So gun control, mental health care, and mass shootings

[Ephemeral]

What if nukes were primarily used to blow up asteroids... or rockets used to propel people to the next star system? Or bombs that are used to deconstruct (demolish) buildings? Timothy McVeigh?
I think it's more about what can kill large amounts of people. Hmmm.. drone army.

'Nukes' primary use is to generate power.
eph

[Celestial Jeddak]

'Nukes' primary use is to generate power.
eph

Uranium enrichment.

And enough of the ‘guns don’t kill people, people kill people’ nonsense. Can we agree with ‘guns enable people to kill people faster and more effectively’? If gun control doesn’t work then someone needs to explain away the ‘coincidence’ that USA has the most guns in the world and the most gun deaths in the world. It is quite obvious that gun control does work, just as it has in many, many other countries of the world. We are the fucking morons that allowed NRA and gun manufacturers to play the dumbass politicians who are now saying ‘oh gee guess we now need gun control’.
This tragedy has nothing to do with guns or right to own a gun. It is about allowing ‘making a dollar’ to extend into areas of human greed and stupidity.
eph

Obviously, if guns were not manufactured and were banned there'd be less GUN deaths. There's a correlation between the number of gun owners and gun deaths, as well. The hope is less people would die if guns were outlawed. If weapons of mass destruction (ak-47s) were outlawed... it should reduce the number of people one crazy guy is able to kill, and that would hopefully make a difference. Obviously we shouldn't give everyone a nuke. I do agree that what you said would reduce the number of murders.

[Bioture]

The purpose of a firearm is to kill - that's a good argument except when it's not purposed to kill people. Which is why we shouldn't put guns in a giant box and call them evil. A knife, a car, anything that can kill a person usually has a primary alternative function. Unless we're talking samurai swords.

[Celestial Jeddak]

The purpose of a firearm is to kill - that's a good argument except when it's not purposed to kill people. Which is why we shouldn't put guns in a giant box and call them evil. A knife, a car, anything that can kill a person usually has a primary alternative function. Unless we're talking samurai swords.

Samurai swords are awesome. And that wasn't my argument - just what I thought is a central theme to the gun issue. I believe the primary purpose of a firearm is to kill (could be wrong, i guess) - not necessarily humans. I think we'd have an easier time outlawing something that has a different primary function, oddly enough. Kill, protect, obey, slave... who to listen to..
Your point is perfectly valid.

[Welfare]

It's too late for gun control to be effective.

[gran guerrero]

The evolution of the ranged weapon:

Sling with a rock, a blow dart, a bow and arrow, the crossbow, musket, flint lock pistol, rifle, semi-automatic and automatic guns.

Whether used for hunting, war, crime or security. You can't take away the fact that they are weapons designed to inflict damage from a distance.

[schope]

slippers... the best weapon

[Bioture]

Can't argue with results.

[kthx]

This is a retarded argument, something tragic happens and every liberal, and politician decided to take it upon themselves to demonize something. I think you should all read the history of gun control and the countries whose civilians lost the ability to own weapons, and what happened to those people. Guns are very useful for things besides killing other humans, they can be used to kill other humans but really the main point of guns isn't the gun itself, it is the knowledge that a population is armed, that is the point of the second amendment. Never will another country, or our own country truly be able to subjugate our citizenry due to the fact that we are able to protect ourselves and that very possible fear is always in the minds of countries foreign and domestic.

But seriously, read up about countries who passed strict gun control laws in the past and the genocides it has caused.

[Bioture]

“If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

[gran guerrero]

This is a retarded argument, something tragic happens and every liberal, and politician decided to take it upon themselves to demonize something. I think you should all read the history of gun control and the countries whose civilians lost the ability to own weapons, and what happened to those people. Guns are very useful for things besides killing other humans, they can be used to kill other humans but really the main point of guns isn't the gun itself, it is the knowledge that a population is armed, that is the point of the second amendment. Never will another country, or our own country truly be able to subjugate our citizenry due to the fact that we are able to protect ourselves and that very possible fear is always in the minds of countries foreign and domestic.

But seriously, read up about countries who passed strict gun control laws in the past and the genocides it has caused.

I'm lazy can you just link me to it

[Crescent Seal]

If some lunatic really wanted to carry out a mass shooting then I doubt stricter gun laws would stop him. It would just make it a bit tougher.

[Celestial Jeddak]

This is a retarded argument, something tragic happens and every liberal, and politician decided to take it upon themselves to demonize something. I think you should all read the history of gun control and the countries whose civilians lost the ability to own weapons, and what happened to those people. Guns are very useful for things besides killing other humans, they can be used to kill other humans but really the main point of guns isn't the gun itself, it is the knowledge that a population is armed, that is the point of the second amendment. Never will another country, or our own country truly be able to subjugate our citizenry due to the fact that we are able to protect ourselves and that very possible fear is always in the minds of countries foreign and domestic.

But seriously, read up about countries who passed strict gun control laws in the past and the genocides it has caused.

Why shouldn't this apply to nations? Only the US and responsible countries can have big weapons? Ok. Fine. Don't kill me.
Anyway... I hate all christians! So... mental health care insurance? It's great when mental health problems are taken care of, imo.

[kthx]

The real tragedy here is your lack of reading comprehension and that very pathetic attempt to troll the thread.

[Ephemeral]

This is a retarded argument, something tragic happens and every liberal, and politician decided to take it upon themselves to demonize something. .

So the logic is that anytime a mass killing occurs we should avoid any discussions about possible root causes? Am I missing something, that makes little sense to me.

I think you should all read the history of gun control and the countries whose civilians lost the ability to own weapons, and what happened to those people. .

I do know the history of gun control just as i know the history of guns themselves. You cannot have an intelligent discussion about one without the other. The guns that were around in the 1700’s are obviously not the same thing as they are today. What makes things difficult is not a ‘gun vs. no gun’ situation, it is that guns have evolved into something far more capable of mass killing.

Guns are very useful for things besides killing other humans, they can be used to kill other humans but really the main point of guns isn't the gun itself, it is the knowledge that a population is armed, that is the point of the second amendment. Never will another country, or our own country truly be able to subjugate our citizenry due to the fact that we are able to protect ourselves and that very possible fear is always in the minds of countries foreign and domestic. .

A armed population, even with automatic assault rifles, is no match for any decent army or government in the world. The days of being able to counter-balance the armed forces of any government passed well over a century ago. You know about the attempts that private citizens have tried to make against the US government. Going back centuries; the Indians had guns and we pushed them around with no problems. Even in modern history, lessons in Oklahoma and Montana clearly demonstrated that if the government wants you, no matter how big your stash of guns are, they will get you.

But seriously, read up about countries who passed strict gun control laws in the past and the genocides it has caused. .

I’ve read about these countries and their homicide rates are about 15 times lower than that of US, which has some of the least amount of gun control laws. You can download these stats here Homicides by firearms. If you don’t trust the UN and want a the 30 second sound bite, consider Wikipedia stats for just the homicide numbers, you can clearly see that those countries with stricter gun control laws have much lower rates.

Simply put, the justification for allowing private citizens to arm themselves as some kind of means to fight their own government or invading forces only applies to 5-10 of the smallest third world countries in this day and age. In the US we lost this justification about 150 years ago and truth is that we are not allowed to own any kinds of arms that would give us any kind of fighting chance at even holding out against the government for a few days.

I do agree that if the world declines into zombie chaos that having high powered weapons such as assault rifles would be a good thing. But in the mean time government power has long ago evolved past being able to be influences by private citizens gun ownership. And guns themselves have evolve far past the need to shoot some food, shoot some targets, or shoot some guy coming in through the window of your house.

In my opinion it are these evolutions that gun control laws need to address.
eph