
You really think it's cute to talk about ending another human being's life? Would the big bad Jesse Moody champion of poor downtrodden murder victims like to kill the murderer himfself, so it's even? You said you wanted him shot to death when he surrendered, unarmed. That's appalling, dude.
It's not too much for me to ask you to quit wishing death on other human beings.
Your perception and attitude are killing any honest debate that could take place and will lead to a thread lock, so chill out, calm down and try not to view things so concretely.