Virtually every mass shooting has occurred in a "gun-free zone", including this one. These are areas where legal permit holders cannot legally carry. Why don't these happen where people can legally carry, especially when that virtually always means there are MORE guns in the vicinity?
The reality is that guns aren't going anywhere, so given that, why do the major crimes occur in areas where the good people are disarmed?
Remember that the US government (under Obama) were arming the cartels with machine guns - some of which have been confirmed to have killed US citizens and Border Patrol agents (this was the Fast And Furious operation). Criminals will always get guns - gangs in the UK have plenty - so even if you disarmed every citizen, criminals would still have them. And bombs aren't very difficult to make, so suicidal people would likely kill with bombs or vehicles.
No one ever wants to talk about realistic solutions, they just want to take away guns. But the Constitution is not going to make that very easy.
First we need to enforce the laws that already exist. Then get rid of “Gun free zones”. Criminals don’t obey the “Gun free zones” anyway Because they are criminals. Its just fish in a barrel. Only law abiding citizens obey the law. A criminal is less likely to shoot people if they know there is a strong possibility that someone will shoot back at them. Discharging a firearm in public is a crime. Killing somebody is a crime. But yet they still do it. Because they are criminals. Compare states with strong gun laws vs states that have very loose gun laws. There is easily a lot more gun issues in the states that have the strongest laws because, criminals don’t obey the law.
In my country before I was born around the time of the Dunblane massacre a man walked into a primary school assembly armed with a flamethrower. Over in England and the rest of Europe it seems anyone with a lorry license can committ mass murder. What I see as a foreigner living in America is that crime is so out of control that gun ownership is a requirement. The real problem I see in the US is its mental health crisis and over medication of antidepressants. The BBC a few years ago did a documentary that linked mass shootings and antidepressants.
What would be the difference. All you have to do in America is go out and rent a Ford Ranger or rent a U-Haul truck. I was driving a u-haul truck a while back legally, how? I don't know because I'm a terrible driver. It was actually like this clip https://youtu.be/wRyg3BoagTc As far as I know you have to have a federal background check to own a gun legally. It was the same back home, but there were always plenty of ilegal guns available. Dublin for instance is the wild west yet its very difficult and expensive to actually own a gun legally.
I think that the Mass Depression is the result of unattainable expectations. My generation felt that if they went to school and got a good job, did their work and had a good attendance record, success was theirs. We had a strong working class. Jobs were plentiful. Then outsourcing began jobs disappeared. If you wanted a managerial job you need to speak a foreign language. Remember we are a materialistic society. Our well being is based on things and the ability to show others that we can afford things.
Based. We really need to address the mental health crisis, the sheer scale, the causes of it and the pharmaceutical link. Blaming it on guns is the laziest way to sweep the real societal threatening issues under the rug. Even if they know guns will never be banned, it’s actually even more beneficial for them. They (societal “leaders”) never have to address the real problems.
Great ideas. The problem with America is all the leftist law makers refuse to do anything but make another law. Or repeal the “no gun zones” Its so sad. A new law every couple years has not stopped anything. They refuse to see another strategy. Any time someone comes up with a different strategy they shout it down. Ever since the first mass school shooting in 1998. It’s always the same. Scientific method literally says if one idea doesn’t work, try a new one. But they just keep doubling down.
Uhn, yeah! Automatic rifles with graduation and shotguns at banks. MURICA!
Frankly, if Americans don't get a handle on their gun fanatics and implement gun controls, I'm just gonna have to settle in with popcorn to watch 'em all shoot each other.
Sucks, cause there's a good number of reasonable and good Americans I would want to live. But it's like getting emotionally attached to pigs on the slaughter line.
Keep making gun free zones… crazy people love soft targets. There are naturally places that never have problems with crazed gunmen. Gun ranges, police stations, and police bars. Crazed gunmen know they wouldn’t stand a chance at these places, they want to go to the places where No one else has a gun. I carry a gun everyday and never had a problem with that gun spontaneously start shooting people, there needs to be a mentally I’ll person for that gun to cause a problem. Let’s talk about mental illness. if I was ever someplace where an active shooter was to show up, I would shut him down quickly. Because regardless what you believe mass shooters are ALWAYS stopped by good guys with a gun.
It's the challenge of dealing with corrupt, poorly trained humans. The result of this debate/issue is certain... guns will have to be restricted as well as magazines. This is part of the takeover of the country and it's certain as a trickle of water taking down a barn.
But resistance is required. This is all emotionally damaged people, not guns. We know that. But noone here is arguing the restriction of RPG's, nuclear bombs, attack drones (with laser beams, mchine guns, and bombs)... which a well armed militia would have these days.
That said, I support peoples right to have guns, but restrictions need apply. Blech... I don't like myself saying that. The underlying problem is the training of society, but noone is talking about that.. and that is what needs discussed. I once thought of going to school to shoot a bully that hurt my feelings. I realized my dad would beat my A$$ and decided to just take the pain. You see the solution to most issues...
We have a mental health crisis. Please keep in mind that massacres of this nature are relatively new in our nations history with many starting in the 80s there has been a shift in morality and mental health. The weapons are inanimate objects that do nothing when left alone. We can’t blame objects for poor behavior. I own firearms but at the same time I am a mentally healthy man whose religious beliefs forbid murder unless it’s in self defense. If I ever shot someone it would be traumatizing.
Guns will always be accessible. Bad guys will either steal them or buy them off the black market. Remember. Criminals do not obey gun laws. Gun laws only restrict lawful self defense. And lefties will never disarm Americans, which could only be done by force. If they try, we will shoot them. Can you say 'Triple Tap'
Like it or not as a result of decades of very bad cultural leadership created an unprecedented mental health crisis. For everyone nut who kills others there are hundreds if not thousands who kill themselfs.
As a culture thanks to "modern" cultural values like tolerance ("don't judge me") and isolation we are no longer dealing with problems anymore. Those problems as a result just get out of control.
I could make a 12 gauge shotgun out of a couple pieces of black steel pipe, a pipe cap, a screw, a 2x4, and a roll of duck tape that would splatter the small amount of brains you do have, out of the back of your skull… What’s next on the communist agenda, removal of all indoor plumbing? You commies really are stupid.
Weird how the shooter didn't understand that was a gun free zone. Surely more gun laws will change this.
Also weird how it was a black male shooter, the demographic that is overwhelmingly more prone to committing violent crime, who was targeting a specific person, but that was conveniently left out.
MrOracle nailed it. The states that allow concealed or overt carry have better records. The bad guys will always find a way to get a gun illegally if they want to get a gun. Keeping them out of the hands of honest, responsible residents who carry them for self-defense is a sure sign that the area will be one of the next targets.
Guns don't kill people - people kill people. Rather basic, huh?
Well, contrary to what conservatives keep asserting the more guns that are in circulation in the country, the less safe it's going to be. Conversely, however, having no guns is not exactly safe either since a certain number of people will always have guns and that shouldn't have them.
You *can* legally own machine guns in the US (and AR15's in the UK). You just need to prove you're capable of being entrusted with such a weapon. More of that kind of thing for gun owners in America wouldn't even affect most gun owners.
Limit magazine sizes, too. It's been done before (and found constitutional by SCOTUS).
@goaded no, it doesn't i'm changing a magazine and you're still going to stand in the hallway and die. there's nothing you can effectively do to a person changing magazines that you coulnd't have done before or you aren't too far away to do. What "fight back" are you going to do in one second Bruce Lee?
@BoopBoopBeep That's all well and good, but there have been examples of people being tackled when changing magazines (e. g. Tuscon), and also why do you assume I only mean hand-to-hand? Why isn't it a moment to come out from cover and aim (or run like hell)?
@goaded Aim with what? I'm likely hitting up a gun free area (school, shopping mall) so I'm the only one with anything to aim. Everybody can't run. Not faster than a bullet.
@OddBeMe Shopping malls must make a lot of people angry then... but sure. Don't care. I like being armed when they show themselves. I'm sure most of the people I've shot were angry right beforehand. Probably more afterwards. They should have made better life choices. I don't care about some violent strangers feelings.
I like the women in my family/life not having to manually fight off someone twice their size (at least) who intends to violate them. I don't care if they were an incel that got bullied.
I like that my elderly mother doesn't get thrown to the grown in a carjacking attempt. Or run over. I don't care what socioeconomic disadvantages the carjacker had.
Some people just make me happy more once they're dead.
It that what you think then look a the knifing statistics for the major cities over here in the UK, if Firearms are not available those who are are going to 'spree kill' they will find another weapon be that a knife, crossbow, screwdriver, hammer, tyre iron, car, suv, truck, the list is endless. All it really takes is someone to have the will to do the act.
If I put it was harder and longer to be able to get your gun license like a year. If only they did background checks. If only they made a law where you have to put trigger licks, and keep it locked up in safe.. there must be away. Oh wait murican! Where they make money off sick people, guns, and dead people.
In most red states licenses aren’t required. I’m in Texas and have three guns and no license. Went to gun shows, found a private seller who gave me guns for cash. Done.
You’d better be worried odd- your hero Biden is going to make your wife take in illegal MS-13 gangbangers and you being unarmed won’t be able to protect her. Actually, I don’t think you would protect her even if you were armed.
Exactly how was the question racist (you brought race into the discussion)? Your answer sure was, though, as is much of what you have posted here on GAG is. And you might want to be careful when attempting to wield the sword of racism because like any other weapon it can be turned against you, sometimes in ways you may not expect.
In answer to your question about whether blacks or whites are more likely to be perpetrators of rape, have you consulted FBI data on violent crime by race?
Your claim that you would shoot some people if they were raping your wife doesn't come close to aligning with your anti-gun stance and your soft-on-crime mentality (unless of course the "crime" is being opposed to Democratic Party corruption and other abuses). You're against people owning firearms, so how would you be armed with a firearm in order to be able to shoot someone raping your wife?
I believe you brought up ms 13. Like they’re the military wing of the Democratic Party…lol
Sigh…im not against people owning guns. I own three, purchased at gun shows without background checks or IDs. And if anyone was raping my wife, more likely a whitie, yes I would shoot them.
But thanks to economic benefits -tho we could have more- there is far less crime overall. And if we had some limits on guns, less rapists would have access.
LMAO, Odd, you're being deliberately obtuse. How is it "racist" for a guy with one Hispanic parent to bring up MS-13 when they are well-represented among the illegals and those committing violent crimes in the US? Are you now trying to cover up crimes by MS-13? It sure sounds like it.
So you are a firearm owner after all. LMAO. Do you support your firearms being taken away as well?
So you think a white guy is most likely to rape your wife. Do you have anything to back that up with? Or is it just your racism talking?
Odd, everyone knows you're racist, so don't try to deflect and play dumb. What you posted made no sense. I don't know why you have such a soft spot for MS-13 and other criminals (who incidentally, mostly have victims who are also Hispanic).
It's true that a majority of all violent crime (but far from all) has same race perpetrators/victims, but from what you're saying 1) you live in a segregated white area, and 2) your wife is considered white by other people.
So why do get angry with your nickname, "The Scion of Segregation and Slavery"? It's an accurate one!
But let's say your wife is being raped by someone who isn't white or Hispanic. Will you shoot him too, or just slink away? It's not a difficult question. And what will you do when your anti-firearm activism leads to you being disarmed as well? What will you do? Or if there are multiple rapists?
Personally, I think it's dangerous to assume that you would only be attacked by a fellow white, And you're in Texas, where whites are a minority, especially at the age cohorts that commit most violent crimes.
You are very obsessed with talking about raping my wife. I won’t hesitate to shoot you or anyone else. Just ordered hollow points if Scion of Rape shows up.
Well, damn, look how hard it was to drag even that vague statement out of you. The point of using rape as an illustrative example was to see if you could grow a pair of balls and defend her, so it had to be an example that would bring out emotions in you and therefore action. It couldn't be some neutral thing,
Now to correct you (something that has to be constantly done): no one here on GAG is obsessed with raping your wife, so you don't need to threaten me or anyone else. You were merely asked what you would do if it were happening because you're such a soy boy cuck.
Now, Odd, you claim to have majored in English, so there is no excuse for you so badly misusing the word "scion". A "scion of rape", as you so clumsily put it, would be someone who was born because their biological father raped their biological mother (a scion is someone who is an heir to a wealthy family). I've warned you numerous times that your mouth and lack of any impulse control is going to get you in trouble, and saying dumb stuff like that doesn't help your cause, especially now that you've confirmed you're a trigger-happy racist with a firearms collection who bears strong political grudges.
as if criminals submit to laws. criminals get guns regardless of laws so no excuse to make laws. also if MORE people had guns they can stop shooters instead of waiting helpless for cops to travel to a crime scene
Wrong. I prefer Robert A. Heinlein approach: "And armed society is a polite society."
With every law-abiding citizen armed, criminals, mass murderers, gang members wouldn't stand a chance getting away with the laughably easy in & out of jail stuff they do.
Bad take on crime prevention. Simply having access to a means doesn't cause the problem. You want less homicides? Increase the financial stability of the households in the nation's worst neighborhoods.
Why don’t we have armed officers at the schools? I know you don’t want to arm the teachers but we do need to protect our students. Think about this we protect banks more then we protect our youth why is that?
And how exactly would any of those proposals solve anything? School shooters know they're gonna get caught and they want to get caught, they want to be famous and influential, notorious. A gun registry to them is no different than that moronic 'gun free zone' sign. Only way to stop shootings via the metal health route is if you just ban lonely people from having guns. And even then thievery is rampant. Only thing those authoritarian laws are gonna do is make it more difficult for the average person to get a gun that may save their lives.
If those proposals would have so much as helped a single soul you would have said so yourself. And the 'hypothetical question about the future' is one that you want to solve in the first place. Otherwise, why did you post a picture involving a school shooting. But sure, if you think that was just a 'hypothetical question about the future' can you give me a single plausible scenario where your proposals would stop atrocities?
Oh, so you're once again dodging to answer. I wonder why that might be. It's almost like you know I'm right and your proposals are nothing more than emotional grandstanding that aren't gonna do jack shit to stop a single atrocity.
I just told you, I can’t answer because we’ve never tried it. I can point to examples like Australia- former British colony with lots of rural areas surround large metropolises- but I would guess you’d scoff at that too.
Superb Opinion