guns don't kill people

but gun owners do

rappers do

Nope, they're illegal in the UK :[

so are balisongs :(

no need for that redneck.

now go shoot some niggers

shooting some jew will be more usefull

Would love to get into it but it's too much hassle in this country.

get into knives then

or potat poisoning!

I'm glad it's a hassle. Too many idiots in this country.

this is basically terrorism

If you enjoy shooting, find a local IPSC club and learn how to shoot well.
It's an extremely expensive hobby but money well spend.
http://ipsc.org/

keep it in the game man

get off my lawn

from my cold dead hands

did it in the army. was ok. got boring fast tho.

now airsoft or paintball is where i'd go.

anyways - protect your ears at all cost! fuck them up and they are gone for good. tinnitus is a bitch.

YOLO?

why do you like this hobby?, could you explain further than just "being thrilled by it"?

because the constitution allows him to do so

And as always, have nice day.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/nyregion/sh...e&_r=0

I hope you are not trying to construct any link between a school shooting and recreational and game shooting / sporting.

Educational institutions in the US are "gun free" zones. Bringing a firearm is a federal offence. Criminals did not care, do not care and will not care.
Murdering people is illegal, criminals did not care, do not care and will not care.

Why would anyone think that banning guns, will have prevent criminals from owning them or abusing them?

I absolutely don't want to imply a connection between sport/recreational shooting and this tragedy, but the criticism of gun owning law in US is something to be had i guess. To use an example: you can absolutely get a gun in Poland, but mass shooting is a term that doesn't exist here. it just doesn't happen the law is more strict and the process of getting a gun is very difficult and long, but still you can get it done if you really want to.

- Why would anyone think that banning guns, will have prevent criminals from owning them or abusing them?

I call statistics for 500 on that one. please don't tell me it's pure coincidence that countries with strict gun possession rules have a significant lower rate of gun murderers compared to countries where it's 'easy' to obtain a gun.

Could you please link me to your source or name the publication?

I would be really surprised if you can point me to credible research that shows a conclusive correlation between "legal gun" murders (!!!) and liberal gun legislation.

Also correlation does not signify causality: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...nglish.jpg

:) :)
Just for the sake of the argument, lets assume that such statistics exist - how would you prove that people wouldn't just stab or club each other to death if they had no access to guns? (Or shoot each other with illegal guns?)

I don't want or care about proving something. I just think it's not far fetched to believe that when you can obtain guns as easy as smartphones it's more likely they get used.

Maybe you meant "I cannot believe how people think banning guns will prevent ALL crimes" (which is silly of course) and I misread it for "SOME crimes", which in my opinion is obvious.

did you even look at the graph that you posted?

it's a random curve with random numbers on it. shows nothing and proves even less

it's pure coincidence that countries with strict gun possession rules have a significant lower rate of gun murderers compared to countries where it's 'easy' to obtain a gun.

You have to ask for statistical proof of everything I have said before you can say that!

no, I don't.

actually statistically there is an extremely strong link between number of shootings in a country and legalised weapons. (statistics itself teaches us that you cannot say "It is true that they are linked" but you could say that "countries where owning a weapon is legal has a wayyy larger chance to have shootings" I'm not exactly up to date with the numbers though I thought legalized weapons cause around 5 times as many shootings... but I could be wrong on that).

So factually you are wrong in saying that there is no link.

Could you please link me to your source or name the publication?

I would be really surprised if you can point me to credible research that shows a conclusive correlation between "legal gun" murders (!!!) and liberal gun legislation. (Copy and paste from above.)

<<statistics itself teaches us that you cannot say "It is true that they are linked" [...]>>

<<So factually you are wrong in saying that there is no link. >>

These seem to contradict each other directly. Please explain?

as to an explaination to the seemingly contradiction.
Everything in statistic is based upon chance.
For instance you could find "people are more likely to get cancer if they have been in contact with a lot of radioactive material".
However it doesn't say anything about cause and effect. Perhaps some people who are in the proccess of getting cancer seek out radioactive material.

So even though you can notice that there is a correlation between 2 facts, you can only say that you observe that correlation. There is no direct link found as to why it is the case.

However it does indicate that "there is some link" just that it's unknown which. For instance(!) in your example... Perhaps it is the case that people who have a certain mindset about owning/using a gun move to areas in the world where having one is legal.
And the people who have this mindset could be more likely to abuse the gun for evil purposes.


As to the source I have trouble finding any report which is free (aka a scientific paper that explains all the figures)...
But if you just look at the data www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/sta...cs2012.xls it should be fairly obvious.
Most countries that have "strict or banned gun policies" have a homicide rate of about 1 - 3 per 100.000 residents.
The other countries (less strict rules) are mainly around 4.5 - 7 per 100.000. (which is a seriously large percentual increase)

Ofcourse there are some rediculous figures there as well in countries that have a lot of turmoil in them (el salvador and mexico to name 2 of them). But in general you can see a trend.

Btw might I add that a LOT of research is free where they compare "crime rate per gun" which then they say "drops significantly when guns are legal". Which is only logical because if guns are illegal and you have one, chances are you are already wanting to use that gun for illegal purposes.
This also doesn't tell anything as to "crime rate" or "number of gun crimes" or "rate of gun crimes".

This is logical because:
In areas, where guns are illegal, less people would have a gun, so 'if the 1 guy who has a gun commits a crime with it... it is a 100% crime rate per gun. (1/1 = 1)'
Where when guns are legal there are probably more guns as well which makes the rate drop (gun crime / number of guns). (1/100 = 0.01)

Also I came across research which said that "gun crime vs non-gun crime figures remain equal" which then compared with the other should actually mean that states where owning a gun have significantly more crime. (of which there then is no research being done ofcourse)

Now because both of the later types of research has to been done by people with their head up their ass (how else can you compare such stupid facts with eachother) I am in serious doubt as to if they are of any worth.

The figures actually show the neutral (factual) story so if you want to do your own research with the figures... there they are.

there is also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_...te_note-99 but I dislike wikipedia as a 'factual source'

I bet theyll blame anything except that he probably had easy access to weapons and gun education.

So in your world, easy legal access to firearms and training makes you want to murder people?

I hope you do understand that a lot of people say the same thing about video games.

No, but it makes it very easy to murder people.

No, it just makes it easier for people who want to murder, to obtain tools that are made for that.

When someone snaps, for whatever reasons, ease of access just enforces their willingness to go through with their wish.

Being able to go onto Walmart and come out with gun, or ordering it on Amazon with few day shipping is so easy, that you don't even need to put any second though in it.

As opposite to, for example, having 1 week mandatory wait time and mental evaluation with some bureaucratic registration prior to having gun in the hand. They might cool off, and rethink their issues, or find help during that time.

It won't prevent all, or even most of such events, but I am sure it will save some people.

Being able to just go in shop and buy gun, with absolutely no control, is just retarded, and based on law that made sense and was designed for times portrayed in Sergio Leone movies.

Everyone should have right to own guns, I don't care, but easy access to them should not be a part of this right.

Tell me one situation where you need gun right here and now?

I agree that mandatory cool-down phases are good things - but in my opinion they are not suitable for stopping such events: Most (school) shootings were planned over weeks, months or even years.
No gun ban in the world could have stopped someone like Breivik, just like all the "bomb bans" failed to stop him from building bombs. When someone dedicates their live to killing and hurting others, they will find a way to do it, even in an Orwellian society.

@ffx: I disagree. If the shooters didn't have access to guns and training in gun clubs, they would have stolen or bought on the black market and so on.

Why would you say that gun+training is the problem? I think the problem is that our society tends to harass and mob outsiders and mentally ill people. Most of them will accept that and find "normal" ways to deal with it (e.g. retreat into virtual worlds) but some will start plotting their sick revenge fantasies. Combine that with the 15 minutes of glory effect and there's your recipe for a massacre - with or without legal guns.

This problem is almost impossible to fix, that's why most people prefer easy but useless "ban guns" approaches.

I'm sorry your post is full of shit.

You can't just go around and practice shooting your gun in civilized countries except at shooting ranges which are reserved for gun-club members.

Yes, strict regulation or gun bans are the way to go, look up the numbers for gun-violence related deaths in civilzed countrys like Japan.

The black-market problem is only a factor in the US because they brought so many guns into circulation through their legal gun-market, it is much harder to get a hold of an illegal gun in the civilized world and just FYI Breivik bought his ammo in the US.

Why do you mention bombs, this argument is completely out of place the only bombing on US soil I can think of from the top of my head was a planned parenthood clinic in Wisconsin, bad things happen from time to time but you have much more to worry about than bombs when there's been 4 mass shootings within such a short time. If these people didn't have access to guns they would be stopped if you don't believe me, look up the numbers for mass-stabbings and see for yourself.

Where did I say "You can just go around and practice shooting your gun in civilized countries?" -> Straw man argument.

While we look up countries, why not compare Switzerland or Austria to the UK or to Germany?

The black market is a problem in the US but more-so in many countries of central and eastern Europe. There are loads of illegal guns in circulation which used to be arsenal in the south-east or east of Europe.

The bomb argument is only out of place if you can't grasp a basic logic concept. It clearly demonstrates that a law will not stop a dedicated and moderately smart/lucky criminal. By the way: the Oklahoma City bombing was far worse than any (school) shooting.

So basically your post was full of shit and mine wasn't all that bad.

You questioned whether gun access and training would be the problem, I don't think there would be as many victims if the shooter din't have proper training I'm merely stating that you couldn't bring an illegal gun to a shooting range and practicing outside isn't that easy.

Why would I compare Switzerland (50 gun related deaths p.a.) to Germany (150 gun related deaths p.a.) when the USA (10,000 gun related deaths p.a.) is clearly the problem?

I'm sorry, I live in central Europe and we neither have a problem with illegal guns or gun related deaths (look up the numbers above), stop pulling shit out of your ass. Yes it might get a little iffy when moving east but it's still a minor problem.

Ok, I don't have all the numbers but why I think your argument is out of place is that you have like 0.1 bombings a year but on the other hand you have roughly 6-10 mass shootings a year. You decide what the problem is.

Please explain to me how Americans can live their lives in denial over everything that works elsewhere? Gun regulation, social medicine, welfare, science, high taxes, drug decriminilization, not torturing people, no death penalty, seperation of church and state, I could go on.

"Gun related deaths" can be anything: can be suicides, can be justified cases of self defence, can be people killed by the police and can be gang violence with illegal guns. So your numbers of "gun related deaths" are simply not relevant in a discussion about "murders with legally civilian owned firearms".

So here is the big surprise: I live in central Europe, the gun law in this country is far more liberal than in Germany, yet we didn't have a single school shooting yet. And yes, getting illegal weapons seems to be fairly easy - so if you want a gun you can get it, no matter if they are banned or not.

The bomb argument is still valid: it demonstrates perfectly, that a law can't stop bad things from happening. Need some more examples?
Prohibition didn't keep people from drinking and narcotics laws don't keep people from taking drugs (funny how you acknowledged exactly that in your last paragraph :D )

I can see your points about social medicine, welfare and death penalty, but the rest of that last sentence just shows how misinformed and guided by stereotypes you are:
Separation of church and state is BETTER in the US than in many European countries.
Some states in the US have more liberal narcotics laws than most European countries.
Don't forget that a lot of European government were involved in various torture schemes as well.
Science - LOL just LOL. This really made me rofl.

So yeah, educate yourself, because right now YOU are the one who is pulling shit out of your ass.

no one debates stopping these people, obviously you can never completely stop them but you can make it harder in an effort to have less shootings or less victims per shooting. regulations on magazine size would be an example of a pretty straight forward law that would dramatically cut the amount of victims in mass shootings.

I don't even know why we are debating this, there's too much evidence that the lax regulation on military grade firearms correlates with the amount of mass shootings.

comparing drugs and weapons, nice! what's next, horseshit and telescopes, apples and oranges?

I'm sorry I have trouble thinking of a european country that would give as many votes to a party that tries to force women to carry their rapist's child or that tries to have creationism taught as an equal theory to science in classrooms. The best thing about this is that those creationist motherfuckers sit in science committees and decide what to fund. lol, just rofl, usa not stoopid lololololol - idiot.

Educate yourself and look up the numbers only 50-60 % of christians in the US accept evolution, how you can laugh at someone saying US citizens don't believe in science is a sentiment to your ignorance

Some states in the US have more liberal narcotics laws than most European countries.

yes and most US states have stricter laws than some european countries.
Also I didn't neccessarily meant legalize, read again, DECRIMINALIZE. In most european countries you won't be sent away for life without parole on your third non violent drug offense.

even if european countries have been involved in some torture there's still an effort to get rid of it, especially since every report indicates that the most information you get from torture is false. Courts have now even started ruling that what CIA does to some EU citizens is torture and that the CIA has to pay up.

Lol, try writing a post without foul language for once.

Its not apple and oranges, its the same basic logic applied to different things. But probably you just can't acknowledge this logic because it doesn't fit your "simple solution for simple mind" concept.

There is an European country which absolutely bans all kind of abortions - so you are wrong YET AGAIN. Apart from that, this is hardly what science is about. So nice try but yet again you fail: scientific success is usually not generated in elementary and high schools but in universities and the US universities are doing extremely well.

Your arguments rely on association all the time and not willing or capable to understand real causal arguments and simple logic concepts, so I see no point in further discussing this with you, boy. Take your stereotypes and your ill guided ideological nonsense somewhere else.

how is it the same logic, a drug abuser is typically one that inflicts physical harm to himself whereas a weapon abuser is someone who harms others? I really can't see any connection, please enlighten me.

I said I had trouble thinking about one, not that there isn't one, also there's statistical outliers in everything just like you pointed out how cannabis has been legalized for recreational use in two US states. If you look up the numbers of anti-abortion bills introduced you can't classify this stance as an stastistical outlier but one of the bigger movements in the country.
Maybe this is a bit of a backpedal but I wouldn't consider any of these country, even tho located in europe, to belong to the civilzed world.

Also my abortion argument wasn't about science but the seperation of church and state it just so happens that the same people who fight abortions are the same who want to replace science by their holy book of fairytales.

Yes, universities in the US are doing extremely well even financially, now you could say that is due to huge TV deals for their collegiate athletics programs and the popularity of every one of they courses but the science courses where enrollments are at an all time low, but you'd rather ignore that and rely on association and say since they do well science has to do well, wouldn't you?

Also, I'm sorry to burst your bubble but I'm not painting stereotypes, I'm pointing out facts and draw conclusions from there all you do is deny facts and attack me on a personal level, trying to discredit my arguments by calling me out on swearing and possibly imply racism on my part.

I'm just saying that most of the US citizens (obviously not all) have made their decision and announced to the world that they are ready to pay the price of 20 dead children every now and then to keep their guns. They could've made their voice heard and vote for Rocky Anderson.

In an age where religious bullies try to render science irrelevant, politicians asses belong to corporations, people being unjustly killed and women's rights being taken away, I ask you, how is it possible not to swear in anger?

"Gun related deaths" can be anything: can be suicides, can be justified cases of self defence, can be people killed by the police and can be gang violence with illegal guns. So your numbers of "gun related deaths" are simply not relevant in a discussion about "murders with legally civilian owned firearms".

yes completely irrelevant you stupid fuck. a lot of altercations or bar fights that might end in a few bruises or a broken jaw at worst or even stabbings would somehow end up producing the same numbers of fatalities if everyone carried a gun.

by that logic every country should have nukes because it would mean more security.

JESUS FUCK, how stupid and naive does one have to be to believe in such bullshit

By your "simple logic" we don't need laws at all as criminals wont care anyway.

"Gun related deaths" can be anything: can be suicides, can be justified cases of self defence, can be people killed by the police and can be gang violence with illegal guns. So your numbers of "gun related deaths" are simply not relevant in a discussion about "murders with legally civilian owned firearms".

So you try to dismiss the gun related deaths by the means that you can't exactly say how and why the deaths came? Excuse me how does that make a difference?

Yeah, he's right about science. Europe is above US in both scientists and innovations per capita.

Please explain to me how Americans can live their lives in denial over everything that works elsewhere? Gun regulation, social medicine, welfare, science, high taxes, drug decriminilization, not torturing people, no death penalty, seperation of church and state, I could go on.

=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD=DDD

I believe Amazon.com has policy prohibiting firearms sales.

Well almost all the past school shootings in Germany were only possible because the assassin had access to guns and/or training in a gun club. So yeah I rather think the gun+training is the problem than computer games ;). And seeing what type of guns he owned (according to newspapers) I would certainly say that someone at his age shouldn't be allowed to own these for private use.

it's one of those weird posts again...

at work i shoot with the glock 17..

guns i have fired,
dymaco c7, dymaco c8, uzi, FAL, p90, a shotgun, MAG, Barret .50, browning .50, HK416..

Its fun for once in while.

Nothing compares to the smell of fresh napalm in the morning!

Owned one or two Mosin Nagant. Used to go on hunting in town. Sometimes I was shooting old people, other times young beautiful women. Used to put them on fire then cooking my capture for a good meal. Problem is their flesh is too soft or too strong, and it gave me those damn indigestion problems. Finally I run out of bullets and I'm a vegetarian now, eating also cookies biscuits and all.

i should have a kalashnikov in the cupboard somewhere. Was pretty fun at the time but every kid has one now

me have a potat gun

I just can't believe how many times I've read "There is evidence for ..." without anybody showing evidence of anything.

LOL, agreed! :)

Where is your evident evidence of people writing "There is evidence" without showing any evidence of the evident evidence that they are evidently trying to show?

bowling for columbine

As anyone enrolled in the Swiss army (which is mandatory), I had one of these at home: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_SG_550

But I'm not really fond of weapons. I eventually quit the army to do social service instead, as I hated to have to go every year at their conditions. Much better now.

But you can't get the ammo in Switzerland legally iirc?

Legally no. In practice, some dumb fuckers steal ammunition during the fire practice session (you have to pretend you fired more that you did). They do random checks and if you get caught they won't go too gentle, but still I know some guys who did this successfully and had ammo at home. I think it's rather exceptional though.

Legally, you can go to the practice areas and do regular training on targets. You actually have to visit these places every now and then, or get a fine.

Come get my guns you sissified clowns. Living in a first world country has made all you idiots soft, I don't know why we even argue about guns your not taking them away its impossible. Over half the people in this country will gladly defend their right keep and bear arms.

I like guns too. I use them to PROTECT my house and my family against burglars and felons like every good citizen should. For that purpose, I bought a RPG-7 rocket launcher, a M134 minigun and a M32 multiple grenade launcher. And after all that, if a bad guy manages to bypass all these, I've still got an atomic bomb concealed under the carpet of my dining room and all I have to do is press a simple to wipe out the whole town. Burglars and felons ain't having their way with me. Freedom !

If you live in the US and you follow a male with strong mental problems, there is a high chance he can get a gun.

If you live in europe and you follow a male with strong mental problems, there is a very low chance he can get a gun unless the person has some kind of ties to organised crime.

Shootings is nearly non existant overhere.
You can argue all you want, school shootings is directly connected to your gun hoarding. It is the monthly sacrifice you pay for having them.

amOKchen: the man who singlehandedly stopped shootings everywhere!!!

This is simply not true - many European countries, require no permits or have "shall issue"-policies.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp...online.pdf

Science has been dropped.

american studies does not count btw

Because they would shatter your little world of unsupported claims and biased oversimplification?

you guys are the ones with the problem not us :p

Even if your assumption was correct, you still gave no reason whatsoever, why American studies would not count.

(But your assumption is wrong anyways, because I live in a country where we fortunately haven't had a mass shooting yet, afaik.)

YET

Sure, sooner or later it will happen.

The media is trying their best to make celebrities, anti-heros and role models out of the madmen who commit these crimes. There is an abundance of crazy people with a need for attention and fame (ESR has a lot of those too, right?).

How could mass shootings NOT happen under these circumstances?

inTheory if you had gun control, you wouldn't have many mass shootings under any circumstances

Countries with complete gun bans still have police and military personnel:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woo_Bum-kon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tian_Mingjian_incident

And killing sprees are frequently done with edged or blunt weapons:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akihabara_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi_Yuejun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiguan_kindergarten_attack
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanping_school_massacre


Lack of gun control is not the problem and gun control will not solve the problem.

Since I see most people as missing the point, I'll post two short links (and one long) that actually get to the issue at hand, as I see it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxqEM3LhneA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewtA3qcm3fo

+

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz0AvdqRVnI

=

:)