67% of Americans want to ban assault weapons

Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
jrbritton said:
Let's see here. Chicago has one of the nation's strictest gun control laws and also has one of the highest rates of gun violence in the United States. Vermont has some of the nation's most lenient gun control control laws and one of the nation's lowest rates of gun violence. So you tell me if gun control works. Oh and by the way these shooters could do more damage with a semi auto shotgun a drum clip and some buck shot then a ar-15.
Click to expand...
Gun control works.

Gun Control: How Australia Stopped Mass Shootings | Fortune
Fortune › Health › public health
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://fortune.com/2018/02/20/australia-gun-control-success/&ved=2ahUKEwjpzKKui7zZAhXIx1QKHWoTCRMQFjAAegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw09TlUO7ZvdBWQiLi-LNqec
 
jrbritton

jrbritton

Member
Justin-case said:
Gun control works.

Gun Control: How Australia Stopped Mass Shootings | Fortune
Fortune › Health › public health
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://fortune.com/2018/02/20/australia-gun-control-success/&ved=2ahUKEwjpzKKui7zZAhXIx1QKHWoTCRMQFjAAegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw09TlUO7ZvdBWQiLi-LNqec
Click to expand...
Ok so you ban the ar-15. Problem is there will be all kinds of illegal ones, and if those illegal ar's mysteriously disappear then the shooters move on to an ak. Ban the ak they go to they go onto a scar 16, ban that and the next gun will pop up. School shootings have nothing to do with gun control, they have everything to do with security. Why can someone just walk into a school. They shouldn't be able to. Schools should be completely secure. Stop pushing political agendas and fix the real problem. Secure the schools period.
 
Grandpapy

Grandpapy

Well-Known Member
jrbritton said:
Ok so you ban the ar-15. Problem is there will be all kinds of illegal ones, and if those illegal ar's mysteriously disappear then the shooters move on to an ak. Ban the ak they go to they go onto a scar 16, ban that and the next gun will pop up. School shootings have nothing to do with gun control, they have everything to do with security. Why can someone just walk into a school. They shouldn't be able to. Schools should be completely secure. Stop pushing political agendas and fix the real problem. Secure the schools period.
Click to expand...
Then we can secure,
Hospitals, Libraries, Bus Stops, Gas Stations, Cafe's, Bookstores, Shoe Shops, Swimming Pools, Sauna Beds, Yoga Studios, Barber Shops, 4way intersections, Picking up dog shit in the front yard.

And still be in need of healthcare.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/05/how-the-american-health-care-act-would-affect-mental-health-coverage/528291/

Healthy customers are not profitable.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
jrbritton said:
Let's see here. Chicago has one of the nation's strictest gun control laws and also has one of the highest rates of gun violence in the United States. Vermont has some of the nation's most lenient gun control control laws and one of the nation's lowest rates of gun violence. So you tell me if gun control works. Oh and by the way these shooters could do more damage with a semi auto shotgun a drum clip and some buck shot then a ar-15.
Click to expand...
Hawaii, california, and the northeast have the strictest gun control and the lowest rates of gun violence.

Go be non-smart somewhere else
 
Cold$moke

Cold$moke

Well-Known Member
As a serious gun owner im down for more severe background screening and mental awareness before being able to buy a gun.

Mabey a gun buying license? Cause i agree not every fuck tard should have a weapon.


But come on man, i hate it when a weapon jumps out of a locker and assults me .

Oh wait you said people kill people not guns.


Just cause guns where used would it have better if he used a bomb ? Can i keep my guns then?

We dont have bomb shows yet that im aware of where he could purchase one.

Mabey we should ask all the criminals if they could switch to grenades?
 
Cold$moke

Cold$moke

Well-Known Member
Well sense most these kids doing the shootings are skinny little terds that cant handle life

I guess they couldnt carry grenades due to weight on their weak whiney asses
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
jrbritton said:
Anyone who says they are for anyone commiting suicide should probably see a mental health specialist themselves. Pretty horrible thing to say.
Click to expand...
Gun owners keep bringing this up as if it somehow invalidates the arguments against gun violence. Along with the tag line: People will find other ways to commit suicide. So, my response is one of irritation rather than lack of caring for the ones left behind. I've lost friends to suicide and feel the loss whenever I think about them. Suicide is an awful thing and the people left behind are the ones I do apologize to if that comment leaves them you with the idea I don't care about them. I know how it feels and wish you or any other living person should not have to feel the pain inflicted by another's suicide.

OTOH, suicide is self inflicted and the choice of the person who does it. I have no problem with a gun owner choosing to end their life with a gun.
 
Last edited:
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
907cannabis said:
The top three are caused mostly by smoking cigarettes and could definitely be lowered. Flu deaths can be lowered, oh wait that's right flu vaccines are poison never mind that.

Besides that medical malpractice kills more too can can be prevented.
Click to expand...
LOL

Mass shootings. The killings this week were mass shootings. 17 kids, 17 families, an entire city affected. How to stop that is the topic.

And you want to talk about cigarette deaths, the flu and lets throw in obesity.

Of course, I understand you don't want to talk about how to stop mass shootings by killers using high powered rapid fire large clip fire arms. Because the solution is obvious.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Fubard said:
I'm saying better control in regard to that aspect would go a long way in some respects, but it isn't going to to do anything about the "gang" killings at all which are another issue altogether.

Bottom line is that giving firearms to someone who is a tad "unhinged" rarely ends well, having them in the same house as someone else who is beyond that point is never going to end well, so why shouldn't there be psych assessments, using your medical records and a face-to-face should there be any "history", to weed out the potential for such people to go nuts in the first case?

Won't stop the "illegal" sale and possession, won't stop someone else to go completely monkeypoop in some way, but at least you are weeding out the potential for such things to happen in the first case.

I'll use the UK as an example again, the most famous school shooting, Thomas Hamilton at Dunblane. The upshot was that most firearms were banned except under exceptional circumstances, but nobody answered why someone with a rather "disturbing" history, which came out VERY quickly, had his firearms licences renewed at the stroke of a pen every year. I mean this guy was not only born in the Year of the Fruitbat, he lived every year as if it was the Year of the Fruitbat, his obsessions, known to police, should have had all sorts of bells and tooters going off but they still made sure he had the means, legally, to do what he did. Like with so many, it was preventable, same as better integration of data used, psych evals if necessary, removal of firearms from those with certain conditions until proven to be no "risk", would also cut down the risk of someone being able to go off on one.

And a better integration with health and welfare, especially mental health services, wouldn't go far wrong either. Identify and treat them before they can do anything. Many countries lack in this respect, it's a cost which has benefits that are not easy to proclaim as a "success" so gets pushed by the wayside.

Some factors are easy to see, easy to control. Start with them and then you can concentrate on the other factors which are more complicated, sometimes it's better to thin out the bigger picture out so you can see the interaction of what is buried in the middle than it is to try and deal with too many things at once as that usually ends in the knee-jerk reactions wanted by some as they try to gain the power to shape national policy without being elected, politicising every real issue as they go along, and that sort of reaction never works out well in the end.
Click to expand...
OK, let's use UK for an example:



I'd sure like to have UK's problem with gun deaths. How did they manage that? Oh, wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top