Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Yes I believe it because its absolutely true, guns are inanimate objects they do not just go off, people use them as a tool and some abuse it no different then those who have killed with an axe or a knife or a bat or a car, or used battery acid to assualt people, or planes etc etc etc. The fact is if you look banning guns has not helped the issue, guns are all but banned in chicago yet more people are killed their from gun violence (and violence in general) then in the iraq war earning its nickname chiraq. Australia has banned guns but hasn't seen a decrease in gun violence and while its been moderatley successful, the fact is it has a third of the population of america and a little over half the size of california. With a smaller boarder it is easier to regulate and control what goes in and out america obviously doesn't have that ability so it would be pointless (and incredibly expensive) to try. The issue is why people kill each other rather then getting rid of guns which really would only function as a feel good solution with no actual practical change in the violence.
I agree. But as I see it, by handing out guns to everyone, one could as well give babies access to a certain red button that unleashes nuclear weapons of mass destruction.
This question is as useless as asking which came first the chicken or the egg. Guns cannot harm without someone being responsible. However, people are so unpredictable; how can you determine if a person can be a responsible gun owner? Sane people can have mental breakdowns or lose their temper or accidentally forget to lock their gun safes. Look at all the accidental gun deaths involving children. I think only a small percentage of us truly need the protection of a gun. The rest of us should leave it up to trained authorities.
Yes I agree with the quote. People want to blame a inanimate object *smh*. No, it's not guns who kill people it's people who kill people. Plus there's plenty of ways other people kill other people without a gun. They make guns illegal they might as well make knifes, rocks, belts, and other things people use to kill other people illegal aswell *smh*. It's not doing anyone any good making guns illegal because innocent people need it for protection because there's other killers who get there hands on guns anyways.
Guns don't kill people. But they enable people to kill each other a lot easier. With guns, you can shoot many people from a distance. Give a shooter a knife instead and see how many people they manage to stab to death. My guess would be that they wouldn't be able to kill even half of everyone they would have killed otherwise. Stabbing someone to death takes strength, often requiring more than one stab if you don't aim it perfectly. And by that time, lots of people are already like 50-100 meters away.
Opinion
73Opinion
Yes, unless it's a robotic gun that can shoot things itself. Still a gun is a tool that makes killing people easier vs other weapons, along with you don't need to be close to them at all.
I understand how people want the right to own a gun but honestly there are just too many idiots that can't handle owning one. Yet they still will own it and cause accidents.
Cars don't cause crashes, people cause crashes.
I don't understand why guns are the only tool that is blamed when users abuse them. If a roof collapses, you don't blame the staple gun the contractor used. If you don't take enough notes for a test, do you blame your pen and notebook? Since I tripped while running, do I blame the sneaker company, the shoelaces, or the construction workers who laid asphalt that wasn't ideal for jogging and exercise?
I can understand the argument that guns kill people, just like I can understand an argument that cars cause speeding tickets, and clothes make people look fat. While it is true, it's only half of the equation.
As I understand it, the equation looks like this:
xFirearm + xShooter = xTool (s)
[Where x ≥ 1]
If you agree with that, then you might see my extrapolation:
xFirearm + 0(xShooter (s)) = 0Tool (s)
[Where x ≥ 1]
If there is no one to operate the tool, it is useless.
If Ferrari doesn't hire an F1 driver, their car won't magically win at Monaco, just like a horse without a jockey can't win at the Triple Crown events.
To sum up, I agree with the quote. If a tool doesn't have someone to use it, it's really just a 1:1 scale model.
Blaming the guns is insane. Unless the government also abandons its guns, then all gun control legislation is 100% hypocrisy to begin with.
Countless times, bad guys with or without guns have been stopped by one thing alone: a good guy with a gun. "Gun-free zones" are armed thugs' favorite places to host a shootout. Without guns allowed, what security is able to fight back?
It takes 18 seconds for a trained thug to break into a house and start killing everyone inside. It takes 30 seconds for a homeowner to load a gun and fight back. It takes 8 minutes for police to respond to a 911 call. You do the math.
The Orlando gunman, Omar Mateen, had ties to Marcus Richardson - a man who was also very close to being on an FBI watchlist. Their common threads included ISIS and the Fundamental Islamic Knowledge Seminary, which trains black Muslims in much the way the Aryan nation does - targeting the prison population to win converts.
The legitimate market must never be infringed upon, for the black market (how Omar got his weapons) will never go away. To place guns on prohibition will end even worse than the alcohol Prohibition of the 1930s.
You should all rewatch Cap 2. Zola was right: if enough derelict leaders permit enough sowing of the seeds of chaos, then men will give up their freedom all too willingly.
Except, ISIS will not stop. And our government has been taken over by the Brotherhood of Evil Muslims. The well-regulated militia of us all is the only resistance left. Finnicum was only the beginning. The slaughter will get worse, unless we stop it.
People kill people with guns
People kill people with knives
People kill people with cars
People kill people by getting drunk and beating the crap out of their spouse
People kill people by drinking and driving
People kill people by texting and driving
People kill people by selling them drugs
People is the common factor here.
Passing laws does nothing to stop a criminal. That's why they are a criminal.
Making it harder for law abiding citizens to get firearms makes things worse. In a perfect world, nobody would have guns, but we do not live in a perfect world. That said, since nobody being armed isn't a possibility, the next best thing is everybody being armed.
Whether or not you like guns isn't the point. No matter how much you don't believe in something, that doesn't make it stop existing. Not believing in gravity doesn't make it go away, and neither does not believing in owning a firearm. People kill people, they always have. The tools they use to accomplish this aren't to blame.
Gun could be used for hunting & self defence, or it could be used to take innocent lives. Same goes with knife, you can cut food with it or stab someone. Cook with fire or burn a house down. Its not the object but how it is used. An individual makes that choice.
However guns don't kill people, but guns do make it a lot easier to kill people. Also make it easier to kill multiple people in short period of time. I think Americans need to toughen up their gun laws. Make sure nutjobs don't get their hands on them. But if a person wants a gun he'll find a gun regardless.
obviously people kill people, but I think other people hate guns because it motivates people to actually commit to killing other people because a gun makes the task so easy. If there weren't a gun available, the killer may not be motivated enough to carry out the crime because of the difficulties, that depends on the individual though and how willing they are.
The quote is technically correct in a sense but I disagree with how it is being used.
People using that quote are implying that tougher laws on guns won't decrease gun related deaths.
If less people have guns, that means less people will shoot guns. Hello?
Turning it into an either/or proposition is fallacious, and both sides of the debate often do it.
Like usual, the truth lies somewhere in the middle -- there are elements of both at play.
For me, mentally unstable people kill people, and the use of guns makes them infinitey more efficient in doing so.
Last I checked, gun legislation in Paris is incredibly strict. If I'm not mistaken, you have to provide a legitimate reason to posses a gun in order to acquire one. That clearly didn't stop a mass shooting from occurring.
Unfortunately, gun laws do very little to deter determined terrorists from committing mass murder. We need to focus more on security than on firearm legislation.
A gun cannot point itself, lock onto a target, and fire it's own trigger. Those are all actions done by the bearer of the firearm. A gun doesn't intend on killing, it's an inanimate object with no free will or ability to think. The person holding the gun does all of that.
u If the shooter didn't have a gun, he could have set the club on fire. He could have walked in and exploded a bomb.
If someone gets stabbed, do we say "let's ban knives"?
I agree, but unlike many people from the USA I'm completely against the free sales of weapons. Although I'm in favour of giving a permit to any decent person who needs a weapon for example since they live in a very rural area and need some means of self protection.
But of course, it's the guy who pulls the trigger who decides to shoot :-(
I disagree with this quote, guns are designed with the sole purpose of killing in mind. But, I also support the second amendment. The right to own firearms is a constitutionally protected liberty, and I will always oppose trampling on those.
And I'd also warn people against reactionary politics, remember that's why the patriot act became law, that's why we invaded Afghanistan, and in both cases only a few months after 9/11 America's strongly opposed those decisions.
Furthermore, firearms are responsible for roughly 30,000 deaths a year in the U. S., that's a large number for sure. But, did you know cars are responsible for 30,800 deaths a year in America? Or that 30,000 people in a country of 319 million people represents less than 00.01% of Americans.
So if you ask me, should I sacrifice one if my civil liberties for a marginal amount of safety, my answer is no.
To put it very simply, if you think the saying 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' is a valid argument against gun control, you should probably be wearing a crash helmet for your own safety.
Literally no one is saying guns kill people of their own accord. That's idiotic. But a person is going to find it extremely difficult, if not impossible, to kill dozens of people at once without some sort of firearm. Try committing mass murder with a knife. Not gonna happen. An assault rifle? Much easier.
Enough with the 'guns don't cause violence, so gun control is bad' argument. Guns don't cause violence, but when the only thing stopping any given person from committing mass murder is whether they want to or not, there's a serious problem.
I don't think guns should be banned, but there is no reason for civilians to have assault rifles. I'd be all for more strict control as well.
I mean... guns clearly don't kill people. Neither do bombs. Or nukes. Or land mines. So clearly anyone should be able to carry and operate explosive devices to their hearts content. Sounds fun.
And to all those that bring up the second amendment... you had better not advocate the removal or banning of Muslims from the US. I wouldn't want you guys to sound like giant fucking hypocrites and not follow the first amendment.
If you take away the guns, people will still find a way. Guns aren't gonna stop people from killing
People kill people, but guns make it easier to kill people. If there was a bow or a knife, there's no way the death toll would be that high
guns don't directly kill people, people kill people of course... but the thing people fail to mention in this argument is people with access to guns kill people and no it doesn't matter what kind of access they have to guns, thats moot in point, just that they do have access to guns regardless. it should really be do guns kill people, or do people who have access to guns kill people?
People have to handle the guns. It's not the guns who do the killing, it's the people pulling the trigger. I agree that more restrictive measures should be made as far as who can and cannot purchase guns but you can't blame an inanimate object for something a person did.
It is true that people kill people and guns are mere tools, however, if people didn't have the tools (the guns) available to them, a lot less people will be killed every year in the US. It's that country that has the most problems of massacres, shootings, et cetera, of all the developed countries.
People kill people. Always have always will. Its not right but it hashas been happened for a long time. Yes a gun was involved but that doesn't mean we should take guns away. Where I'm from 99% of people use them to hunt with (feed their families). And protect their the home and families. Just because I carry a pistol on my hip doesn't mean I'm going to shoot everyone I disagree with or everyone that pisses me off. I use my pistol to protect myself and kids.
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions