Ongoing US Mass Shooting Thread

[T@T]

Originally Posted by driveway

The United States made a choice hundreds of years ago to consider the right to firearms inherent and inalienable. There were at the time very good reasons for this choice and, while those reasons have changed over time, there are still some fairly good rational arguments why this right should remain.

There is, of course, a consequence to this choice and that consequence is 30,000 deaths a year.

The United States continues to value the right to arms above the value of 30,000 deaths, and that's a choice the United States is entitled to make. If the people of the US decide that 30,000 people are more valuable than the right to arms, then the place to start - the only avenue really - to reducing that number is a repeal of the 2nd amendment.

People who are passionate about gun control in the US should only be talking about repeal of the 2nd, no other measure makes any kind of sense, nor would it have long-term impact.

That this position is politically unpopular is absolutely true. However, simply because it's unpopular doesn't make it wrong or pointless. It is where the discussion should begin for people who care more about 30,000 lives than the right to bear arms.

200 years ago, Canada, Australia, the UK and many others also allowed firearms to anyone who wanted them but like life itself those countries evolved.

Australians had the same backwards thinking that Americans have today in the late 90's "you can't have our guns" "guns are our right"...bla bla bla. but after a 10-12 year span of multiple massacres it took a determined PM John Howard(I think) to stand up and say enough!

Like ourselves in Canada ask any law abiding Aussie , English, Scot or whoever if they hate their gunlaws and the answer is a big NO.

[T@T]

Stupid idiots, Please! Sorry folks but if someone kills a member of my family on purpose(murder) I want him/she dead in the most cruel of way possible.

"I will never be able to hold her again, but I forgive you," a daughter of victim Ethel Lance said. "And have mercy on your soul. You hurt me. You hurt a lot of people but God forgives you, and I forgive you."

Jesus F'n Christ, What's the more ######ed thought in America? Guns or God.

Stupid ass dummy's.

[PeteMoss]

Errr what? Her mother just died and you are going off on her reaction to it?

[pylon]

Originally Posted by T@T

Stupid idiots, Please! Sorry folks but if someone kills a member of my family on purpose(murder) I want him/she dead in the most cruel of way possible.

Jesus F'n Christ, What's the more ######ed thought in America? Guns or God.

Stupid ass dummy's.

Although I am too vindictive and atheistic myself to forgive someone for something like this, if part of her healing process is to look to God, and to forgive him, perhaps that makes her a better person than you or I. If all followers of religion were like her, you could claim it makes the world a better place. Unfortunately that's not the case.

Regardless, she should be free to heal however she chooses without being called an idiot or ######.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

Maybe I'm misunderstanding a majority of you. Are you referring to tightening gun laws in the US?

What are everyone's thoughts on gun laws in Canada?

Canadian gun laws are a mix of reasonable requirements and nonsense based on ignorance and fantasy. The most prohibitive parts are still based on the false assumption that criminals will follow laws and the appearance of certain firearms.

There are parts of the laws that should be stripped out altogether and there are things that should be added. Unfortunately, our MPs have no issues lying in the House about guns in order to push their own agenda/opinion (no matter how uninformed that opinion is) and the Coalition for Gun Control has no issues lying to the media in order to spread fear.

The biggest difference between Canada and the US is the fact that the gun laws in Canada are federal, not provincial. The provinces can enact certain measures, but not to the extent that the states can in the US.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

Canadian gun laws are a mix of reasonable requirements and nonsense based on ignorance and fantasy. The most prohibitive parts are still based on the false assumption that criminals will follow laws and the appearance of certain firearms.

There are parts of the laws that should be stripped out altogether and there are things that should be added. Unfortunately, our MPs have no issues lying in the House about guns in order to push their own agenda/opinion (no matter how uninformed that opinion is) and the Coalition for Gun Control has no issues lying to the media in order to spread fear.

The biggest difference between Canada and the US is the fact that the gun laws in Canada are federal, not provincial. The provinces can enact certain measures, but not to the extent that the states can in the US.

Overall Canada's laws seem to work ok. If they somewhat infringe on someone's rights to use a deadly weapon as a toy I'm ok with that.

[llwhiteoutll]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Overall Canada's laws seem to work ok. If they somewhat infringe on someone's rights to use a deadly weapon as a toy I'm ok with that.

What about the parts that do nothing to improve safety and don't make logical sense?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

What about the parts that do nothing to improve safety and don't make logical sense?

Sure if there are some that truly make no sense, but I'd err on the side of being absolutely sure a change is needed. I would also see this as way down the priority list

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by T@T

Stupid idiots, Please! Sorry folks but if someone kills a member of my family on purpose(murder) I want him/she dead in the most cruel of way possible.

Jesus F'n Christ, What's the more ######ed thought in America? Guns or God.

Stupid ass dummy's.

You've just shredded any moral high ground you had in your anti-religion stance. You don't have to accept or even like religion to recognize the teaching of forgiveness as one of its great contributions to humankind. It doesn't require any faith in super natural powers, just a bit of humanity.

You've shown yourself to have neither.

[Acey]

9 shot at a Detroit party, 1 dead, 1 critical. Then again, 30+ have been killed in Chicago this month already rendering this almost a non-story.

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/5...court/33693190

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by T@T

Stupid idiots, Please! Sorry folks but if someone kills a member of my family on purpose(murder) I want him/she dead in the most cruel of way possible.

Jesus F'n Christ, What's the more ######ed thought in America? Guns or God.

Stupid ass dummy's.

You should really just stop posting. Hopefully God gives you the strength to do that.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by T@T

Stupid idiots, Please! Sorry folks but if someone kills a member of my family on purpose(murder) I want him/she dead in the most cruel of way possible.

Jesus F'n Christ, What's the more ######ed thought in America? Guns or God.

Stupid ass dummy's.

I bet this sounded really cool and edgy to your 14 year old friends.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by T@T

200 years ago, Canada, Australia, the UK and many others also allowed firearms to anyone who wanted them but like life itself those countries evolved.

Australians had the same backwards thinking that Americans have today in the late 90's "you can't have our guns" "guns are our right"...bla bla bla. but after a 10-12 year span of multiple massacres it took a determined PM John Howard(I think) to stand up and say enough!

Like ourselves in Canada ask any law abiding Aussie , English, Scot or whoever if they hate their gunlaws and the answer is a big NO.

In any nation where police kill a thousand people a year, I'm prepared to listen to arguments that citizens should be armed. I readily admit it's a chicken-and-egg question, but I'm at least prepared to listen to the arguments.

Also, T@T: ... dude, your post is idiotic.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by driveway

In any nation where police kill a thousand people a year, I'm prepared to listen to arguments that citizens should be armed. I readily admit it's a chicken-and-egg question, but I'm at least prepared to listen to the arguments.

Also, T@T: ... dude, your post is idiotic.

Your right, I let loose last night on the booze, I must have read her statement and lost my mind

And the egg came first!

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by driveway

In any nation where police kill a thousand people a year, I'm prepared to listen to arguments that citizens should be armed. I readily admit it's a chicken-and-egg question, but I'm at least prepared to listen to the arguments.

Also, T@T: ... dude, your post is idiotic.

16 cops were shot in the U.S. This year, this appears to have done nothing to reduce police shooting citizens at all, so to sum up you are suggesting 30,000 dead Americans might be a worthwhile price to pay for the 30 or so cops that will die by the end of the year, even though the dead cops won't in any way prevent the cops shooting people.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

16 cops were shot in the U.S. This year, this appears to have done nothing to reduce police shooting citizens at all, so to sum up you are suggesting 30,000 dead Americans might be a worthwhile price to pay for the 30 or so cops that will die by the end of the year, even though the dead cops won't in any way prevent the cops shooting people.

I personally am in favour of repealing the 2nd Amendment and kicking down doors to take guns away, or rather, I would be if I lived in the States. As I don't live there I don't really care what the States decides to do.

I'm simply allowing that there are arguments which could be made against the idea of repealing the 2nd, that some of them could be considered logical, and that one of the ones I would listen to is the argument that Americans need to be able to protect themselves against the police.

Again though, totally personally in favour of a repeal of the 2nd and door-kicking, gun-grabbing laws.

Although, the first people I would take guns away from are the police. That's an important step in my "get rid of the guns plan."

Step one: Repeal 2nd Amendment.
Step two: Disarm the police.
Step three: Make handguns illegal to own or purchase, no handguns get 'grandfathered' into legality.
Step four: Confiscate and destroy every handgun in the nation.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by driveway

Step one: Repeal 2nd Amendment.
Step two: Disarm the police.
Step three: Make handguns illegal to own or purchase, no handguns get 'grandfathered' into legality.
Step four: Confiscate and destroy every handgun in the nation.

I have to admit...I am super curious how you intend to do step 3 and 4 after you have done 2.

[driveway]

It's currently only the outline of a policy. After I speak with my lawyers, policy advisors, and get some polling data I will release the fully articulated "Guy on the Internet's Gun-Policy White Paper."

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

I have to admit...I am super curious how you intend to do step 3 and 4 after you have done 2.

I was wondering that too. But he did not say anything about disarming the largest military ever. Sill wouldn't work though. Wolverines!!!!

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by driveway

In any nation where police kill a thousand people a year, I'm prepared to listen to arguments that citizens should be armed. I readily admit it's a chicken-and-egg question, but I'm at least prepared to listen to the arguments.



Also, T@T: ... dude, your post is idiotic.

Are you suggesting the reason to have guns is to protect against the police?