Yet another US college gun slaughter - "at least 10" killed in Oregan shooting

[Belushi]

Only criminals have guns in the UK and er we have far fewer shootings than the US..

 

[Belushi]

The same way similar restrictions on legally held firearms imposed by [Godwin's alert ]Hilter, Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, etc., etc. made it easier for them to do what they liked.

Do you have references?

 

[Athos]

Yeah come back when you are not channelling glen beck and Alex Jones.

This sort of nonsense is why it's impossible to have a sensible discussion about this issue. For the record, are you disagreeing with the content of the remark you quoted? Or resorting to that ad hominem stuff in the absence of any sensible counter-argument.

You're right ones a conservative rugged country with a wild frontier that brutally subjected its native population and other is um..,

Do you seriously think those countries attitudes to firearms are/were similar? I can tell you they're not.

So because the law won't be 100 effective we should bother.

If a law will do more harm, then, yes, we should think twice.

A better question is should the only country in THE WORLD were mass shootings are A DAILY OCCURRENCE reevaluate its position on gun ownership.?

No it wouldn't. The very fact that America is an anomaly in terms of the correlation between rates of legal gun ownership and mass shootings suggests that there are other factors at play in the US that better explain this phenomenon. A better question would focus on identifying them. Certainly better than suggesting unworkable laws that would have more practical disbenefits than benefits.

And that's before we come to the question of whether it's right for a state to disarm its citizens.

 

[Athos]

Do you have references?

Which bit do you need a reference for? The fact that they took those measures, or that it was easier for them to e.g. round up unarmed jews than it would have been to round up armed ones?

 

[Dowie]

I've recently heard the suggestion that we could require gun owners to carry liability insurance. The theory is that it would raise the cost of gun ownership beyond where you could own a lot of them, but wouldn't actually infringe on the right to own one.

not exactly an ideal solution but it would perhaps help

in particular you could legislate that guns need to be locked away in an approved gun cabinet when not in use and ammunition stored separately, also without infringing on the 'right' to own one - most legally owned guns are more likely to kill a family member and it seems that with some of these high school shootings it is kids stealing legally owned guns from their parents which haven't been secured...

In fact just the insurance angle could force safe storage - in order for premiums to be affordable you need to keep them locked away as your insurance becomes invalid and you become liable/potentially lose your house if anything happens.

Perhaps even change the law so you become criminally liable if you've not taken reasonable steps to secure the weapon. Raise the age for gun ownership, don't allow people suffering from mental illness such as depression to own firearms in the same way criminals can't, heavier criminal penalties for dealing in/owning illegal guns. Tis going to be near impossible to remove the right to bear arms but there is still a lot that could be done to make things safer while maintaining that 'right'.

 

[Athos]

Only criminals have guns in the UK er we have far fewer shootings than the US..

Only criminals carry out mass shootings in the US.

 

[8den]

Do you have references?

No he doesn't it's Alex Jones level bullshit. and claiming Australia has a "different gun culture" is bullshit. That Stalin Mao Hitler crap was spouted in the mass rallies in Australia when they enacted their gun control and Tony Abbott wasn't Hitler

 

[8den]

Only criminals carry out mass shootings in the US.

Idiotic. Source. You don't have because it's bullshit.

 

[Athos]

No he doesn't it's Alex Jones level bullshit. and claiming Australia has a "different gun culture" is bullshit. That Stalin Mao Hitler crap was spouted in the mass rallies in Australia when they enacted their gun control and Tony Abbott wasn't Hitler

No, but Hitler was! The fact that you can give one example of a country where mass gun control did not facilitate state atrocities does not detract from the many other examples where such measures did.

 

[Athos]

Idiotic. Source. You don't have because it's bullshit.

Just to be clear, are you saying that the mass shootings in the US are carried out by law-abiding citizens?

 

[sim667]

Only criminals carry out mass shootings in the US.

Sorry to break this to you, but this is the statement of someone who is fucking clueless.

 

[sim667]

Just to be clear, are you saying that the mass shootings in the US are carried out by law-abiding citizens?

Lets be clear, are you saying that they're only carried out by criminals known to the US police before the shootings, or they are criminals after the shootings?

 

[cesare]

I'm not convinced by the argument that in order to prevent Hitler-type genocides the US has to put up with regular mass murder.

 

[Athos]

Sorry to break this to you, but this is the statement of someone who is fucking clueless.

What you saying that mass shootings are lawful in the US, now?

 

[Athos]

I'm not convinced by the argument that in order to prevent Hitler-type genocides the US has to put up with regular mass murder.

It doesn't have to; it chooses to. And that's part of what liberals in this country don't understand about America's attitude to guns.

 

[8den]

This sort of nonsense is why it's impossible to have

You are spouting Glenn beck Alex Jones sound bites that's not a ad hominem that's a fact.


Do you seriously think those countries attitudes to firearms are/were similar? I can tell you they're not.
[/quote]

Where I your evidence that aus and us attitude to Guns is different?

If a law will do more harm, then, yes, we should think twice.

Again all evidence supports that increased gun restrictions reduce mass shootings and suicide this is a fact.

No it wouldn't. The very fact that America is an anomaly in terms of the correlation between rates of legal gun ownership and mass shootings suggests that there are other factors at play in the US that better explain this phenomenon. A better question would focus on identifying them. Certainly better than suggesting unworkable laws that would have more practical disbenefits than benefits.

Give us a giggle what's the difference between the us and Canada or Australia or the UK? Does the us have violent media that these other countries don't consume? Different food? Different medication? You're unhinged

And that's before we come to the question of whether it's right for a state to disarm its citizens.

Yes it's absolutely okay for a state to do so to protect its citizens.

 

[cesare]

It doesn't have to; it chooses to. And that's part of what liberals in this country don't understand about America's attitude to guns.

I realise it chooses to. I just reject the argument. I similarly reject the argument that having the right to bear arms makes insurrection more likely, because it clearly doesn't.

 

[Athos]

Lets be clear, are you saying that they're only carried out by criminals known to the US police before the shootings, or they are criminals after the shootings?

No, I didn't say they were carried out by people known to the police, did I. The acts of mass murder, are, by definition, crimes.

 

[Belushi]

Which bit do you need a reference for? The fact that they took those measures,

Yes, I want references that they actually did take those measures and that you haven't just spewed out a list of every 20th century tyrant you can remember from the history channel.

or that it was easier for them to e.g. round up unarmed jews than it would have been to round up armed ones

You've never heard of the Jewish Combat Organisation then? The Bundists? The Partisans? The Ghetto Uprising..

 

[8den]

Just to be clear, are you saying that the mass shootings in the US are carried out by law-abiding citizens?

Pathetic. I'm saying that the many if not most mass shooters haven't broken any laws before they start their rampage. They acquire their weApons through legal means

 

[two sheds]

No, I didn't say they were carried out by people know to the police, did I. The acts of mass murder, are, by definition, crimes.

Bit of a pointless statement then, wasn't it? Like saying profoundly: "Everyone who goes into a house and steals things is a burglar!".

 

[Dowie]

just reading a thread on the /r9k board ( superhardcore anti - nomies/normals/anyoone with a sex likfe/social life ) on 4 chan - that 'Beta uprising " seems like a wind up, they basically fed CNN false news that it was some dude 'Eggman' straight after the shootings (there's load of photos of him up there ) - I feel bad ( a bit ) but was pissing myself just now

their summation :

Someone shot people.
Someone from 4chan baited the press into believing it was someone from 4chan.
The press bought it.
4chan fed them lies about Egg.
The press bought it again.
Proceeded to slander him on national television for about six straight hours, CNN especially.
Oh whoops, it turns out it wasn't Egg at all.
All other media outlets switched to the real perp, CNN continued slandering him and 4chan and the "beta uprising", despite it not even being relevant to the story anymore.
CNN goes into panic-mode and switches to talking about the weather instead.

Egg better be lawyering the fuck up right now. If he had a brain in his fucking skull, he'd be hiring the Jewyest New York Jew lawyer to sue CNN.

it seems quite likely it was someone from 4chan, there was a thread started prior to the shooting...

though what happened after the shooting and the media attention is someone decided to pretend that person was some kid nicknamed 'egg man' who'd already been bullied on that site and of course the commercial news stations just ran with it without bothering to check basic facts as they're just deperate to be the first to bring the latest updates... leading to the bullied kid getting his picture plastered all over facebook, twitter etc.. with loads of angry people calling him all sorts of things (including commenting on his appearance)... yes he probably should sue

 

[8den]

No, but Hitler was! The fact that you can give one example of a country where mass gun control did not facilitate state atrocities does not detract from the many other examples where such measures did.

So the US is the only country in the world that needs daily mass shootings to prevent Hitler II

And both the UK and Australia are two western democracies where gun control was enacted after mass shoots and have seen no more massacres or fascist dictatorships so raising them as comparisons are completely valid. We could also talk about Canada.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

not exactly an ideal solution but it would perhaps help

in particular you could legislate that guns need to be locked away in an approved gun cabinet when not in use and ammunition stored separately, also without infringing on the 'right' to own one - most legally owned guns are more likely to kill a family member and it seems that with some of these high school shootings it is kids stealing legally owned guns from their parents which haven't been secured...

In fact just the insurance angle could force safe storage - in order for premiums to be affordable you need to keep them locked away as your insurance becomes invalid and you become liable/potentially lose your house if anything happens.

Perhaps even change the law so you become criminally liable if you've not taken reasonable steps to secure the weapon. Raise the age for gun ownership, don't allow people suffering from mental illness such as depression to own firearms in the same way criminals can't, heavier criminal penalties for dealing in/owning illegal guns. Tis going to be near impossible to remove the right to bear arms but there is still a lot that could be done to make things safer while maintaining that 'right'.

They could also legislate that all guns manufactured must have palm/fingerprint locks on their triggers. That way the gun could only be fired by its owner and no one else. Some models could be retrofitted with them.

 

[Tony_LeaS]

Only criminals carry out mass shootings in the US.

Most are often clean cut and sometimes dont show a motive, even if they had criminal records in the past I can only assume they were minor offences.

 

[snadge]

4chan is genuinely off its head

Anonymous 10/02/15(Fri)08:22:00
File: (45 KB, 696x960)
What a day

That is an extremely fitting Gif actually

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

yeh. but it sounds to me like this would abridge the right of poor people to own guns while leaving rich people with arsenals. that's simply going to ensure massacres carried out by the wealthy.

Yes, I had that worry too.

The truth is if you can't regulate the guns themselves you have limited options for a workaround.

 

[8ball]

Yeah come back when you are not channelling glen beck and Alex Jones.

Any opinion on the actual argument as opposed to voicing your dislike for someone else who says similar?
Do you think all encryption should be banned because Alex Jones would hate that?

 

[Athos]

Again all evidence supports that increased gun restrictions reduce mass shootings and suicide this is a fact.

I don't doubt it; I've never suggested otherwise, have I? Similarly, I don't doubt road deaths would be reduced by banning cars. So what?

Give us a giggle what's the difference between the us and Canada or Australia or the UK? Does the us have violent media that these other countries don't consume? Different food? Different medication? You're unhinged

I don't know the answer. But it's pretty clear that it's something a lot more complex than more guns = more mass shootings. Look at Switzerland; why are they not killing each other al the time? It'd be better to find out what it is about the US that causes these incidents, becasue it's clearly not just the fact of gun ownership.

Yes it's absolutely okay for a state to do so to protect its citizens.

And those instances where states have used such measures to facilitate genocide against their own people? What of them? Ignored? Inconvenient?

 

[snadge]

They could also legislate that all guns manufactured must have palm/fingerprint locks on their triggers. That way the gun could only be fired by its owner and no one else. Some models could be retrofitted with them.

Guns are so mechanically simple any electronic failsafe could easily be circumnavigated, even the ammunition can be made easily enough.

Now particle beams and laser type firearms, they could be but I digress.