@Stonyman65 said:
@fustacluck said:
@Stonyman65 said:
@fustacluck said:
@Stonyman65 said:
@fustacluck said:
@Stonyman65 said:
@BRich said:
@Stonyman65 said:
@fustacluck said:
@Stonyman65 said:
@Colourful_Hippie said:
@ZGoon said:
@Bizen247 said:
Joe Biden is a joke. He's a character from a Mel Brooks film except in real life. Even sounds like one. Anyone who thinks this guy is a decent politician or has any charisma is somewhere between partisan hack and political tool.
All reps from the NRA and game industry need to do is walk in the room and say, "First and Second Amendments, ever heard of them?"
And then walk out.
I don't want to seem like an ignorant Canadian, but... Why do people in your country continue to blindly cling to a bunch of stuff written down 200 years ago by a bunch of sexist, slave-owning bigots whenever someone challenges your pathetic lack of any gun control, or anything else for that matter?
Cuz it's the only defense they have and never mind the fact that the thing has been amended numerous times and in the case of the cough (18th) cough repealed. They're too busy being paranoid about a big brother takeover and irrationally think that stockpiling will save them. (Generalization sure, but that way of thinking is seriously out there. You're lying to yourself if you think that's not true)
It's like people are incapable of separating the concept of gun control from no guns.
I think the problem is that the most vocal people for gun-control don't just want to strengthen laws, they want to outlaw them completely. People like Diane Fienstien and Michael Bloomberg have said as much. I have don't really have a problem with sensible laws that actually work, the problem is that the laws people like that are trying to pass aren't sensible, and have been proven (remember the 1994 crime bill?) not to work. Stopping criminals from getting guns is a great thing, but stopping law-abiding people isn't going to do a damn thing. We already have some 2,700 gun laws on the books as it is. Let's try enforcing those rather than cooking up new ones to make ourselves feel good.
That's great and all, but haven't the majority of those that have recently lost it with a gun in a public place been, up until that moment, law-abiding citizens?
Law abiding citizens who all had numerous mental health problems. And a few convicted felons that stole guns from from burglaries and police officers. Strengthening our mental health system should be our main priority here. There are some people that shouldn't have guns at all for various reasons, but taking guns away from people who don't have mental health issues or haven't broken the law isn't going to solve anything.
And even then, people are going to do what they want to do. Those freaks at Columbine stole pistols and shotguns and used them, and made their own explosives and used them because they wanted to. "Assault Weapons" where already banned then under the 1994 crime bill, and explosives have been banned forever, and they weren't of legal age to own a gun, much less buy one, but that didn't stop them one bit did it?
It's just more useless laws that we can't enforce - we can't even properly enforce the laws we have now.
If there were almost no guns in the country (like every other first world country on the planet), where would they steal them from exactly? Sure, mass shootings have happened in countries like Norway, but they average 2 guns homicides per year IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. England, a more comparatively diverse country to the U.S. had only 41 gun homicides compared with over 9100. There are 88.8 firearms in the U.S. for every 100 citizens (35-50% of the world's civilian owned guns for 5% of the world population).
Fuck a 230 year old document written during a revolution.
And the UK had the 2nd violent crime rate in the EU, and the US is rated 28th in the world in gun-related homicide. There are more gun related murders in south america and eastern-Europe than in america, and far less guns.
It's not a gun problem, it's a societal problem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2u6aen0RCY
See what you did there Stonyman, nice skewing of the figures! If you try to make a comparison, at least give both sides an even chance. Actual gun crime figures in the UK are lower than most of those in Europe and lower than both the US and Canada, accounting for about 0.2% of all annual crime figures (including air-pistols and rifles), and of that most of those are suicides (not including air-pistols and air-rifles). Only 3% of the 0.2% result in serious injury or death.
Still, don't let the facts get in the away..... and all that.
I'm not skirting that facts, just adding another perspective. As far as gun-related deaths and crime in the US:
deaths in the US - 2,468,435 (annual) http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
Gun related death in the US 32,163 (total including self-inflicted) http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/citation/quotes/6492
Violent crime rate: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime (take your pick of any year)
You do the math.
Hint: it's a lot less than you think it is.
Yeah, but check the UK figures, it's a lot lesserer. You do the math.......s.
Of course it's a lot lesser. They have like 1/4th of the population that the US does.
I'm not saying that guns aren't a small part of the problem here, but considering everything else, it's a statistical zero. Especially the dreaded "assault Weapons" that account for 0.000001% of that statistical zero.
Just as an aside, those "freaks" didn't steal their weapons, they bought them off friends who bought them from gun shows.
And maybe dismissing them as freaks doesn't really help getting to the heart of the problem.
Anyone who goes on a shooting rampage and kills a bunch of people is a freak. Sorry. Before that, maybe not, but nothing in the world could (or should) drive someone to do that.
I stand corrected on the source of guns - that is what is considered "straw purchasing" - selling guns to someone who can't legally own one or buy one themselves. The friends are just as guilty as they are in this case.
Look, I don't claim to know all the ins and outs of Columbine, but surely two guys driven to desperation by the bullying they received, that was allowed to go on in their school, and happens in many schools, should not just be referred to as just "freaks". I'm not excusing them in any way, it was a horrendous act, but simplifying the argument never helped (and pointing at any one thing, in particular video games is also simplifying the argument). Until the societal problems are addressed, and let's face it those with the power to effect societal change are quite happy with the way society is, the next best solution is just to allow those that need guns to carry out their duties (security personnel, hunters, farmers, etc) to carry weapons, but to have them held in a secure facility away from the home, like an armory, and those that don't need guns don't. If people want to fire weapons as a hobby then they keep their weapon at their gun club. Pretty simple.
I know at this point the horse has bolted, and I don't have the answer for the mess that that's entailed, but there are people paid a whole hell of a lot more than me to come up with realistic solutions. And it should be more realistic than "there's no correlation between guns and gun-crime" or "It's vidier games what done it". When that's all that's offered, maybe it's time for a regulated militia to rise against their govt.
<now waiting for my door to be bust in by Homeland Security>
I'm really confused about the argument people have. It's very much like:
"But they have more gun related crimes than we do! So we should be able to have guns! This is unfair!".
How about stop comparing to other countries and focus on what's happening in your backyard and not across the road.
Log in to comment