Liberals shouldn't own guns

IsitWinterYet17A little simplistic to say good guy with a gun. He was a freaking cop who opted to do nothing and could have saved many lives. It said he arrived 30 seconds or a minute after the 4-5min shooting spree started, but stayed outside rather than doing his job and entering the building. He was previously a sheriff's deputy, then moved to school resource officer that is still employed by the sheriff's department.

Youre a douche trying to spin this into an argument for gun control.

zuesHold up... you want me to admit that guns are a problem in mass shootings? NO SHIT what else would be the problem is mass SHOOTINGS? bows and arrows? HAHAHA...

Guns don't cause mass shootings People wielding guns do. If we wanted to stop mass shootings we should just ban murder... why only focus on guns?

Thats it we've solved the problem!!!?? lets pass a bill to make murder illegal!!!

TheHamburglarAnd you say I act childish...

So by your logic, because murders will still happen inevitably, we shouldn't have a law against murder?

Now that you've admitted that guns are part of the problem, what can we do to minimize guns from falling into the wrong hands in the future?

onenerdykidI can tell that you're one of those people who thinks that less government will solve everything. Please.

It should be pretty clear that without government regulation, that businesses/banks would shit all over everything if given the chance if it improved their profitability, which history time and time again shows they do. The free market is a myth, it doesn't work.

If the government actually had the interest of the public/tax payers in mind, then yes government would be a very good thing. But as long as they put business interests ahead of public interest, there will always be a huge problem. And right now, that is exactly what the government is doing.

cool_nameI dont say this to be dismissive, but when people are discussing policies of how to prevent mass shootings, they seem so often to forget ask themselves if this policy would have actually stopped this shooting?

cool_nameThis entire argument is pretty much for less government. Business interests will always go ahead of public interests as business stands to gain a lot from a change beneficial to them, whereas consumer on aggregate lose more, but on an individual level lose very little and have no incentive to lobby the government. Therefore government should have less power.

Note: i said less government, not no government. Even Hayek supported some government.



Also more on topic, I purpose we establish a simple litmus test for these proposed regulations: would they have prevented this or other mass shootings?

Something like a training class, no it would not have stopped the killing, might have made it worse.
Waiting periods: nope
Banning AR-15's: nope would have just bought a different gun

I dont say this to be dismissive, but when people are discussing policies of how to prevent mass shootings, they seem so often to forget ask themselves if this policy would have actually stopped this shooting?

onenerdykidPerhaps not this shooting, but it would for sure reduce the number of shootings if people had to take a pilot's-license-level amount of training before being allowed to own a gun and yearly post-sale mental health checks and aptitude exams. This would certainly catch a lot of people and dissuade many would-be-shooters from obtaining a gun. There is enough sufficient evidence from around the globe to show that this does work.

And again, having healthcare more readily & easily available would also help our mental health problem that we clearly do have.

zuesIt's odd how the rest of the world has guns, yet don't have these terrorist school shootings.

Israel used to be one of the most dangerous places in the world. EVERYONE there has a gun and a bomb shelter. They are also emerging as a technological phenom and economic super power. There is violence there (getting much better) but it's a much different degree of violence compared with what we're dealing with in America. The same is true with any other country.

Name another country that has as many school shootings as the USA?? This issue is segmented almost exclusively to the USA... But you can't tell me other countries citizen's don't own guns - the middle east is up to 50 guns per 100 residents.

That is why I think there is a clear mental health issue as opposed to a gun issue.

onenerdykidBut these other countries have way stricter gun laws with post-sale checks in place. Austria, where I live, is a perfect example of this. You can own hunting rifles, shotguns, handguns, etc. but you need to pass mental health exams and aptitude tests pre-sale and post-sale. And if you fail these tests, you lose the right to own a firearm.

The USA is not alone with mental health problems. Just other countries deal with it better and put better safeguards in place concerning deadly weapons. I full agree with you that mental health issues are a main problem, but it's not an either or issue. It is both mental health and ease of access to guns. The ease at which people acquire deadly weapons in the USA is far too lenient.

The fact that these other countries don't have this problem is definitely linked to the ease (or not ease) at which guns are available. And there is a huge reason for why a gun is chosen over a knife or a pipe bomb. It is a far better weapon to use than a knife and it is far easier to get (or make) than explosives. It's a super efficient deadly weapon and it's easy to get.

Fix both of the problems, not just one.

zuesThat is why I think there is a clear mental health issue as opposed to a gun issue.

.MASSHOLE.Can't it be both?

Not every gun death is a result of mental health issues.

Not all mental health issues result in someone shooting up a school or shooting another person.

Is it that difficult to acknowledge this?

Sure, mass shootings may generate more headlines, but what about when someone shoots another person because of a disagreement? Or bullying? Is that because they have mental health issues or because they're acting emotionally and have easy access to weapons?

zuesI just don't want to see these Safeguards slowly deteriorate my second amendment right which is ultimately what I can see happening.

onenerdykidBut these safeguards seem to be very fitting with a "well regulated militia" though. Just don't turn this into a slippery slope fallacy. Just because safeguards are put in place, the 2nd Amendment doesn't need to be eroded.

zuesAnd over 99% of gun owners don't murder people. Taking away peoples rights because a minority of people are violent is wrong and its exactly what liberals want. I responsibly own a pistol. I haven't killed anyone and I never want to.. You want me to give up my gun? Responsible people should be able to own guns, keeping them out of criminals hands is the hard part that I truly don't believe can be done regardless of restrictions passed

.MASSHOLE.Did I ever say I'm advocating for people to give up guns?

Nope.

All I said is it's not just a mental health issue masquerading itself in the form of mass shootings.

There's an issue with the ease of access to weapons as AND a lack of access to mental healthcare in this country.

.MASSHOLE.Can't it be both?

Not every gun death is a result of mental health issues.

Not all mental health issues result in someone shooting up a school or shooting another person.

Is it that difficult to acknowledge this?

Sure, mass shootings may generate more headlines, but what about when someone shoots another person because of a disagreement? Or bullying? Is that because they have mental health issues or because they're acting emotionally and have easy access to weapons?

zuesAnd over 99% of gun owners don't murder people. Taking away peoples rights because a minority of people are violent is wrong and its exactly what liberals want. I responsibly own a pistol. I haven't killed anyone and I never want to.. You want me to give up my gun? Responsible people should be able to own guns, keeping them out of criminals hands is the hard part that I truly don't believe can be done regardless of restrictions passed

zuesJust wondering when people will realize that regulation doesn't actually do anything

zuesYou didn't say it but essentially you're advocating for it in the long run.

Just like states legalizing weed is the beginning of the end of the war on drugs, stricter gun regulation is the beginning of the end of the second amendment.

zuesJust wondering when people will realize that regulation doesn't actually do anything

.MASSHOLE.Really? What about drivers licenses? Pilot licenses and the FAA? Medical licenses? Regulating what can be dumped into public water via the EPA? Insider trading and the SEC?

Talk about a stupid fucking statement.

zuesSo you're saying because all those exist people cannot circumvent it in any way right? What world do you live in?

Insider trading in the SEC?? haha are you kidding? Don't pay any mind to Enron or WorldCom... What about Volkwagon?

Sure regulation exists, but do people obey it? absolutelyfuckingnot.

.MASSHOLE.Alright, now you're just moving the goalposts.

First it was what do regulations do? Now it's well people break the law anyway, so let's just do away with them all!


Those were just a few examples.

Let me pose it to you this way, would you rather live in a world where that doesn't exist?

How about a world without driver, medical, dental, or pilot licenses?

How about a world where your drinking water can be contaminated with chemicals? Or your air can be filled with smog and acid rain?

zuesNo i went off on a tangent and you're right. There need to be laws put into place. Most people on this planet are inherently good and will obey the laws as long as they are reasonable. But you have the inherently evil people that won't regardless.... If stricter gun laws help to prevent murder i'm all for it.

onenerdykidPerhaps not this shooting, but it would for sure reduce the number of shootings if people had to take a pilot's-license-level amount of training before being allowed to own a gun and yearly post-sale mental health checks and aptitude exams. This would certainly catch a lot of people and dissuade many would-be-shooters from obtaining a gun. There is enough sufficient evidence from around the globe to show that this does work.

And again, having healthcare more readily & easily available would also help our mental health problem that we clearly do have.

zuesThats it we've solved the problem!!!?? lets pass a bill to make murder illegal!!!

theabortionatorI'm absolutely okay with us losing our power as one of the strongest nations. Honestly, fuck our empire. Let's fix America before trying to run the world, and I'd like us to stop running the world regardless.

As far as guns, nothing will ever change because rabble rabble dont take my freedoms people are delusional as fuck.

CambrewskiYou misunderstood what I meant about USA. I mean to say that our ability to be a force of positive change will be diminished beyond repair if we as citizens do not take responsibility for our nation.
You can hold whatever opinion you want which is one of the best qualities in America. But to say that you don't care if we lose our status as a super power, to me, is a sign that you don't fully accept the responsibility that comes with that power (see Uncle Ben for more details).
USA citizens have more ability to affect positive change in the world than citizens of most other nations. Our freedoms are much more abundant than many nations which I feel would be hard to argue.
I am saying is that we have an inherited responsibility to the world to capitalize on our good fortune (as opposed to a citizen of say, Haiti)

On a side note, it seems you have very passionate opinions, I hope you put your energy to good use in your life.

slush8'Banning a certain firearm or certain size magazine might stop a few mass shootings, yeah. But at what cost?'

I mean what! Read what you have just written, then go back and read it again until you get some sense of morality. If you think people's right to a certain gun trumps children's and innocent people's safety you may need to rethink your mindset.

Sandyhook, Pulse, Las Vegas, Columbine, Parkland were all carried out using AR-15s

Mental Health and AR-15s. There's a link here. Spend money on mental healthcare and ban AR-15s

cool_nameA pilots license level of amount of training seems way overboard, but ya it likely would reduce gun ownership. How much would it reduce murders becomes the next question, and how much does it restrict a persons ability to defend themselves, in particular people from poor neighborhoods who likely would not have the means nor the time to pass such an onerous test, despite likely being in more need of protection.

Clearly a balance needs to be struck, I don't think US should have less regulations, but I am not as sure about more (though I did hear plans to ban bump stocks, which only makes sense given that fully automatic weapons are banned)

I also think the mass shooting/school shooting problem is a very different problem from the problem of all the other gun deaths, I dont expect a one-size all solution would exist.

cool_nameA pilots license level of amount of training seems way overboard, but ya it likely would reduce gun ownership. How much would it reduce murders becomes the next question, and how much does it restrict a persons ability to defend themselves, in particular people from poor neighborhoods who likely would not have the means nor the time to pass such an onerous test, despite likely being in more need of protection.
.

YoungNickolasThe same thing can be carried out with a stereotypical hunting rifle. Both the "scary" AR-15 and basic hunting rifles shoot the same type of round (. 223/5.56/.308/.450/. 22). Both rifles also have 30 round mags. Hell, there's AR-15 used in shootings because they're plastic and cheaper than a full wood hunting rifle. Oh, and both of them are used for hunting. Those sick fucks could take a $5 Walmart knife and do the same mass killings. It's about the mental health not the weapon.
I do agree with the mental health point. Gun control should be focused around the mental health of gun buyers.

LonelyThat kid would be the greatest fighter of all time if he was able to kill 17 people. I'm getting tired of the argument that other things can be used to kill, therefore there's no point in gun control. You could use a wrench to kill someone. It's not the same thing and that argument just diverges into a load of shit.

There's no need to own a 30 round magazine. You definetly do not need that for hunting. You don't need a fore grip or bumpstock for hunting.

While none of those things kill people, it definetly adds ease of use, which what all the untrained crazies use.

I think weapon modification and parts that trickle down from the military should not be available to the civilian market.

YoungNickolasT R I G G E R E D assumptions were made. Look up the Chinese train station massacre... Two guys with cleavers killed 29 and injured 100 more in a train station. I agree that mag capacities should be changed. The more times a shooter has to realod, the more chances there are to intervene in a shooting. I never said there's no point in gun control either. You definetly need a foregrip for some types of hunting. For example when people hunt for hogs, they shoot multiple rounds in a row to take down as many of the invasive species as they can. A foregrip allows for fast realignment of the reticle. Most of those "untrained crazies" use them because they are made of plastic and are cheap as hell. So your also saying that scopes, flash hiders, compensators, rail guards, iron sights should not be allowed since they are based off of military counter parts? Please research your thoughts and ideas before posting nonsense.

LonelyHi, not triggered gum owner here. Want to give me a stat on how common mass stabbings are in the US? Compared to mass shootings? How about the small percentage of the population that hog hunts.

Only thing that triggered me was the stupid "object x kills people" argument. Pillows can kill people, but we don't need to talk about controlling them because the amount of killing done with pillows is statistically insignificant compared to guns.

Besides scopes and rails why would you need a suppressor, or a flash hides or a myriad of other devices.

I've never met another hunter who really enjoyed hunting with a fore grip, acog scope, laser, and flash hider. You don't need it.

If using a knife was easy, all crazies would do it.

**This post was edited on Feb 25th 2018 at 9:25:37pm

YoungNickolasYou're still putting words in my mouth. I never mentioned suppressors(whole other topic) and I never mentioned lasers. Since you get all your knowledge from COD... You're assuming that a foregrip automatically add +30 accuracy to a school shooter. Also, please quote my "object x kills people"... A gun won't do a damn thing to anybody unless it's in the hands of person. Since you like to extrapolate, that shoulda been a given.

LonelyWhy would you ever need to hunt with an ar? Especially when they are usually chambered in 223.

I don't hunt with semi, and I don't know anyone who does, besides a friend who is a small pest exterminator.

iFlipI wanted to jump in and answer these two questions. An AR is absolutely, hands-down, the best predator (coyote, fox, etc) hunting rifle there is. Almost every serious coyote hunter uses an AR. It is accurate, semi-automatic, and capable of taking several animals out of a pack. .223 is the ideal caliber for predator hunting as it can reach way out there, is accurate (if quality ammunition or reloads are used), cheap, and small enough that it does not damage the fur too much.

Regarding .223 as a hunting round, it is the preferred round for predators, vermin (think groundhogs), and other smaller game. I've personally taken a deer with a .223. While the deer was a clean, quick kill, it is not my preferred deer caliber (I usually use a 30-06).

To answer your question about semi-autos and hunting, beyond what I stated above regarding predators, you're largely correct. Most hunters use a bolt-action rifle for big game hunting, myself included. Semi-auto is all but a must when hunting waterfowl, although this is done with shotguns, not rifles. I've put thousands upon thousands of rounds through my Benelli semi-auto, and can't imagine going back to hunting waterfowl with a pump-action (how I started).

LonelyYou were the one who said just as much killing could be carried out with a five dollar hunting knife, and that a fore grip was neccesary to control recoil lol.

Why would you ever need to hunt with an ar? Especially when they are usually chambered in 223.

Why would you need any sort of tactical attachment? I'm not being triggered, I genuinely want to know.

Home defense?
Hunting?

Why is a hand gun not sufficient to defend your house. Why is a hunting rifle not sufficient for hunting. I don't hunt with semi, and I don't know anyone who does, besides a friend who is a small pest exterminator.

The thing that upsets me the most is not the guns or the gym debate itself, it's that no matter what anyone's beliefs are, the government could give less of a shit. If it was in their favor to take away guns they would have done it already. They don't care about you or me or anyone else.

I would have no issue with it being more difficult to get guns, and increasing the penalty if you get them illegally. I already think it's to easy to get a driver's licence, and that's still easier to get an easily modifiable rifle.

LonelyWhy would you ever need to hunt with an ar? Especially when they are usually chambered in 223.

SkiBum.I’m left. I think most republicans these days are fucking idiots. Especially anyone that still backs Trump.

Yet I own numerous guns. Have a CCP. Shit, I own a fucking Mack 10 and an Oozi.

Guns are not the problem. It’s people.

Make them harder to get. I’m all for extensive checks and crack down and all the left shit. Why? Because I can still get one. Why? Because I’m not a kook and will pass the tests. Also the bad guys will get guns and shoot people no mater what the laws are.

SkiBum.I’m left. I think most republicans these days are fucking idiots. Especially anyone that still backs Trump.

Yet I own numerous guns. Have a CCP. Shit, I own a fucking Mack 10 and an Oozi.

Guns are not the problem. It’s people.

Make them harder to get. I’m all for extensive checks and crack down and all the left shit. Why? Because I can still get one. Why? Because I’m not a kook and will pass the tests. Also the bad guys will get guns and shoot people no mater what the laws are.