Freshmaker
I am Korean.
Knives. They are unstoppable.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Would increased gun regulation have prevented Connecticut?
- Thread starter Deified Data
- Start date
- Status
Thanks for posting that. It all makes so much more sense than how we do things here.
Escape Goat
Member
Ninjas
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
Actually, I'd argue in favor of concealed carry by a responsible wielder via this argument:
A clearly visible weapon introduces a gun into an environment where there was none before. While this may strike fear into the hearts of mentally stable criminals, and reassure mentally stable civilians, a mentally unstable person with the desire to do harm could see and then attempt to obtain the weapon. "Hopefully" they'd get shot by the carrier in the process, but if not, suddenly the entirely process that might have denied the mentally unstable individual the gun in the first place has been circumvented.
TheContact
Member
spoke with a guy who has a similar AR the killer used and asked him why civilians should be able to own ARs. He said for hunting and that no one was going to take his away from him, but he says he can't remember the last time he used it. If the killer had a couple handguns, which is the most civilians should really need to carry, there would still be gun violence and deaths, but at least the casualties would be greatly reduced.
People will just build their own knife-shooting guns. The ultimate weapon.
This is getting way off-topic but a digital assault alongside highly targeted assassinations (whether using guns or not) would likely be the most effective approach were this to occur.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
This. This is how it is in most states.
KingofSarus
Banned
Totally don't get the picture. At all.
No.
An equally senseless tragedy is an equally senseless tragedy. Whether a gun or knife was involved or children passed away or not.
Yeah.
I sure am.
Over 20+ children isn't the same number of damage?
Banning or increasing gun regulation wouldn't had done anything. That's the point.
If he wanted to do harm to those teachers/students, he would've done so anyway he could.
I know, right?!
How idiotic.
Moral Panic
Member
I don't believe that your view reflects the realities of the matter at all.
Really? You do know guns shoot bullets from them right? Last stand on their home front. That'd be some terrifying scenery. As to the topic, I can't fathom what evil people are capable of but tighter gun laws much like prohibition, won't change the demand, it will just alter the supply method.
Since we in the US of A are seemingly gun happy (and I plan on purchasing a firearm in the next couple of months for home protection) the first step is education. Secondly, the other factor in this is mental health. If we don't have a good way of identifying people who do this sort of thing, we need to take a long hard look at what types of preventative measures are possible going forward. People who are calling for a ban on all guns going forward that think that it will stop future events like this from happening are out of touch with reality.
Incendiary
Banned
Hm. I never really thought about it like that. That's a fair point.
I mean, the whole reason of the Constitutionality of owning guns. It wasn't so you could protect your home from savage Indians or escaped negro slaves on a rape rampage. It was so every person could have a stake in defending liberty itself on a personal level, I think. But today, that context doesn't apply. So when they bring out the 2nd Amendment, why they don't change how it's viewed and interpreted, I only assume they're afraid of what would happen next.
finger fucking and then killing them? my god, man.
Moral Panic
Member
I think this is where you're missing the point. They aren't equal at all.
TheContact
Member
the average civilian doesn't need to carry a concealed weapon. a lot feel it as a right the constitution offers them after they've proven they are able to get the license for it and because it makes them feel protected, even though carrying a gun statistically puts you more at risk. there are a lot of instances where people have had their lives saved because they had a weapon to defend themselves
Devolution
Member
What really strikes me as fucked up is this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Seegrist
I remember watching some show and once she was on meds and able to deal with what she had done she apparently said it was ridiculous how easy it was for her to get a weapon. This was in 1985. We sure have made a lot of headway.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Seegrist
I remember watching some show and once she was on meds and able to deal with what she had done she apparently said it was ridiculous how easy it was for her to get a weapon. This was in 1985. We sure have made a lot of headway.
AstroNut325
Member
If my one and only child were to be killed via a gun massacre I would devote my entire life to making guns completely banned in this country.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
Where on earth is the equality here. I'm speechless.
What if something happened to the country where cops and the military can't help you? They are humans with families just like you are. If we were thrown into a situation where the government doesn't exist anymore how are they going to help you?
How do you rate tragedies? The amount of dead bodies? What was used? How people die?
TheContact
Member
the reality is that if this kid didn't have an AR he either 1) would have found another way, 2) used a less devastating weapon. i'm not saying if guns didn't exist this kid wouldn't have killed people, he just wouldn't have been as effective at it. it's not a solution, I know, this kid was really fucked in the head apparently. guns are a means to an end in this case.
That's the kind of knee jerk emotionally based reaction I expect to happen out of this.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Alright, a post with bullet points to discuss!
Ultimately, I think the NRA can scare away any real reforms, but we need to seriously improve our mental health screening and put some more resources into the background checking mechanisms currently employed. It's been almost 5 years since the Va Tech shooting, yet few meaningful improvements to the gun screening system can be found. It's gotta change. But can it, and is the public will really there. I just don't know. As for the illegal gun market...it will always be there. The US is not like other nations in history, culture or composition. it's hard to tell what will work here to reduce these crimes.
agreed.
yes.
Unrealistic. Consider the costs alone for policing 50 million Americans in this way. The manpower alone makes it unrealistic. Also, the interrogation and psych evals part doesn't address the guns that have already been sold. But damn, imagine how much time it would take to give full, proper psych evaluations to everyone who owns or wants to buy a firearm. I can imagine appointments running out 12-18 months at a huge cost to the public.
Unrealistic, expensive. It may bring some peace of mind to you to know that this is already done for owners of Class 3 weapons. Those are items like automatic rifles and suppressors (silencers). The process of being able to buy a Class 3 weapon is extremely extensive and thorough. It requires getting written permission from your local police chief (iirc), an application submitted to the ATF, a 6-month wait, and unannounced checks to make sure the class 3 weapon(s) in question are secured. This is realistic because the number of Class 3 permit holders is extremely small. Again, I believe this level of enforcement to be unrealistic when scaled up to 50 million gun owners and 300 million guns. That's time and resources taken away from things police offers really need to be doing in cities and states with tight enough police budgets as it is.
indeed, they have no counter-balance. partially because fear lasts longer than love and hope...and the NRA is much better at scaring up support than the pro-regulation crowd. Few lobbies are as powerful as the NRA and I can't imagine what a counterweight would look like.
No. Gun shops are not the problem. Regulation enforcement is the problem. Also, Gun Shows, which manage to skirt the existing background check system.
Yes.
Expensive, unrealistic. trained guards at every school in the Union? About 135,000. To have enough trained guards and metal detectors to secure every school? Do you have any idea how much that would cost? Where would the money come from? School districts are cash-poor as it is.
Firearm manufacturing in the US is a pretty secure process. It's pretty damn secure in every country, as far as I'm aware. The issue with illegal guns hitting the market isn't secondary to some sort of clandestine activities by gun manufacturers. This isn't 24. The issue is with them being sold across international borders after being sold responsibly to gun resellers. Also, guns stolen from responsible gun owners.
Hell yes.
Unrealistic. The ports are literally impossible to secure. Not enough manpower and too many shipments coming in and going out. We'd have a hard enough time stopping a nuclear bomb from getting through a port, let alone boxes of illegal guns/ammo.
Maybe, but if you remove the ideas that are probably unrealistic (financially or in terms of ability to enforce), I think people would be fine with it.
That's going to happen if any serious regulations get passed. If there's money to be made, someone will step up to fill it.
Ultimately, I think the NRA can scare away any real reforms, but we need to seriously improve our mental health screening and put some more resources into the background checking mechanisms currently employed. It's been almost 5 years since the Va Tech shooting, yet few meaningful improvements to the gun screening system can be found. It's gotta change. But can it, and is the public will really there. I just don't know. As for the illegal gun market...it will always be there. The US is not like other nations in history, culture or composition. it's hard to tell what will work here to reduce these crimes.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
In the context of a thread discussing gun control, yes.
Help me do what? What are they helping me do now? Where are we going with this? My lunchbox is packed.
KingofSarus
Banned
Okay, okay.
I'm done.
Y'all right.
Both aren't equally senseless tragedies, because American children died. Got it.
And its more than just that. I've seen statistics saying that gunshots have a 22% mortality rate while stab wounds merely a 4% rate. Thats already huge. That means you have almost a 1 in 20 chance of surviving a knife attack compared to a 1 in 5 chance of surviving a gunshot.
But consider how quickly it occurs. You dont have to be skilled with a gun to cause serious harm in a very short amount of time. You can fire a shot off, disable a person at the least, and continue to fire on the next target within seconds. A knife attacker, assuming the person doesn't put up any fight whatosever, has to get up close, make the attack and then actually move on to the next target and repeat the process.
And of course a person being attacked by a knife has an actual chance of protecting themselves. You cant stop a bullet, but you can stop a knife. So you not only have a chance of surviving this if you do get stabbed, but you actually stand a chance of preventing the stabbing from occuring.
Last, but not least, is the perp's motivation in undertaking all of this. It strikes me as much riskier to actually have to get up in a person's face to kill them than it is to stand back and pull a trigger. Any coward in the world can shoot a gun from a distance, even if its just a small distance. It probably takes much more determination to risk your own well-being to stab somebody.
Undeniably, a world full of kniving maniacs is superior to a world full of gun-toting maniacs. I'll take that any day of the week.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
If a friend of mine got stabbed I'd be horrified and griefstruck. If a friend of mind got killed I'd feel like a piece of my heart was ripped out of my body.
Straight over your head.
Every time.
Also, I'm not American.
No, you lunatic, the children in Connecticut are dead. They're not going to be attending school again. Their parents cannot sit with them at their bedsides while they recover. They don't get to learn anymore, or graduate, or become doctors or astronauts. They won't be able to experience joy or laughter or reassurance that there are better days to come. Their parents will have to bury them, and their lives, just barely having fucking started, were snuffed out by someone wielding a gun on the same day that someone wielding a knife, supposedly with the same intent, attacked roughly the same number of children but thus far has failed to kill any of them.
It is an "equally senseless tragedy" because the motivation to attack fucking children under any circumstance cannot be sensible. But I bet if you asked the parents of the children in China who are holding their very much alive children in their arms right now, and the parents of the victims in Connecticut, they would agree with me and with one another that the scenarios are not the same.
That was it for me. I hope I contributed rationally in some ways to this thread up to this point; my blood pressure is indicating to me that it is time to bow out.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Well said. All deadly weapons are not created equal.
Help you from people trying to hurt you or your family for what you have and what they want. Countries go to shit all the time. Yes, the US is more stable than most of the world but you never know what might happen.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
This specifically strikes me as unrealistic paranoia, akin to hoarding gold in case the US dollar crashes.
Yeah, that's not going to happen in this thread when you have people calling the NRA a terrorist organization. So good luck, I suppose?
thezerofire
Banned
It would have been equally senseless tragedies if Chinese children had died. That's the point you're missing: children dying or not. It's like life itself doesn't mean anything to you. Like it's some theoretical concept and not the actual emotions, thoughts, memories, and relationships of real people.
jamesinclair
Banned
Because theyre paranoid, ignorant, and proud.
They dont understand stats, so they have issue driving (very dangerous) but yet worry that someone, somewhere might try and do something, and they, and only they, can stop it, instead of, you know, being dead already....or the much more likely incident of never being exposed to the situation at all.
Its essentially a mental illness, which is what makes the "stop mentally ill people from having guns" so amusing.....theyre the first in line to buy as many as possible.
I mean, just look earlier in this page....some lunatic claiming that an injury is exactly the same as death.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
Libertarian friend at work arguing gun restriction are not the way because baseball bat's are responsible for more murders. Of course the FBI website has guns at around 8,500 and blunt objects at around 600. Wow, so wrong.
I'm not some crazy prepper but it doesn't help to think about the future.
Do these roving bandits also have guns, or are they similarly armed with kitchen cutlery and sports equipment?
No we don't have to collect guns for doomsday, because doomsday is going to kill most of us anyway. I'm not anti-gun in any way, but that argument is a bit tiresome, that we need guns to prepare for the fall of government. We didn't need guns for that reason before...
well, who are you going to trust? The stealing government? Or your trustworthy friend?
thezerofire
Banned
Real question: What purpose does the 2nd Amendment serve our society today?
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
Ignore those posts then?
schwabdizzle
Banned
One fucking Lunatic kills people and all of a sudden gun control comes back into topic. Yes, there is an issue with gun control in the US...they are too easy to get and criminals can get thier hads on them. Should you take them all away.....absolutly not. People will kill people by any means.
Devolution
Member
Have you seen the Postman?
tycoonheart
Member
Yeah people will kill. So lets try not to do anything about it.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Who said take them all away? But on this same very day someone went on a stabbing spree on a school in china and not one child died, even though 22 were injured. So no, people will not always kill by any means.
Anticitizen One
Banned
What disgusts me is that nothing ever changes after these tragedies. After 9/11 literally everything about travel and American security changed but after an outrageous amount of mass shootings zero has been done or talked about. It's like "oh yea what a real tragedy" for a few days and then everyone just goes back to normal. Tighter regulation and monitoring of gun owners, improved mental health programs, and getting rid of some really retarded gun laws should have all happened by now.
I'd be fine with legislation that actually would do something to stop horrible events like this but what would that be? Ban all guns?
It's really the same as anything else where the actions of a criminal or mentally unstable person impacts what other responsible people can do. If a man drinks a lot of alcohol and then drives, killing a bunch of innocent people do we ban alcohol?
soul creator
Member
Hell, Indiana Jones already proved this like 30 years ago
yeah it's a Hollywood movie, but the general point is valid
- Status