- 34,898
- 76,785
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
- 728
- 895
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2012
Overall,as previously stated, guns can do much more damage, much quicker than knives. Guns can be fired from farther away and are much more likely to kill. The argument is they kill so well that they should be heavily regulated. In fact, the argument continues, the more effectively a weapon kills, the more we should regulate it. Bombs, missiles, and chemicals also need to be regulated. For instance, ball-point pens, or scissors, which can kill, do not need to be controlled, because they can be used more clumsily and inefficiently to kill in comparison.
- 15,990
- 5,970
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2008
There are more guns in America than there are Americans.
How are we going to even begin regulating guns after the fact? Folks can go out and cop assault rifles privately, they don't need to submit to background checks, wait periods or registration.
Bombs and missiles need to be regulated? Bruh? What? Are they not overtly illegal or am I missing something?What are you talking about famb?
Talmbout regulated
. Ballpoint pens?
View media item 1718983
Last edited:
blco02
Banned
- 3,932
- 1,281
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2001
Pipe bombs are already illegal and they had a freaking pipe bomb factory in their garage.
- 44,157
- 2,482
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2006
I gotta' get off this planet.
- 15,867
- 20,737
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2013
Mars should be ready in 10 years fam. Wait it out....
- 29,663
- 39,386
- Joined
- May 25, 2004
Bumping killa cam, smoking a blunt in a rocket on the way to Mars would be 
you officially made it at that point.
you officially made it at that point.
- 15,187
- 15,958
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2006
Last edited:
- 9,064
- 1,157
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2009
People don't play by the rules. Let's just get rid of all these laws then.
There's a thing called deterrence. These criminals bought their weapons from Texas, a state with less strict gun laws than Cali. There isn't state border police having people go through security like there is between the U.S. and Mexico. If we regulated gun control at a federal level instead of leaving it up to state governments, then there's a better chance this doesn't happen.
I don't understand the rationale that "We should just let people be criminals, that's what they're gonna do" comes from. As if that even solves anything. I've said this plenty of times on here and I'll say it again: apathy is the worst course of action. Unless you propose some other alternative to this situation, how can you even have the gall to say something like this?
I don't even know what that mess of a statement is at the end of your post is supposed to be
Last edited:
- 29,663
- 39,386
- Joined
- May 25, 2004
We were talking about people being extra sensitive earlier. Do you but if you're all the way out there you should know you might not always make friends with everyone.
Back to the topic. I'm all for a solution but gun control is going to be a waste of resources. Go ahead. Tighten it up, it wouldn't affect me. Let's see if the gun crimes drop.
Mental health> gun control as far as priorities in stopping mass killings. That's what I'm saying. Obviously deterrents aren't working.
You don't agree that mental health is more important than a deterrent gun law? If a sane person is walking around with a gun... Oh well. Not saying throw an ak on your back like those clown hicks on YouTube just because you can. The large majority of gun owners aren't hurting anyone.
The root of the problem is crazy people. To fix that you help them with their mental troubles and eliminate the problem. Not let them marinate in their craziness and make them jump through one more hoop to get a gun. That's just a bandaid.
Disagree with me if you want. That's how I feel.
Back to the topic. I'm all for a solution but gun control is going to be a waste of resources. Go ahead. Tighten it up, it wouldn't affect me. Let's see if the gun crimes drop.
Mental health> gun control as far as priorities in stopping mass killings. That's what I'm saying. Obviously deterrents aren't working.
You don't agree that mental health is more important than a deterrent gun law? If a sane person is walking around with a gun... Oh well. Not saying throw an ak on your back like those clown hicks on YouTube just because you can. The large majority of gun owners aren't hurting anyone.
The root of the problem is crazy people. To fix that you help them with their mental troubles and eliminate the problem. Not let them marinate in their craziness and make them jump through one more hoop to get a gun. That's just a bandaid.
Disagree with me if you want. That's how I feel.
Last edited:
Belgium
formerly colombia
- 26,038
- 37,334
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2013
I know Belgium's a tiny country but we used to have very loose gun laws. Many people owned guns and it wasn't really hard to get them.
My dad owns 9 rifles for example. Back in 2006 we had a mass shooting where some guy bought a shotgun and started a spree in broad day.
3 weeks later the government made a legislation that would drastically alter the guns laws. Now only registered members of a shooting club or hunters with a hunting license are allowed to have guns. The government also asked that people would turn in their guns to register them and take them and they actually did. Tons of gun owners turned in their guns for registration, something hardly anyone expected. Failing to meet the new gun ownership regulations resulted in the loss of your gun(s). Many people also freely turned in their guns to be destroyed by the local police. Roughly ~125000 guns were destroyed after the new legislation.
Our society went from embracing guns to near outlawing them. I don't know anyone who has or even wants a gun aside from my dad who is a hunter and his hunting partners.
I think it definitely made our society better. I, and just about everyone else, feel that I can walk around and do whatever I please without fear of being robbed, shot or killed.
Of course people can still buy guns on the black market, we've had a couple smaller shootings they've all been with black market guns (AK47s, FN-FALs, ...) but at least a mentally dernaged person can no longer just go out and legally buy some guns and start a shooting spree all in one day.
Over here we feel safer knowing that guns are very hard to acquire and not many people have them.
Banning guns would never work in the US but at the very least there should be much more strict regulations on a federal level to acquire a gun.
If one state has less strict gun laws than the other what's stopping someone from legally buying a gun in another state and taking it back?
My dad owns 9 rifles for example. Back in 2006 we had a mass shooting where some guy bought a shotgun and started a spree in broad day.
3 weeks later the government made a legislation that would drastically alter the guns laws. Now only registered members of a shooting club or hunters with a hunting license are allowed to have guns. The government also asked that people would turn in their guns to register them and take them and they actually did. Tons of gun owners turned in their guns for registration, something hardly anyone expected. Failing to meet the new gun ownership regulations resulted in the loss of your gun(s). Many people also freely turned in their guns to be destroyed by the local police. Roughly ~125000 guns were destroyed after the new legislation.
Our society went from embracing guns to near outlawing them. I don't know anyone who has or even wants a gun aside from my dad who is a hunter and his hunting partners.
I think it definitely made our society better. I, and just about everyone else, feel that I can walk around and do whatever I please without fear of being robbed, shot or killed.
Of course people can still buy guns on the black market, we've had a couple smaller shootings they've all been with black market guns (AK47s, FN-FALs, ...) but at least a mentally dernaged person can no longer just go out and legally buy some guns and start a shooting spree all in one day.
Over here we feel safer knowing that guns are very hard to acquire and not many people have them.
Banning guns would never work in the US but at the very least there should be much more strict regulations on a federal level to acquire a gun.
If one state has less strict gun laws than the other what's stopping someone from legally buying a gun in another state and taking it back?
Last edited:
- 34,898
- 76,785
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
No one said "we should just let people be criminals."People don't play by the rules. Let's just get rid of all these laws then.
There's a thing called deterrence. These criminals bought their weapons from Texas, a state with less strict gun laws than Cali. There isn't state border police having people go through security like there is between the U.S. and Mexico. If we regulated gun control at a federal level instead of leaving it up to state governments, then there's a better chance this doesn't happen.
I don't understand the rationale that "We should just let people be criminals, that's what they're gonna do" comes from. As if that even solves anything. I've said this plenty of times on here and I'll say it again: apathy is the worst course of action. Unless you propose some other alternative to this situation, how can you even have the gall to say something like this?
I don't even know what that mess of a statement is at the end of your post is supposed to be
We're just saying that gun control laws will NOT deter mass shootings.
- 14,361
- 19,348
- Joined
- May 14, 2013
I think he's speaking on the attitude of "criminals are going to do what they want regardless of gun control laws, so why even bother" which is a sentiment I see all the time.
say it doesn't deter mass shootings, but what if it does lead to a decrease in overall gun related deaths would it be worth it then? I'm not very well versed in gun politics but I have read numerous times that states with stricter gun laws have lower gun related deaths.
Last edited:
- 9,064
- 1,157
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2009
I'm not denying that mental health is a problem. It acts as the republican scapegoat, but they aren't even proactive about proposing legislation to combat it. I agree. But these terrorists showed no signs of any mental health problems. You can't combat something you don't even know about it.
I'm not saying all gun owners are crazed lunatics trying to kill people. If a majority of them won't be affected by gun control, why bother opposing it? A lot of folks are easily swayed and buy into propaganda claiming Obama is trying to ban guns. Those air suckers aren't even worth my attention.
The fact of the matter is we have some of loosest gun laws in the world. There are so many exploitable loopholes in the system literally anyone could buy a gun. Read this: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/12/4/9850572/gun-control-us-japan-switzerland-uk-canada
And a majority of the gun crimes in this country aren't by Muslim terrorists, they're by the conservative nut jobs who embrace the lack of gun control: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/opinion/the-other-terror-threat.html?_r=1
There is simply no reason that we shouldn't enable gun control laws. The ease of getting a gun in the U.S. reflects this.
How would we know that? We've never even come close to passing any gun laws in the past five to ten years.
We have the most homicides by guns per 1 million people out of all countries, you think our loose gun laws and our boner for gun culture don't contribute to that?
- 10,580
- 7,874
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2014
Of course creating a law does not make everybody abide by it but to me, creating a law would outline how the government as a whole views something an allows clear outline on what happens if this law is broken.
People can google murder charges and find out by state how each state views this particular crime and what the possible results are. Does it stop people from killing people, obviously not but it does deter some people from killing somebody knowing that they're looking at a lengthy minimum term.
For example you have crooks who will shoot a victim below the waist so they won't be charged with attempted murder
People can google murder charges and find out by state how each state views this particular crime and what the possible results are. Does it stop people from killing people, obviously not but it does deter some people from killing somebody knowing that they're looking at a lengthy minimum term.
For example you have crooks who will shoot a victim below the waist so they won't be charged with attempted murder
- 34,898
- 76,785
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
Yes it would be worth it. I'm speaking in terms of mass shootings like SB and Newtown. Gun legislation talks never heat up when speaking on urban gun violence in general. We all know why. It only becomes an issue when the shock and awe factor of 10+ deaths in one crime enters the equation, as if homicide rates in Chicago and Camden aren't damning enough to want to make a "change."
- 14,361
- 19,348
- Joined
- May 14, 2013
I think that's because many people don't attribute urban gun violence to Americas gun culture. Again I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure poverty and crime, especially violent crime go hand in hand.
- 2,237
- 811
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2015
I wonder who the first mass shooter on mars will be
- 34,898
- 76,785
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2014
Because anyone motivated enough to carry out a mass killing will be able to find a gun, the same way any drunk in the 20's was able to find a speakeasy prior to prohibition being repealed. If it exists and is as plentiful as guns, it's attainable.
We have the most homicides per capita because our culture is basura. But yes, the amount of guns certainly contributes I can't deny that.
- 9,064
- 1,157
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2009
Yes, but a lot of the reason for this is because like alcohol, guns are a widely available commodity. And why is that? Because we have loose gun laws. Literally, if you've ever been to a gun show, the security there is so relaxed that anybody can buy a gun, whether it be convicted felons or those afflicted with mental illnesses.
You may not decrease mass shootings, but you will at least decrease the number of gun related homicides. And that seems more enough of a win that not passing gun control is detestable. Places with more guns have more murders: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/12/8/9870240/gun-ownership-deaths-homicides
Last edited:
- 18,412
- 5,848
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- 1,582
- 1,791
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2014
Theres a bomb threat at Loma Linda Medical Center
- 385
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2010
picked a great first thread to jump back on NT. 
- 29,630
- 1,862
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2003
http://thehill.com/policy/technolog...ibited-from-looking-at-visa-applicants-social
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-malik-facebook-messages-jihad-20151214-story.html
It's hard to read stuff like this and then trust the administration that goes on and on about the most rigorous screening ever.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-malik-facebook-messages-jihad-20151214-story.html
It's hard to read stuff like this and then trust the administration that goes on and on about the most rigorous screening ever.
- 7,884
- 2,014
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
Yo did anyone see how all of LA unified was closed down today due to a threat?! I've never seen measures taken like that to a threat. I mean they're usually fake or someone playing a joke, but it said credible. And the media hasn't really explained it or said who was it from. The world is getting scarier by the minutes. Like I can only imagine having to drop off my kid at school and drive away not knowing if eveythnngs going to go good. Nah fam, not like this. We need to exterminate the evil in this world. And do it quickly.