[m0dem]

Just food for thought:
"One sword keeps another in the sheath." -=George Herbert=-
"Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far." -=Theodore Roosevelt=-

So I think there would be fewer (successful) shootings if people were armed and at least knowledgeable about defending themselves. Not just sheep to the slaughter.
And yes... I know, I shall be verbally shot.

NOTE: They are now both in my signature!

[Oni]

Personally I think it was mental illness, the shooter wanted to be remembered probably due to feeling inadequate in his own life, often these shooters live very isolated lives and want to go out with a bang / be remembered because they want to feel like they matter...

I think America needs to be stricter on its gun controls, or at least, prevent people from having ammunition at home, you should be limited to a certain amount of it if you're going hunting, other countries where gun laws are restricted / banned don't have anywhere near the amount of gun problems, it feels like every month there's been a new shooting in America...

I can understand people who are pro-gun but at the same time I think the needs of safety outweigh the desires of those that want their guns.

Limit the amount of ammunition? Do you really think it'd be difficult for someone to buy extra ammunition if they were planning to do shoot up a university like this? Let's be realistic here. There needs to be stricter guidelines on giving firearms to people with mental illnesses, if anything. However, I don't believe that our government is efficient enough to do that properly.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

[m0dem]

Limit the amount of ammunition? Do you really think it'd be difficult for someone to buy extra ammunition if they were planning to do shoot up a university like this? Let's be realistic here. There needs to be stricter guidelines on giving firearms to people with mental illnesses, if anything. However, I don't believe that our government is efficient enough to do that properly.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Well said, +1 from me, definitely.

Criminals are criminals because they don't follow laws.

[Jiggly]

People keep talking about how countries with stricter gun laws have less gun crime... Which is true, but in places such as Great Britain we then have more types of crime in general, including stabbings. Sometimes guns are a deterrent. I feel like they could be more careful about educating people about guns and being more aware of those with mental illnesses, but I don't see capping ammunition etc working. The UK has laws about the length of a blade being restricted that you can carry in public. This has never stopped people from stabbing with a kitchen knife.

---

Criminals are criminals because they don't follow laws.

I agree. Killing is illegal but that didn't stop this person from doing it.

[m0dem]

I agree. Killing is illegal but that didn't stop this person from doing it.

How true. Killing is illegal, and if guns are made illegal, it wouldn't stop any determined person... but that is not good enough reason not to have more gun restriction laws. The big reason is because then people will be disarmed... honest, law-abiding citizens even more vulnerable than before.

[mothered]

if guns are made illegal, it wouldn't stop any determined person.

Precisely.

If It's not a gun, It's a knife. If It's not a knife, It's a baseball bat over the head. And so forth. If the Intention's there, the reality Is It's well and truly possible.

[Megan]

People who are saying "making guns illegal wouldn't prevent it"

Why is gun crime so low in other countries then? Cause that shit seems to be pretty well prevented there...

Sure it doesn't stop 100% of all gun crime but here's some stats

In 2008, the number of homicides by firearm in Japan was 11
In 2009, the number of homicides by firearm in England and Wales was 41
In 2004, the number of homicides by firearm in Switzerland was 57
In 2009, the number of homicides by firearm in Canada was 173
In 2004, the number of homicides by firearm in Sweden was 37
And last but not least, in 2010, the number of homicides by firearm in the United States was recorded as 9,960

Source

Now I'm not going to research gun laws in all of those countries but I will compare the three countries I know the best and they are Japan, the UK and the USA.

In Japan guns are very restricted - you have to have a license for the ammo etc
Source

In the UK guns are also very restricted - I'm not gonna provide proof for this as I live here and it's first hand experience, you have to jump through loads of hoops to get one.

In the US guns are not restricted and it is easy to get one, see here for evidence

---

So if what you say is true and that making guns illegal wouldn't prevent it, how do you figure that one out?

Now you could argue that "buh people who really wanna do it will still do it" - Yes but very rarely and not so common, I can't remember the last time a shooting happened in the UK, lots of other things but not a shooting, simply because they cannot access guns as easily.

It's a lot easier to kill a lot of people with guns than it is with a melee weapon, so worst case scenario you can prevent the number of casualties, damage control is better than not trying to do anything at all.

Conclusion:
Guns should be more restricted in the US, you're not fighting hordes of zombies or fighting wild animals for survival (hunting is not fighting for your own survival) so why do you really need guns? Are they "so cool" that people have to die every month? Mental illness is a huge part of these shootings but honestly if they're restricted then it'll be better for everyone.

[m0dem]

People who are saying "making guns illegal wouldn't prevent it"

Why is gun crime so low in other countries then? Cause that shit seems to be pretty well prevented there...

Sure it doesn't stop 100% of all gun crime but here's some stats


Source

Now I'm not going to research gun laws in all of those countries but I will compare the three countries I know the best and they are Japan, the UK and the USA.

In Japan guns are very restricted - you have to have a license for the ammo etc
Source

In the UK guns are also very restricted - I'm not gonna provide proof for this as I live here and it's first hand experience, you have to jump through loads of hoops to get one.

In the US guns are not restricted and it is easy to get one, see here for evidence

---

So if what you say is true and that making guns illegal wouldn't prevent it, how do you figure that one out?

Now you could argue that "buh people who really wanna do it will still do it" - Yes but very rarely and not so common, I can't remember the last time a shooting happened in the UK, lots of other things but not a shooting, simply because they cannot access guns as easily.

It's a lot easier to kill a lot of people with guns than it is with a melee weapon, so worst case scenario you can prevent the number of casualties, damage control is better than not trying to do anything at all.

Conclusion:
Guns should be more restricted in the US, you're not fighting hordes of zombies or fighting wild animals for survival (hunting is not fighting for your own survival) so why do you really need guns? Are they "so cool" that people have to die every month? Mental illness is a huge part of these shootings but honestly if they're restricted then it'll be better for everyone.

I agree, it is a lot easier for mass murder with guns vs. melee weapons.

But what about, for example, the recent France train shooting? I'm sure the don't allow that type of AK-47 in France, but did he have one? There just happens to be a lot of terrorists in France. And that incident came to an end by two smart(er) people. They did something, they didn't just stand there waiting to get shot.

Pick a terror incident at random. The first one I picked from Wikipedia's Terrorism_in_the United States was Ohio highway sniper attacks. A lot of these mass murders have one thing in common, they are done by people with "severe mental illness." There are many ways they do it, not just with guns, but with pipe bombs, and poison, and firebombs, and airplanes.

A lot of the terror incidents in the US are from bombs. There is a lot of restriction on the materials that the bomb requires, but they are still made and detonated.

And how do you propose these gun restrictions be put in place? Are the police going to confiscate every gun and then require licenses and permits to get some of them back?

What about computer hacking. There are no restrictions on computers. What next? Are they going to take away your computer? My computer?

What about kitchen knives? They can be used as weapons. And if they are taken away, then how will we cut up the food we need to eat?

You blame the gun, held in the hands of the person. I blame the person, holding the gun in their hand. A gun is just a tool. And like anything else, it can be used for good or for bad.

[Coca.]

I think that it's fucking terrible...

Spoiler:

...how the shooter died instantly instead of being tortured.

[Oni]

I agree, it is a lot easier for mass murder with guns vs. melee weapons.

But what about, for example, the recent France train shooting? I'm sure the don't allow that type of AK-47 in France, but did he have one? There just happens to be a lot of terrorists in France. And that incident came to an end by two smart(er) people. They did something, they didn't just stand there waiting to get shot.

Pick a terror incident at random. The first one I picked from Wikipedia's Terrorism_in_the United States was Ohio highway sniper attacks. A lot of these mass murders have one thing in common, they are done by people with "severe mental illness." There are many ways they do it, not just with guns, but with pipe bombs, and poison, and firebombs, and airplanes.

A lot of the terror incidents in the US are from bombs. There is a lot of restriction on the materials that the bomb requires, but they are still made and detonated.

And how do you propose these gun restrictions be put in place? Are the police going to confiscate every gun and then require licenses and permits to get some of them back?

What about computer hacking. There are no restrictions on computers. What next? Are they going to take away your computer? My computer?

What about kitchen knives? They can be used as weapons. And if they are taken away, then how will we cut up the food we need to eat?

You blame the gun, held in the hands of the person. I blame the person, holding the gun in their hand. A gun is just a tool. And like anything else, it can be used for good or for bad.

I know Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source, but:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks

Read about the preparations. A regular sane person does not just lose it and make plans this elaborate. Like with any mass killing, this guy was sick in the head and everything was premeditated. I suppose we should ban fertilizer as well.

People who are saying "making guns illegal wouldn't prevent it"

Why is gun crime so low in other countries then? Cause that shit seems to be pretty well prevented there...

Sure it doesn't stop 100% of all gun crime but here's some stats


Source

Now I'm not going to research gun laws in all of those countries but I will compare the three countries I know the best and they are Japan, the UK and the USA.

In Japan guns are very restricted - you have to have a license for the ammo etc
Source

In the UK guns are also very restricted - I'm not gonna provide proof for this as I live here and it's first hand experience, you have to jump through loads of hoops to get one.

In the US guns are not restricted and it is easy to get one, see here for evidence

---

So if what you say is true and that making guns illegal wouldn't prevent it, how do you figure that one out?

Now you could argue that "buh people who really wanna do it will still do it" - Yes but very rarely and not so common, I can't remember the last time a shooting happened in the UK, lots of other things but not a shooting, simply because they cannot access guns as easily.

It's a lot easier to kill a lot of people with guns than it is with a melee weapon, so worst case scenario you can prevent the number of casualties, damage control is better than not trying to do anything at all.

Conclusion:
Guns should be more restricted in the US, you're not fighting hordes of zombies or fighting wild animals for survival (hunting is not fighting for your own survival) so why do you really need guns? Are they "so cool" that people have to die every month? Mental illness is a huge part of these shootings but honestly if they're restricted then it'll be better for everyone.

It's unrealistic to think the government will be able to regulate every single object or substance that it deems dangerous. You might trust it to, but I do not. I'd argue that if there's a mass murderer like Breivik, people are better off armed. Norway's incident also proves that regulations don't prevent incidents. Firearms are expensive and ownership of them is defined as an actual right in our constitution.