Page 5 of 41 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 820

Thread: Revisiting Gun Laws in the U.S.

  1. #81
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,039
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jasper17 View Post
    B. it can help prevent or hopefully reduce incidents like the one today.
    Is there any reason to believe additional firearm regulations would help achieve objective B?

  2. #82
    Practice Squad
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    484
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Axil View Post
    I hadn't heard this particular story before, but doesn't this suggest that the gun played little to no role in this?

    If two or three teachers were armed, i don't think we would have seen anywhere near the loss of life that was seen today.

    A surge in gun violence isn't indicative of a need for more gun control, it is indicative of a need for rapid lethal response directed at those perpetrating gun violence.

    For the record, i disagree with the notion that the original objective of having the means to resist an evil government obsolete. I also object to the notion that "intent" is more important than the letter of the law. If laws are so poorly written that they do not reflect the intentions with which they were passed, they ought to be rewritten.
    The china incident just happened today their time

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&g...w=1440&bih=730
    China is a great example of schools have to arm themselves period.Guns or no guns.


    Gun laws I read as a person can defend themselves from a intruder for example not the government.Hopefully.

  3. #83
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,700
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cedk View Post
    The china incident just happened today their time

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&g...w=1440&bih=730
    China is a great example of schools have to arm themselves period.Guns or no guns.


    Gun laws I read as a person can defend themselves from a intruder for example not the government.Hopefully.
    Pretty sure something similar happened a couple of years ago.

    EDIT- Here it is:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/wo...hina.html?_r=0

  4. #84
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,462
    Post Thanks / Like
    I don't care what happens.

    Either we don't have enough gun laws or we have too many.

    Something's gotta give. This is f*cking ridiculous. Something is seriously f*cking wrong in this country.

  5. #85
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,529
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    I don't care what happens.

    Either we don't have enough gun laws or we have too many.

    Something's gotta give. This is f*cking ridiculous. Something is seriously f*cking wrong in this country.
    Too many people are able to buy numerous assault weapons and stockpile insanely huge arsenals. What for? Hunting?

  6. #86
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,547
    Post Thanks / Like
    There shouldn't be any assault weapons. But this goes beyond guns. We have become a morally corrupt society.

  7. #87
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wildcat Country
    Posts
    4,888
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    There shouldn't be any assault weapons. But this goes beyond guns. We have become a morally corrupt society.
    I don't know if we're morally corrupt but we're certainly desensitized to violence. We like violence. I'd even go so far as to say we love violence.

  8. #88
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,353
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by MCBNY View Post
    Please look at the FACTS.

    FACT: European countries regulate guns & crack down much harder on illegal guns.

    FACT: European countries have way fewer gun related deaths, thus making them safer.

    Simple, right?

    There is no reason America can't change its policies to more strictly enforce gun ownership. None! All I want is a safer country.
    Will this result in lesser gun related crimes in South Chicago or East LA?

    I own 2 handguns...I see NO, ZERO reason why I can't. I wasn't required to but took private lessons THEN an required 8 hr safety course so I can carry concealed. I don't, but I can.

    I would be in favor of required safety training but that would NOT have stopped the latest few incidents of horror.

  9. #89
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,751
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    I don't care what happens.

    Either we don't have enough gun laws or we have too many.

    Something's gotta give. This is f*cking ridiculous. Something is seriously f*cking wrong in this country.
    Do you own a gun PK? Just curious, I think of you as a man who would.

    I don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Borgoguy View Post
    Too many people are able to buy numerous assault weapons and stockpile insanely huge arsenals. What for? Hunting?
    It should be pointed out that (from reports) none of the weapons used today was an "Assault Weapon". He had (again, according to the reprots I've got thus far) two normal handguns and a semi-auto (i.e. not bolt-action) small-calibur .223 rifle.

    What would be your suggested policy limit/regulatory ban, specificly, to solve the problem? The problem in this issue always lies in the specifics.

    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    There shouldn't be any assault weapons. But this goes beyond guns. We have become a morally corrupt society.
    Assault weapon is a political term, often used by gun control advocates, typically referring to firearms "designed for rapidly firing at human targets from close range,"[1] sometimes described as military-style features useful in combat.[2]
    So, how about a more accurate desriptor. What weapons specificly should we ban? What types, what styles, etc.

    I'm open to regulation, I really am. But open-ended langauge without specificity is not going to get us there, nor is political terms like "assault weapon". We need specifics to agree on before we can agree.

    Other than a 100% ban, or a ban on say, all guns that carry more than one singel round within them, I'm not sure how to "stop" events like today. Even a bagful of old Colt single-action revolvers can be used to kill multiple people, you just need to bring more than one with you. An average guy could probably carry 4 loaded easily, and a number fo speed-loader reloads. Say 30-40 total bullets, without a problem. Thats still 30-40 possible kills, with the most basic and old school handguns you can get.

    So is the answer no Guns that fire more than one shot?
    Last edited by Warfish; 12-14-2012 at 06:13 PM.

  10. #90
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,039
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by southparkcpa View Post
    Will this result in lesser gun related crimes in South Chicago or East LA?

    I own 2 handguns...I see NO, ZERO reason why I can't. I wasn't required to but took private lessons THEN an required 8 hr safety course so I can carry concealed. I don't, but I can.

    I would be in favor of required safety training but that would NOT have stopped the latest few incidents of horror.
    Just as an FYI he posted that 5 months ago.

    I agree, i don't think gun control stops violence. Some level of gun control may reduce gun violence, but overall, violent behavior will be unaffected. In addition, since law abiding citizens are more affected by gun control than criminals, your going to decrease the instances of successful defense against criminal violent behavior, and thus decrease one of the disincentives towards criminal violent behavior.

    That said, given the tragedy that took place today, I'm not sure this is an environment conducive to rational discourse. Human beings do horrible things to one another. It would be wonderful if we could eliminate these instances through governance, but i do not believe that is possible.

  11. #91
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,751
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Axil View Post
    Just as an FYI he posted that 5 months ago.

    I agree, i don't think gun control stops violence. Some level of gun control may reduce gun violence, but overall, violent behavior will be unaffected. In addition, since law abiding citizens are more affected by gun control than criminals, your going to decrease the instances of successful defense against criminal violent behavior, and thus decrease one of the disincentives towards criminal violent behavior.

    That said, given the tragedy that took place today, I'm not sure this is an environment conducive to rational discourse. Human beings do horrible things to one another. It would be wonderful if we could eliminate these instances through governance, but i do not believe that is possible.
    I.e. probably les outright dead victims.

    And a LOT more injured/crippled/beaten/runover/stabbed victims who may not die.

    But overall violence will remain the same, as a crazy chucklehead intent on harm will find a way to harm. They may just be less able to kill.

  12. #92
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2,031
    Post Thanks / Like
    Tougher gun laws won't prevent people from obtaining guns...period. Did Prohibition prevent people from buying liquor? Which brings me to ask another question. Do you really think tougher liquor laws would prevent people from driving drunk? More people are killed by drunk drivers then with guns.

    I don't have any answers as to how to prevent what happened to today, happening again. I am from a different generation and these types of things did not happen when I was a kid...it's society that is ****ed up and how do you fix that?

  13. #93
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wildcat Country
    Posts
    4,888
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by NIGHT STALKER View Post
    Tougher gun laws won't prevent people from obtaining guns...period. Did Prohibition prevent people from buying liquor? Which brings me to ask another question. Do you really think tougher liquor laws would prevent people from driving drunk? More people are killed by drunk drivers then with guns.
    Actually, tougher drunk driving laws DO reduce incidences of drunk driving. So that's not a good example.

  14. #94
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2,031
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver View Post
    Actually, tougher drunk driving laws DO reduce incidences of drunk driving. So that's not a good example.
    Really? You have stats to back that up? I think it was a great example. Answer my first question. Did Prohibition prevent people from obtaining liquor? My point is, you want a gun bad enough, you get one regardless of any law...

  15. #95
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    4,883
    Post Thanks / Like
    I,m starting to get a bit fat, so is the rest of the US, should we outlaw forks?

    If drunks didn't have easy access to cars then they would not be able to drink,drive, kill innocents, should we outlaw cars?

    More people are killed by falls then guns, should we outlaw ladders?

    Lets outlaw trampolines, bikes, swimming pools, rivers and lakes, Drano,
    Ski Resorts, etc.


    Or we could get serious about how we deal with mental illness.

  16. #96
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,750
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by cedk View Post
    The regulation not allowing guns at school has made the schools a target.


    In china 22 children where stabbed by another nut job.

    I like my idea of developing non lethal weapons to defend one self and then much greater regulation of guns
    You cannot be serious. You want kids and teachers carrying rubber bullets and mace?

    The whole fake cowboy argument of the right that guns should be made more available as a preventive measure is asinine. I've seen highly trained and experienced members of the military have all kinds of accidents/negligent discharge etc. So some teacher with no military or law enforcement background, a 10 safety course and maybe 1 trip to an indoor range should be packing heat?


    I am opposed to gun control and believe in the Constitutionally mandated right to bear arms but making guns more available than they already as some sort of safety measure is stupid is as stupid does.

  17. #97
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wildcat Country
    Posts
    4,888
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by NIGHT STALKER View Post
    Really? You have stats to back that up? I think it was a great example. Answer my first question. Did Prohibition prevent people from obtaining liquor? My point is, you want a gun bad enough, you get one regardless of any law...
    So why not repeal all gun laws then, is that your point? Seeing as you seem to be arguing threat of punishment doesn't prevent people from doing things they shouldn't.

  18. #98
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,750
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by NIGHT STALKER View Post
    Really? You have stats to back that up? I think it was a great example. Answer my first question. Did Prohibition prevent people from obtaining liquor? My point is, you want a gun bad enough, you get one regardless of any law...
    Guns will never be banned in this country. I could care less about the far-right's paranoia. Obama, who everyone keeps telling me is a communist dictator, has done NOTHING to further regulate or ban guns as President.

    Outright banning of guns and even some gun control laws are unconstitutional. 2nd amendment is what it it is. That said, I love how conservatives are more outraged about people calling for gun control then they are about 26 innocent people getting killed.

  19. #99
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,547
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    So, how about a more accurate desriptor. What weapons specificly should we ban? What types, what styles, etc.

    I'm open to regulation, I really am. But open-ended langauge without specificity is not going to get us there, nor is political terms like "assault weapon". We need specifics to agree on before we can agree.

    Other than a 100% ban, or a ban on say, all guns that carry more than one singel round within them, I'm not sure how to "stop" events like today. Even a bagful of old Colt single-action revolvers can be used to kill multiple people, you just need to bring more than one with you. An average guy could probably carry 4 loaded easily, and a number fo speed-loader reloads. Say 30-40 total bullets, without a problem. Thats still 30-40 possible kills, with the most basic and old school handguns you can get.

    So is the answer no Guns that fire more than one shot?
    My definition of an assault weapon is a semi-auto rifle that can be modified to become fully automatic. AK-47, AR-15, etc.

    I agree with your points, I do not think this will prevent these tragedies from happening but at this point I think we should just try it out. There is very little downside to this. People can still hunt and buy regular rifles or shotguns for home defense.
    Last edited by DDNYjets; 12-14-2012 at 07:21 PM.

  20. #100
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    7,750
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    I don't care what happens.

    Either we don't have enough gun laws or we have too many.

    Something's gotta give. This is f*cking ridiculous. Something is seriously f*cking wrong in this country.
    Killing sprees have unfortunately become the easiest way to get famous quick in our society which worships the famous. The little p*ssy in Va Tech, that clown in Ft Hood, the wannabe comic book villain in Aurora, this waste of sperm who did this today - they're all a bunch of narcisistic psychopath fame-whores who had nothing going for them.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us