Ongoing US Mass Shooting Thread

[CaptainCrunch]

I hate reading about any mass murders like this, it just seems to me that the root cause has to be address, and that's making sure that the tools (Guns and knives) don't get in the hands of people with mental illnesses or high stress points.

For guns it should be easy, if you want to buy a gun you have to get a clean bill of mental health from a professional. I don't know what to do about the knives things because frankly unless people are posting I'm going to kill everyone videos on the net we'll just never know.

I have no trouble with hunting rifles with low round capacities, I'd have no trouble with forced marketing of a rifle with a 2 round capacity and a lengthy reloading cycle.

I don't think people need a multi round rifle for hunting, I mean our ancestors were probably better hunters then us with flink locks.

I don't see why people need pistols, I can't think of a single reason why people need pistols, or magazine fed semi auto military classed weapons at all.

The argument about home defense and needing a gun is foolish to me because I think most people are more then likely to kill themselves or family members in a high stress situation. Maybe if we gave people a non lethal varient for home defense things would work better. pepper capsules and expanding bean bag guns, or yes even tasers.

But things are completely out of hand especially in the states where there's little to no monitoring or restrictions on who can get a gun.

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't see why people need pistols, I can't think of a single reason why people need pistols, or magazine fed semi auto military classed weapons at all.

The argument for semi-auto military classed weapons that always amuses me is "I need them for when the revolution puts the government down and I have to do the protectin' of our rights!"

There are seriously people out there who think that when/if the ARMY comes calling, their gun will make a difference. Because the army doesn't have...you know, tanks and fighter planes...

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

The argument for semi-auto military classed weapons that always amuses me is "I need them for when the revolution puts the government down and I have to do the protectin' of our rights!"

There are seriously people out there who think that when/if the ARMY comes calling, their gun will make a difference. Because the army doesn't have...you know, tanks and fighter planes...

I think I made that point earlier in the thread. Seriously, when the constitution was written a good stout jacket had a good chance of stopping a round and it took 1 minute to reload it. Plus the army had the cavalry, which at the time trumped a rifle armed dude with a flintlock rifle.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

For guns it should be easy, if you want to buy a gun you have to get a clean bill of mental health from a professional. I don't know what to do about the knives things because frankly unless people are posting I'm going to kill everyone videos on the net we'll just never know.

Well the one argument that the gun-nuts have that actually holds some weight is that people kill people. This is true and they will likely always find ways to do it. You can't ban anything that's sharp, it's just not feasable. But you could ban knives of certain sizes. Some people would still be killed by kitchen knives and things like that, but I don't know why there is the need to have weapons that do nothing but increase the rate at which you can murder. I don't see why you can't ban things that shoot projectiles over a certain velocity and or rate with a certain size of projectile.

I also have no problem with hunting guns, but if it meant getting rid of all weapons from handguns to nukes, I would be all for melting them down for something more useful. And having the rocket scientists forget about figuring out how to blow up Iran and more concerned with things like renewable energy, world hunger/poverty and space exploration.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by whitetiger

the argument for semi-auto military classed weapons that always amuses me is "i need them for when the revolution puts the government down and i have to do the protectin' of our rights!"

there are seriously people out there who think that when/if the army comes calling, their gun will make a difference. Because the army doesn't have...you know, tanks and fighter planes...

wolverines!!!!!!!

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't see why people need pistols, I can't think of a single reason why people need pistols, or magazine fed semi auto military classed weapons at all.

As a guy who owns both of those firearms you mentioned, this question kind of irks me.

I have both a pistol and the dreaded black rifle of death and I've been asked twice why I "needed" them. Simply put, I've never said I "needed" them. I simply wanted them. Quite a few of the purschases we make in our lives are based on want, not need. Much the same way why a guy buys a sports car that can greatly exceed posted speed limits. Yes, yes, I fully understand the difference.

My reasons were simply the experience. I certainly have no grand dreams of defending house/family or property with any of them, it's never really crossed my mind. I bought them simply because I enjoy shooting and wanted to experience various platforms.

For guns it should be easy, if you want to buy a gun you have to get a clean bill of mental health from a professional.

100% agree but I think there should be even more. Storage laws in the states appear to be a joke. Ease of access without background checks is absurd. On top of making firemarms more difficult to aquire, mandatory storage regulations should also be enforced. It sickens me to read stories about kids shooting other kids with a loaded rilfe they found under their parents bed. That is just stupid/tragic and 100% avoidable.

[Hockeyguy15]

What is so great about shooting a gun? I've done it, it was nothing special.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

What is so great about shooting a gun? I've done it, it was nothing special.

I have shot lots of weapons, and I enjoy it. I enjoy the muscle/body control needed to shoot well. If you ever get the chance to do a junglelane and snap shoot, oh hell yeah! Pumping off rounds from a .50 cal is well, ####ing amazing fun.


But, but, I am willing to forgo this fun for a safe society.

[Hockeyguy15]

To each their own I guess, I just don't get it. Even after I went to the range it wasn't like I felt like I had to go back and do it again.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

To each their own I guess, I just don't get it. Even after I went to the range it wasn't like I felt like I had to go back and do it again.

Different strokes for different folks. I don't get quadding but more power to those that enjoy it. I've tried it and although fun, not something I want to get into.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

To each their own I guess, I just don't get it. Even after I went to the range it wasn't like I felt like I had to go back and do it again.

It is like anything, you see guys on CP that are car nuts, or aviation nuts.


It is difficult to explain, like most things in life.


I do miss shooting, but green makes me look fat.

[Coach]

My thing is that there is a lot of things that people want to do/have but can't because it is a danger to themselves and others. Driving as fast as I can, fireworks, have a fighter jet in my backyard, would all be things/privaleges I would like to have. But I don't because my use of those things can cause harm to others. What if someone wants to set off a mortar in the middle of a city because they "wanted the experience"?

Want experience shooting high calibre/rate of fire weapons? Join the army.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by MattyC

My thing is that there is a lot of things that people want to do/have but can't because it is a danger to themselves and others. Driving as fast as I can, fireworks, have a fighter jet in my backyard, would all be things/privaleges I would like to have. But I don't because my use of those things can cause harm to others. What if someone wants to set off a mortar in the middle of a city because they "wanted the experience"?

Want experience shooting high calibre/rate of fire weapons? Join the army.

C'mon, you're taking this to a huge extreme now. If you have a point to make, great, let's just leave out the extremes.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

C'mon, you're taking this to an huge extreme now.

People are murdering others in mass quantities as lobbyists basically fight for their right to do so and the government does dick all. I'm afraid it's getting pretty extreme.

How is me carrying a mortar around any different than an assault rifle, or a rocket launcher? They're all made for killing people in mass numbers. What is the limit of people something can gun down that determines the difference between illegal and legal?

[CaptainCrunch]

I want a small nuclear device, I think it would be the ultimate deterrent against my neighbors dog pooping on my lawn.

I would love to have a RPG-7, they're the ultimate fun weapon to shoot, but I don't think I should have it.

At the end of the day half the guns don't need to be specifically owned, if you want to shoot a .50 cal, then you should be able to go to a range, take a safety course and get to shoot theirs, same for a bunch of other weapons.

Look, I used to love shooting, there was no greater fun then siting a target, and hitting it.

Feeling the kick, smelling the smells, it was awesome, but that doesn't mean that I should own one.

To me, the concept of hand guns in the house makes little to no sense, I do agree that storage laws really need to be upped and enforced, but the whole argument then becomes, if someone does break into my house, then it takes forever to unlock it and load it, its just as good in the drawer beside my best.

I think that a lot of problems would be solved if they upped the qualification required for owning a gun legally, that means absolutely no previous mental health incidences, no criminal record of any kind at all, and a back ground check that shows that you have a clean background.

I'm also of the mind that if you buy a gun you should have to buy insurance against it being used in any kind of activity that harms or possibly harms others. I would think that if you put that in the hands of an insurance agency that it would become pretty expensive.

On top of that, if you get caught selling a gun illegally or use a gun in a crime, its automatic life in prison, no parole, preferably at one of those State run prison farms.

Its just stupid and pointless, and the mind set has to change.

[GirlySports]

I think it's an interest. Is there really a difference between a guy who goes to the gun range and shoots 100 rounds and a guy who goes to the driving range and hits 100 balls?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think it's an interest. Is there really a difference between a guy who goes to the gun range and shoots 100 rounds and a guy who goes to the driving range and hits 100 balls?

I'd say mindset. A gun is an extention of the penis, the golf club is an extension of athletic mindedness and sport.

Plus I can't think of the last time I heard a prosecutor say "Your owner, the defendant then set this golf ball up on a tee and used his three iron after some deliberation to kill 4 innocent strangers by driving the ball down range into their skulls."

[Coach]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think it's an interest. Is there really a difference between a guy who goes to the gun range and shoots 100 rounds and a guy who goes to the driving range and hits 100 balls?

One goes 3000+ ft/sec and one doesn't.

If he wants to leave the gun there at a safe and secure location, go for it.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by MattyC

How is me carrying a mortar around any different than an assault rifle, or a rocket launcher? They're all made for killing people in mass numbers.

If you can't see the difference, there is no point in engaing in a conversation with you.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think it's an interest. Is there really a difference between a guy who goes to the gun range and shoots 100 rounds and a guy who goes to the driving range and hits 100 balls?

There will be no difference when there are over 12000 murders from golf balls a year in the US.