No, I mean, I get that... I'm asking from the perspective of someone arguing that it shouldn't be banned... what's it for?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Would increased gun regulation have prevented Connecticut?
- Thread starter Deified Data
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, sorry, I reread your post and was like, oh, I'm kind of an idiot, but it's a good post so I'll leave it anyway.
That's my instinctual answer too.. it just seems so reductive :[
I didn't say any of that, I don't have disdain to firearms and I personally even agree that the mental health situation in this country is more pressing than the state of our gun laws, I just noted that whenever we try to talk about our gun laws, gun advocates bomb the discussion with a buckshot of unrelated issues, and in my mind it's done almost exclusively in an effort to prevent discussion about said gun laws.
Listen, the thread was created so heated gun talk discussion won't derail other threads, and even here we can't talk about our gun laws?
Again, there is only one question worth asking here -
Are our gun laws perfect, and if not, how can we change them to achieve better results?
Knives, ADD, depression, mental heath etc. have zero bearing on that question.
el retorno
Member
This is my feeling to. It's always something else so why can't talk about guns.its anoying.
Panipal2009
Banned
Chichikov said:
And lucky you, there's been a reply over at that blogpost, which FWIW is as follows -
You seem to have forgotten to chime in to inform us what additional factors you thought should have been controlled for. Or were you not actually going to come back to us on that?
Chichikov said:
Found a youtube video showing how guns on campus prevented a massacre:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkFMrAMI9SM
Too bad there's no timestamp to show how long it took for the police to respond.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkFMrAMI9SM
Too bad there's no timestamp to show how long it took for the police to respond.
Dreams-Visions
Member
I expect some meaningful reforms to be proposed.
There are things that can pass both houses of Congress, and if anyone can lead the effort to figure out what those are...it's Obama.
It'll have to wait until after the fiscal cliff issue is resolved, but yea...it can be his first order of business after that.
The Lamonster
Member
The executive branch can only do so much. But yeah he was implying some epic shit.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Ended about 15 minutes ago. It'll be up soon enough. The gist of Obama's commentary regarding gun control was:
-We can't let this happen again
-I'll be bringing together mental health professionals and legislators over the coming weeks
-We will have to change
-We have to do something
That sort of thing.
That video is absolutely incredible and harrowing, but what is up with your lead statement?
1. Not a campus, a school board conference room
2. The guy fired off several shots before being taken down, from EXTREMELY close range. He could have killed 3 or 4 people if he had aimed properly. This is a youtube video showing how poor marksmanship could have lessened the body count in Connecticut. :-/
3. The man who shot him is the school board's Chief of Security, and a former cop
Were you implying that armed civilians are a good idea to bring into the mix?
Dreams-Visions
Member
Tomorrow? What's the rush. No serious discussion will happen until after the debt ceiling crisis ends. Then comes the elongated process of putting together a commission...then that commission offering a report with recommendations...then the drafting and back & forth of editing and amending a piece of legislation.
I'd say those who want a 30-rounder have 5 months at least.
that's what he's implying, yes. an armed civilian stopped this man.
Yes he could have killed 3 or 4 people and failed to...but he definitely would have killed 3 or 4 people had he not been shot and gone down. That's a fact, I'd say. So yes, in this case an armed civilian saved lives. Whether it would happen more often if more civilians were armed is an argument I don't feel like having, but it's clear that's what he's suggesting.
Probably reading too much into it, but I figured he meant because they'll all be sold out by the end of the day
speculawyer
Member
The primary murder weapon:
— Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, a civilian version of the military's M-16 and a model commonly seen at marksmanship competitions. It's similar to the weapon used in a recent shopping mall shooting in Oregon. Two men convicted in a series of sniper killings in the Washington, D.C.-area in 2002 also used a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle that they fired from the trunk of a car at randomly picked victims. Lanza was carrying multiple 30-round magazines, police said, though higher capacity ones are available.
If you need multiple 30 round magazines to shoot deer then you are doing it wrong.
Yeah, the next few weeks are going to be big profits for gun stores. There is something pretty disgusting about that.
— Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, a civilian version of the military's M-16 and a model commonly seen at marksmanship competitions. It's similar to the weapon used in a recent shopping mall shooting in Oregon. Two men convicted in a series of sniper killings in the Washington, D.C.-area in 2002 also used a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle that they fired from the trunk of a car at randomly picked victims. Lanza was carrying multiple 30-round magazines, police said, though higher capacity ones are available.
If you need multiple 30 round magazines to shoot deer then you are doing it wrong.
Yeah, the next few weeks are going to be big profits for gun stores. There is something pretty disgusting about that.
LAUGHTREY
Modesty becomes a woman
They have them after their extensive military training and service right?
And until 2007, had 50 rounds in a sealed container that was inspected regularly. After 2007 they kept it stored somewhere else, and 99% of the bullets have been returned.
They don't have guns so much as they have hunks of metal ready to go if they ever need to pass out the bullets.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Probably reading too much into it, but I figured he meant because they'll all be sold out by the end of the day
good point. lol.
Yes, but what does that have to do with someone having a mental breakdown and deciding to go on a shooting spree? Or, what prevents someone with a mental disorder from accessing someone's rifle?
If anything, that training would make them more dangerous.
Yeah dude, banning guns would've totally stopped this tragedy.
Adam Lanza was in one of the most stringent states in terms of gun control, and wasn't legally able to buy guns, yet still committed this tragedy.
But yeah guize banning guns from bad guize will totally stop tragedies like this from happening. Keep living in your delusional fantasy world.
Mammoth Jones
Member
I don't believe limiting someone to 3 firearms is going to work either. Remember, firearms in America is a right. Regardless of how you may *feel* about it. It's a right. Not a privilege.
One doesn't have to justify a right. And even if they did. It's hard enough to convince the average anti-gun type of the need for one gun. Let alone more than that.
Dude Abides
Banned
Judging by Obama's track record with Congress, gun nuts have little to fear.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Well here's hoping he surprises you.
helpful. thank you for your contribution.
Neogaf posters have been making me sad in the past couple of pages. Its like you don't understand that people don't need such powerful weapons that make killing children simple. Reducing guns will reduce gun violence. Its amazing how you're shrugging that off. A guy went on a rampage in China with a knife.
Those kids are alive.
speculawyer
Member
Kastrioti
Persecution Complex
(Today, 06:38 PM)
Nice strawman. It is not about preventing this or exactly similar events. It is about reducing the overall number of such shootings. They will still happen no matter what but reducing the number of them would be a good thing to accomplish. And the raw statistics show it can be done.
Aaron Strife
Banned
His percentage of getting bills passed that he sends to Congress is like 98%
Of course, he also achieves such a high number by avoiding sending particularly controversial or partisan items.
Mammoth Jones
Member
Maybe I haven't been reading the same thread as you but I saw a ton of talk about guns.
Some people saying the problem is guns.
Some people saying the problem is not guns and giving an example of something else.
It's that something else that seems to put you off but to be honest I don't want an echo chamber in here about how bad guns are.
We know guns are dangerous. We know we want to keep them out of the hands of people with mental problems.
Gun nuts? Fuck off.
Obama can't do shit because the vast majority of Americans support the 2nd Amendment.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/01/chicago-homicides-reach-4_n_1929015.html
Chicago has the most strick gun laws in the nation, yet has the highest murder rate.
Bad guys will always be able to get guns, dont ban them from law abiding citizens. Especially in the United States of America where owning guns is a measure to counteracting Government abuse in numerous ways.
Gun stores are already packed. If people start to think Obama is going to ban something they are going to buy it all up.
I remember last assualt weapons ban I had a 30 round banana magazine for my ruger 10/22. I paid like $10 for it at Sears or something pre-ban and sold it for over $100.
Especially now with ~280 million guns legally owned by American civilians.
In other countries and cultures this is not the case.
Box of Bunnies
Banned
Get in there Obama. Earn that peace prize.
Sorry for interrupting your circle jerk here, but plenty on GAF and most in America feel differently from your point of view.
You will never prevent situation like this from happening, sorry to burst your bubble.
Adam Lanza was not legally able to purchase guns yet still got them. Shocking. I invite you to come to Los Angeles sometime where most are not allowed to own guns, yet gang violence is still on borderline warfare.
Your pretentious righteousness and delusion will never change the fact bad guys will always be able to get guns and there's not a goddamn thing you can do about it.
It's okay to argue that increased gun regulation is not a desirable policy, fuck, that's what this thread is for.
I just don't think that brining the state of mental health services in this country can be used to support that position.
But enough about the past, let's move forward, you think we shouldn't have more strict gun laws because...?
saltywalrus
Member
People don't need a lot of things. We don't need violent games and movies. We don't need alcohol and prescription drugs. We don't need personal vehicles. We don't need freedom.
I like a lot of things that are not required to live.
Dreams-Visions
Member
dayum.
lol. and what is my point of view? I mean since plenty on GAF feel differently from me, please tell me what my position on these issues is.
You're living up to your tag in the worst possible way. Jesus Christ.
Or should I keep my replies to you under 10 words so that you can follow along? Because your attention span seems hella short. You certainly haven't read any of my posts here. That's for damn sure.
Bad guys aren't committing mass shootings with illegally obtained weapons. Yes, anyone that can look in the face of these children that are bullet riddled, and claim that we don't need to change availability of certain legal weapons, is a bit of a nutter.
Enough with the Americuh bullshit, your rights are removed on a fucking daily basis. You almost lost the right to not be held in prison indefinitely. Gun-Nuts are silent for every single fucking restriction of things like the patriot act, that actually matter, according to your delusions that you're going to be able to fend off the WORLDS MOST ADVANCED AND MOST FUNDED MILITARY KNOWN TO MAN, with your shitty aim, lack of advanced military technology, and a pickup truck.
Certain weapons. What is so wrong with that? If this child wasn't able to borrow his mothers handcannon, we'd wouldn't be witnessing all these round the clock LEGAL mass shootings.
Hey everyone, look! Its Hyperbole!!!!
SPECIFIC weapons do not need to be available to the public. It will reduce tragedies like this. All that other twaddle you fumbled your fingers all over your keyboard for has nothing to do with this thread.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
No, that's how the Swiss army works. There are also lots of civilian shooters using their old army rifles (now turned to semi auto ones) and other kinds of firearms. Switzerland actually subsidizes ammunition as they see training beneficial.
Take a look at the yearly Schützenfest: http://www.srf.ch/player/video?id=68b8e816-10b2-4cb8-9e79-967ca898a125
To be fair, they were registered to his mother who was an avid shooter.
If his mother did not own these guns, he would have had a harder time.
I'd say those who want a 30-rounder should stop and ask themselves why they need to be able to fire 30 bullets before reloading.
Mr_Appleby
Member
I'm not an american, so after I read this I went and read the second amendment. How you could make any kind of contemporary legal policy from that is beyond me. "Arms" could be a knife, or a sword, or a howitzer. It could be one handgun or a million assault rifles.
How about the Well-Regulated Militia's the arms are for, are they still legal?
something tells me commedieu doesn't really know much about firearms.
why do you need a car that goes over 70 mph?
why do you need a car that goes over 70 mph?
saltywalrus
Member
Which specific weapons do we not need?
the scary looking ones.
Dreams-Visions
Member
Yes, very much so.
:-[ You don't have to convince me, I find the article completely arcane (and in case any of you have been wondering, for the record, I do believe that Americans should be allowed to legally purchase and store guns in the home). I disagreed with the DC vs. Heller (which you'll want to look up next) ruling on a number of fronts, along with 4 of the supreme court Justices.
This is not good stuff, Kastrioti. Maybe you want to answer Appleby's question though.
Can you clarify that?
Whoa, what?! Are you referring to the National Guard?
Stinger missiles.
We can all agree on that, right?
So now that we established that as a society we're not only capable but required to make calls about what weapons should be available to the public, what was your point exactly?
Or do you expect a poster on gaf to present you with the final language of congress bill?
I don't, and wouldn't give a shit if they outlawed cars that could go over 70mph.
Dreams-Visions
Member
He hasn't read anything in this thread, as evidenced by his reply to me. From all of his reading of my posts, he managed to gather than I'm advocating banning all guns.
Don't expect him to start reading now.
there are lots of militas in lots of states. For example,
http://www.michiganmilitia.com/index2.htm
(enjoy your stay)
so because you don't enjoy something fuck everyone else who does.
think about that and respond better next time. You're more intelligent than that.
- Status