Big Gun Control Debate

Recommended Posts

Tom    1,190

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map

I've seen right-wingers on here repeat the same talking point on guns over and over here. 'Gun regulation is dumb because most of the mass shooters obtain their firearms illegally anyway'

The facts are in and it shows that's wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tender Foot    47

I'll print these so called facts out and wipe my ass with them, the real facts are in roadwarrior's post

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dippednbutter    117

With a paid circulation of 200,000, Mother Jones magazine is among the most widely read liberal publications in the United States.[citation needed]Monika Bauerlein and Clara Jeffery serve as co-editors. Madeleine Buckingham has served as Chief Executive Officer and Steve Katz as Publisher since 2010.

The magazine was named after Mary Harris Jones, called Mother Jones[6], an Irish-American trade union activist, opponent of child labor, and self-described "hellraiser." She was a part of the Knights of Labor[7], the Industrial Workers of the World[7], the Social Democratic Party[7], the Socialist Party of America[7], the United Mine Workers of America[7], and the Western Federation of Miners[7]. The stated mission of Mother Jones is to produce revelatory journalism that in its power and reach informs and inspires a more just and democratic world.[8]

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nerd Rage    314

YES! MotherJones.com, about as credible a news source as TheOnion.com

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Laughing Man    442

Title should read.

"The opinions on mass shootings and why regulation is a must"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
willgill    80

Never heard of MotherJones. However, consider this, what stops mass shooters? An unarmed citizen? ... no.. it's usually an armed cop or he commits suicide. Police will never outnumber criminals. Wouldn't it be good to help even the numbers with more CHL carriers?

Banning guns only hurts law abiding citizens. Do you really think if these mass shooters couldn't get weapons legally that they would just shrug their shoulders and forget the idea? These nut-jobs are going to get their hands on the weapons regardless of legality.

History shows the first thing a government does to conquer you is confiscate your firearms.

When liberals invent a huge magnet that collects ALL guns from EVERYONE, then I'll listen. Until then, you're probably better off robbing the peacenik down the street than my house.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twiddle    487

Did we really need another thread for this? Just post it in one of the other many gun threads that are going on right now.

Hope a mod merges this into an already active gun thread. I'm not saying it isn't an important issue, I'm just tired of the countless threads on this showing up daily. Keep it in one place, and less fragmented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Azusa    930

I'll put $10 on this thread reaching at least 46 pages.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueScreenOfDeath    416

Did we really need another thread for this? Just post it in one of the other many gun threads that are going on right now.

Hope a mod merges this into an already active gun thread. I'm not saying it isn't an important issue, I'm just tired of the countless threads on this showing up daily. Keep it in one place, and less fragmented.

He'd rather have his own soapbox instead of voicing his views in the other couple threads already open...This proves nothing except the only stated truth - nutjobs will get guns and weapons anyway they can legally or illegally. This really has no bearing on Concealed Carry debates or the 2nd amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chrisj1968    1,415

http://www.motherjon...s-shootings-map

I've seen right-wingers on here repeat the same talking point on guns over and over here. 'Gun regulation is dumb because most of the mass shooters obtain their firearms illegally anyway'

The facts are in and it shows that's wrong.

I think folks in the UK have their own problems rather then worry about issues that UK residents don't even have rights in. As my granddaddy used to say, can't miss what you didn't have."

our government has had connections with BOTH the Aurora and sikh shooters. the latter being in the FBI alliance http://dprogram.net/2012/08/06/sikh-shooter-a-former-psyop-soldier-linked-to-fbis-national-alliance/

as I always ask...

c04f89b0.jpg

and if his family are involved, it will come to light if they aided him. but why did the college ignore the psychiatrists warnings about this guy? reminds me of the West Virginia University shooting years ago. now the college was found at blame for it's failure. so interesting how the gun grabbers are trying their damnedest to find an excuse to revoke our right.

and also funny how after we defeated the British during the war of independence which, also was a factor for the fore fathers writing the second amendment to protect ourselves. they remembered the tyranny that the British crown was using to try and crush the colonies back in the day.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nathaniel Smith_329019    10

http://www.motherjon...s-shootings-map

I've seen right-wingers on here repeat the same talking point on guns over and over here. 'Gun regulation is dumb because most of the mass shooters obtain their firearms illegally anyway'

The facts are in and it shows that's wrong.

A 21 year old know it all lol never seen that before :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aethec    633

http://www.motherjon...s-shootings-map

I've seen right-wingers on here repeat the same talking point on guns over and over here. 'Gun regulation is dumb because most of the mass shooters obtain their firearms illegally anyway'

The facts are in and it shows that's wrong.

Frankly, don't bother creating another thread. Most gun fanatics are unable to listen to (or understand) rational arguments and facts anyway. Just look at all the "hey it's motherjones it has to be wrong because it's liberal hurr durr".

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trag3dy    3,281

Frankly, don't bother creating another thread. Most gun fanatics are unable to listen to (or understand) rational arguments and facts anyway. Just look at all the "hey it's motherjones it has to be wrong because it's liberal hurr durr".

No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueScreenOfDeath    416

Frankly, don't bother creating another thread. Most gun fanatics are unable to listen to (or understand) rational arguments and facts anyway. Just look at all the "hey it's motherjones it has to be wrong because it's liberal hurr durr".

You want those who support the right to have guns to listen to you with a non objective ear, maybe you should try to understand our point and respect it. The biggest problem with people on here are that if you have a difference of opinion then its wrong, you cant simply agree to disagree or respect one anothers opinion on it.

What your side appears to not understand is that not all people want to go out and kill scores of people with their guns, or go running into a temple and mow down people we think are Muslims. There are crazy people out there and if you think there aren't then you're not living in reality. Your argument is to add more regulation and gun laws...and most of our responses are going to be support and enforce the ones on the books now.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevember    135

We need to stop the media making these people famous. Instead make the victims known.

They do the shootings for attention, that is exactly what they get.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eddo89    20

and also funny how after we defeated the British during the war of independence which, also was a factor for the fore fathers writing the second amendment to protect ourselves. they remembered the tyranny that the British crown was using to try and crush the colonies back in the day.

What year did that happen? How is that really relevant today? You don't respect something for history's sake, you look at it objectively and see if is still relevant. Maybe I'm not religious, but you guys always seem to treat the fore father as this all knowing group of people. Maybe I will exaggerate and step on a few toes, aren't they essentially just politicians, or war leaders as politicians? Why must what they wrote back then must be correct and without fault? Bush, McCain, or Clinton might very well the sort who wrote them. And all this protection is simply paranoia, no one will even think about toppling America's army, nor is America the wild west where lawlessness are still common ground. People no longer use guns for protection primarily. It is a hobby. I don't think during the writing if the 2nd Amendment they foresaw a future where people collect guns for play and show. Which probably was bred into the culture because there was an abundance of guns of different variety with a very small need for them as the times get more peaceful.

Still, stats says American's crime rate probably shouldn't be low as it should be, but bad as it is compared to similarly affluent countries, I hardly think is bad enough to have the feeling that you need guns for protection at all times, but I don't live there so what do I know? Though I find it quite petty that people insist on guns because is a right. I could understand if is protection, but so many arguments are "rights" to guns and you somehow think this is a liberty other people really cares about. Not an expert in UK, but I think they have enough free speech, freedom, privacy, access to basic human rights, better healthcare (intentional can of worms here) and they can enjoy this with a lower crime rate (possibly, no data here but from what I understand). Not saying guns won't necessarily reduce it even more, my point is I don't think any Britons envy American's right to have firearms.

I also must ask, how many gun related incident really is stopped by citizen guns? There is a fair few, but that number is dwarved by gun related crime. True, a lot of gun crimes would probably had been knife crime but how you could deal with it is quite different. And there is a lot of talk of illegal guns, but is easier to get hold of guns illegally if you have a lot of guns around. Is certainly not hard for U18 to get a pack of smokes around here, but he probably be looking for a couple months to find a lethal gun if he doesn't know where to look to start with, if he at all could. This is always a conflicting issue. Pro-gun'ers insist it protects them. Anti-gun'ers insist it really doesn't have any impact. Me personally think is a placebo. That or America is horrifying as some of you make it out to be.

What your side appears to not understand is that not all people want to go out and kill scores of people with their guns, or go running into a temple and mow down people we think are Muslims. There are crazy people out there and if you think there aren't then you're not living in reality. Your argument is to add more regulation and gun laws...and most of our responses are going to be support and enforce the ones on the books now.

Not everyone have guns to shoot people with, true. But ease of access makes easier for these crazies. There are people like Brevik and probably the Batman shooter who you probably can't stop no matter the law. And I don't think many developed country has a higher rate of a stabbing spree (Plus shooting spree) that matches with America. Because if they really wanted to kill people, surely they would had found some other way to do it. With guns there and in abundance, is a much easier task to do.

But you not going to take away guns away from Americans. Just like NASCAR, baseball, giant drinks that accompany the equally giant burgers, perception that soccer is a soft sport or the perception they are living in the best country in the world and everyone wants to live there (At least this is the impression I got when I was in LA, maybe is a LA thing but we are getting side tracked). And it probably isn't going to happen even if America somehow thinks guns is a bad idea, for reasons I think is quite obvious. But no pain, no gain (or loss rather). In the end, no one likes mass shooting. And in my cynical view of both sides:

-Pro-guns think the best way to fight a fire is to add more fire (gun access, some even endorsing guns in previously banned areas) and dry wood for it to burn

-Anti-guns think the best way to fight it is with a small bucket of water (Regulation that cannot be enforced readily and thoroughly) again and again even though it failed

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StrikedOut    125

And another gun thread. Wonder how long it will be before it is a USA v's ............. derailment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LiquidCrystalMeth   

Just stopped by after reading the title and wanted to see how many nutters will still defend America's ridiculous gun culture., and their even more redneck incorrect understanding of their own constitution

Yep, there they are, knew i wouldnt be surprised.

Personally im good with Americans getting as many guns as they want, it will just speed up the process of destroying themselves.

Honestly the last two Americans on earth will be standing there with guns trained on the other. and at the moment they both pull the trigger they will both utter the same ridiculous phrase like a petulant 3 year old "its my right"....well, yeah, to like, die ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Windows Nashville    66

http://www.motherjon...s-shootings-map

I've seen right-wingers on here repeat the same talking point on guns over and over here. 'Gun regulation is dumb because most of the mass shooters obtain their firearms illegally anyway'

The facts are in and it shows that's wrong.

Translation: "I found an article on a ludicrously left-slanted website which reinforces my previously held views, therefore I have 'proved' that I'm right."

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yogurtmaster    210

http://www.motherjon...s-shootings-map

I've seen right-wingers on here repeat the same talking point on guns over and over here. 'Gun regulation is dumb because most of the mass shooters obtain their firearms illegally anyway'

The facts are in and it shows that's wrong.

I am not a right-winger. However, the fact is that you have to look at the overall picture here. If you look at what all of the shooters have in common, you will see that they are not right in their mind. They are "Crazy". Getting rid of guns would not solve any of those issues.

They will use Bombs or other means to get to the end resolve. Crazy people do crazy things and getting rid of guns does not solve the issue, it just makes it harder for normal folks to get guns.

You will start to see these kinds of things because our society is getting over medicated and thanks to Ronald Regan in the 80's, most of the crazies are in the streets.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aethec    633

You want those who support the right to have guns to listen to you with a non objective ear, maybe you should try to understand our point and respect it. The biggest problem with people on here are that if you have a difference of opinion then its wrong, you cant simply agree to disagree or respect one anothers opinion on it.

I will not respect anyone who can't read an article simply because it wasn't written by someone who agrees with them. If you think that MotherJones are biased liberals, prove it. Otherwise, read the article and think about it. Biaised articles are usually extremely easy to prove wrong, provided you know some facts and do fact-checking on what you don't know.

The "LALALA I can't hear you" mentality is extremely childish and doesn't lead anywhere.

What your side appears to not understand is that not all people want to go out and kill scores of people with their guns, or go running into a temple and mow down people we think are Muslims. There are crazy people out there and if you think there aren't then you're not living in reality. Your argument is to add more regulation and gun laws...and most of our responses are going to be support and enforce the ones on the books now.

Don't worry, I know that most people aren't psychopaths. But I also know that most people can suddenly want to commit crimes for a variety of reasons. Giving guns to everyone is an excellent way to make sure that anyone motivated enough to commit a crime will try it.

If guns were illegal, a lot of people would stop at the "buy an illegal gun from some shady dealer" part and think twice. Simple example: A man discovers his wife is cheating on him, and gets very angry. If he has a gun home, he might try to use it in a fit of rage. If he doesn't, he will not go buy an illegal gun to kill his wife. Psychology 101. Same thing with street gangs. It's easy to get into a gang and pretend you're powerful with your guns you just bought, but it's hard to actually go and find a gun dealer to buy an illegal gun and then get into a gang.

The main argument of the pro-gun movement is that guns are necessary for protection. But most of the crimes you are defending yourself against wouldn't happen if guns weren't legal. If it's a hardened criminal who wants to commit a crime, then he'll buy an illegal gun somewhere. But that kind of criminal will not be put off by the fact you have a gun, because he knows how to prevent that. Otherwise, they may abandon because of your gun, but their gun is most likely legal.

If guns prevented crime, the U.S. crime rate would be extremely low. The fact is, it's insanely high.

Other argument: the government will try to enslave you because you weren't able to defend yourself. Either the government actually does that, and then you die because a guy who sometimes goes to the shooting range will not survive for a minute against trained soldiers with much more effective weapons, or the government doesn't, and then that point is moot.

If you really wanted to defend yourself against the government, you'd be advocating that everyone should get military-grade training, plus military equipment at home, and armies should be formed to resist in case of a war. Go tell that to the public, they'll think you're insane.

Besides, we're talking about guns in public here. I can understand the need for a gun in a safe for people who live outside of a city or someplace where the police isn't effective just in case. But people who buy dozens of guns because they like that should be put in an asylum. We're talking about weapons made to kill people here, it's not a hobby. If you want to shoot targets at the gun range, you don't need to carry a gun 24:7.

The whole "let's just enforce what exists" thing is not what's happening. Pro-gun advocates are constantly pushing for less gun control - be it Ron Paul who wants to nuke all gun-related laws, the NRA and the GOP who claims that Obama is evil and will nuke gun rights, or Obama himself who signed a few regulations allowing guns to be carried in Amtraks and national parks. The pro-gun movement in the U.S. does not want to preserve the statu quo, it wants to have as much guns as possible and carry them everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom    1,190

Wait... so because it's a left leaning site, right-wingers are just going to outright deny the facts because the facts disagree with them?

Wow, what ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yogurtmaster    210

Wait... so because it's a left leaning site, right-wingers are just going to outright deny the facts because the facts disagree with them?

Wow, what ignorance.

Look at this list below of the article that you, yourself quoted. Now eliminate guns so that they are illegal.

Are they still going to do the crimes of "Mass Murder" and the answer is yes. The key here is "MASS MURDER".

See, here is my logic. Bad people are bad people and they will do mass murder in any way that they can.

Eliminating guns does not solve this problem, because they will go out of their way to kill people.

The fact is that they would use other means to accomplish the same goal. Making firearms illegal doesn't even put a notch

in their goal, they can just easily find a way to either buy a bomb or put one together using instructions found on the Internet.

The Goal is still there and is still a problem. Making guns illegal does not change the goal, it just changes the method.

Oh, and by the way, I don't own a gun, I am not a redneck, I am not even a right-winger, but common sense is common sense.

We used the following criteria to identify cases of mass murder:

  • The killings were carried out by a lone shooter. (Except in the case of the Columbine massacre and the Westside Middle School killings, both of which involved two shooters.)
  • The shootings happened during a single incident and in a public place. (Public, except in the case of a party in Crandon, Wisconsin, and another in Seattle.) Crimes primarily related to armed robbery or gang activity are not included.
  • The shooter took the lives of at least four people. An FBI crime classification reportidentifies an individual as a mass murderer?as opposed to a spree killer or a serial killer?if he kills four or more people in a single incident (not including himself), and typically in a single location.
  • If the shooter died or was hurt from injuries sustained during the incident, he is included in the total victim count. (But we have excluded cases in which there were three fatalities and the shooter also died, per the previous criterion.)
  • We included six so-called "spree killings"?prominent cases that fit closely with our above criteria for mass murder, but in which the killings occurred in multiple locations over a short period of time.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
willgill    80
Giving guns to everyone is an excellent way to make sure that anyone motivated enough to commit a crime will try it.

How many times have you gone through the process? Guns aren't given away.

If guns were illegal, a lot of people would stop at the "buy an illegal gun from some shady dealer" part and think twice.

I doubt criminals would hesitate to break another crime. Also, your logic is a great reason to keep pot illegal. We must be stopping a lot of people keeping it illegal.

If guns prevented crime, the U.S. crime rate would be extremely low. The fact is, it's insanely high.Other argument: the government will try to enslave you because you weren't able to defend yourself. If you really wanted to defend yourself against the government, you'd be advocating that everyone should get military-grade training, plus military equipment at home, and armies should be formed to resist in case of a war. Go tell that to the public, they'll think you're insane.

Guns DO prevent crime. Let's look at extremes. How many mass shootings do you see at gun shows? ZERO. I've been to several gun shows lately. I've stood in lines long enough to think we were waiting on the iPhone7. Most in line had AK-47s, AR-15s, class 3 machine guns, pistols, you name it.

Now how many mass shootings where guns are illegal (schools, theaters, malls)? Want more proof that controlling guns aren't the answer? See the case study of Switzerland. If you're between the ages of 20 and 30, you're issued a machinegun as part of their militia. They have very low gun crime. THEY HAVE MACHINE GUNS IN THEIR CLOSETS!

Besides, we're talking about guns in public here. I can understand the need for a gun in a safe for people who live outside of a city or someplace where the police isn't effective just in case.

How effective were the police in these mass shootings? God bless our men in blue, but they're not everywhere. Well trained CHL owners can fill those gaps. Look at where the crime happens, it isn't in rural territories, it's urban.

I grew up in the midwest where about half of the high school students had rifle racks in their back window with at least one high power deer rifle and usually a smaller rabbit gun. During quail season we had shotguns. We parked our trucks right outside the school in the school lot. No one even thought about shooting someone or the guns being a hazard.

What's the difference between then and now? It's not the guns. It's the culture. In my town we had more churches than bars. We played more sports than Xbox. If you were down on your luck, you ran a tab for a month at the grocery store and the feed store. Maybe it's time we focus on what's changed in our culture instead of what hasn't.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.