(Jul 11, 2016, 04:50 PM)Enzyme Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 04:10 PM)Mr.Sir Wrote: I don't get it why Americans love their precious guns so much that they ignore the fact that they are the main reason of all these shootings

Americans are paying a big price for the right to own a firearm. I just wonder if it's worth all the lives that have been lost and will be lost in the future.

(Jul 11, 2016, 09:12 PM)Preditor Wrote: Topics and discussions like these never get anywhere amirite.

(Jul 11, 2016, 09:38 AM)jarz Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 05:05 AM)George Wrote: If you can provide more examples of when a gun has stopped a mass shooting compared the the number of mass shootings there have been then I'll start to reconsider my stance on the matter.

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://thefederalist.com/2016/06/29/concealed-carrier-prevents-mass-shooting-at-sc-nightclub/ Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://thefederalist.com/2016/06/29/concealed-carrier-prevents-mass-shooting-at-sc-nightclub/

Happened 2 weeks ago.

(Jul 11, 2016, 09:40 AM)jarz Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 06:13 AM)George Wrote: Having a police officer in schools might be beneficial, but they don't need to be armed.

It's a cop. Cops have guns.

SRO's (School Resource Officers) get calls just like all other officers during their time on duty.

(Jul 11, 2016, 10:53 PM)Soviethooves Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 09:12 PM)Preditor Wrote: Topics and discussions like these never get anywhere amirite.

Welcome to the US Gun Control thre....I mean Gun Control discussion.

(Jul 11, 2016, 07:28 PM)jarz Wrote:
Gun crime isn't even on this list. Violence is, and it is number 19 at 19,000 deaths. That's violence in general, not just gun crime.

Can Europeans not tell me what problems Americans are having if they have no clue?

@Mr.Sir Therefore, guns are not the issue. Liberals love to claim that there are 300 million guns in households, but how in the hell does that compare to 8,454 gun-related deaths in the United States in 2013?

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls

Let's break this one down.

Those 'high-powered' 'assault rifle variant' 'killing machines', which in actuality is an 'ArmaLite Rifle' (hence 'AR' in 'AR-15') civilian rifle built from the ground up to maintain the asthetics of a military rifle and nothing more, account for 285 of those 8,454 deaths. That's what, 3%?

428 murders in 2013 are contributed to blunt objects, at 428. Are we to ban inanimate tools because criminals found out that the hard end can kill?

687 murders in 2013 are contributed to criminal's own hands. Are we to ban the usage of our hands instead of AR-15s? 

If AR-15's are so high-powered, why do criminals not use them as much as handguns? Sorta confused.

(Jul 12, 2016, 05:32 AM)George Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 09:38 AM)jarz Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 05:05 AM)George Wrote: If you can provide more examples of when a gun has stopped a mass shooting compared the the number of mass shootings there have been then I'll start to reconsider my stance on the matter.

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://thefederalist.com/2016/06/29/concealed-carrier-prevents-mass-shooting-at-sc-nightclub/ Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://thefederalist.com/2016/06/29/concealed-carrier-prevents-mass-shooting-at-sc-nightclub/

Happened 2 weeks ago.

Oh, that happened only two weeks ago?

Ok, well this happened two weeks ago: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/589488 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/589488
And this:  

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/587755 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/587755
And this: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/587769 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/587769
And this: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/589159 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/589159
And this: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/590233 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/590233
And this: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/588918 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/588918
And this: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/589165 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/589165
And this: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/588867 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/588867
And this: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/591294 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/591294
And this: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/591975 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/591975
And this: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/592207 Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/incident/592207

Only if someone had a weapon to stop the suspect.

So that's one potential shooting stopped but look how many shootings have actually happened. Since the Dallas attack on Police Officers on the 7th July there has been FOUR mass shootings. But, at least one potential shooting was stopped right?

Source: 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

(Jul 11, 2016, 09:40 AM)jarz Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 06:13 AM)George Wrote: Having a police officer in schools might be beneficial, but they don't need to be armed.

It's a cop. Cops have guns.

SRO's (School Resource Officers) get calls just like all other officers during their time on duty.

Then they're not "School Resource Officers" if they're not at the school.

Ok. Tell me more on how you know more about American Law Enforcement than me.

(Jul 11, 2016, 10:53 PM)Soviethooves Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 09:12 PM)Preditor Wrote: Topics and discussions like these never get anywhere amirite.

Welcome to the US Gun Control thre....I mean Gun Control discussion.

As a Jim Jefferies once said "Your first amendment means I can say your second amendment sucks dicks". Don't moan about not being able to exercise your 2nd amendment right if at the same time that blocks people from being able to express their first amendment right.

/

(Jul 11, 2016, 07:28 PM)jarz Wrote:
Gun crime isn't even on this list. Violence is, and it is number 19 at 19,000 deaths. That's violence in general, not just gun crime.

Can Europeans not tell me what problems Americans are having if they have no clue?

@Mr.Sir Therefore, guns are not the issue. Liberals love to claim that there are 300 million guns in households, but how in the hell does that compare to 8,454 gun-related deaths in the United States in 2013?

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls

Let's break this one down.

Those 'high-powered' 'assault rifle variant' 'killing machines', which in actuality is an 'ArmaLite Rifle' (hence 'AR' in 'AR-15') civilian rifle built from the ground up to maintain the asthetics of a military rifle and nothing more, account for 285 of those 8,454 deaths. That's what, 3%?

428 murders in 2013 are contributed to blunt objects, at 428. Are we to ban inanimate tools because criminals found out that the hard end can kill?

687 murders in 2013 are contributed to criminal's own hands. Are we to ban the usage of our hands instead of AR-15s? 

If AR-15's are so high-powered, why do criminals not use them as much as handguns? Sorta confused.

Where to start...

First of all, gun violence doesn't always end in death so that chart means jack shit. So far, according to 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting, 64 people have been injured as the result of a mass shooting. These are people whose lives will have been changed for the foreseeable future, if not indefinitely. Also, please stop assuming that gun violence is only perpetrated by a criminal when a percentage of mass shootings are carried out by those with little or no criminal record.

If they are commiting a mass murder, or conspiring to, they're a criminal.

Why do you assume that those reporting the number of guns in American homes must be liberals? Is the number so high that you just assume it is wrong and post no source that can counter that claim?

I am saying Liberals are against guns. There's no denying this, it is a fundamental aspect of being a Liberal.

Now, on to your bit about the AR-15? So ONLY 285 people have been killed by them, no biggie. I mean, these guns hold no actual use for the standard civilian. Home protection doesn't require a rifle capable of shooting 25 rounds in a couple of seconds.

Georgey boy I love you but what you just said is absolutely stupid. AR-15's are not an automatic weapon, and never have been. AR-15's are a proven weapon in home defense, and hunting, a tradition and way of life for millions of Americans across America. You can't shoot 25 rounds in a couple of seconds with an AR-15, however it does require a highly manipulative weapon that will give you the edge over a criminal, who as you just admitted beneath me, choose to use handguns because they are easily concealable.

Criminals don't use AR's because they're not cheap and they're not easy to conceal. Criminals don't want to get caught so they don't carry big guns. However, those who go and shoot up a school, park, shopping mall don't care about being caught or even killed. That's why "criminals" don't carry around AR-15 rifles.

They're actually quite cheap.  And precisely. Criminals don't like to use AR-15's or any other long gun for their shitty way of life. That's why making laws against them is absolutely fucking pathetic. Just because you make a law saying you can't use a rifle to commit a school shooting doesn't mean criminals will comply. We are on the same page here when I say criminals don't follow the rules, right?

I refer you to one of my previous posts where I say criminals are not affected by Gun laws. That is why I am against them. By making legal guns harder to acquire, you're making it harder for peaceful members of society to get them. To quote my exact words on how criminals get their guns, they trade 3 zips and a dimebag in the ghetto for an illegally obtained firearm.

To reiterate: I'm for gun control, in the right area. By making legal guns harder to obtain, you're making it harder for peaceful members of society to acquire them. These guns laws Obama wants do not affect the criminals, and he will never understand this because he has been a top tier politician for 20 years, never living on the bottom. Plus he is a democrat.

(Jul 12, 2016, 06:33 AM)Safira Wrote: 'peaceful members of society'

If you're gonna shoot someone with intent to kill/seriously harm them because they're on your property I wouldn't call that peaceful, just saying.

Refer to my previous post for my stance on all this, I can't be fiddled to start quoting and replying.

(Jul 12, 2016, 06:33 AM)Safira Wrote: 'peaceful members of society'

If you're gonna shoot someone with intent to kill/seriously harm them because they're on your property I wouldn't call that peaceful, just saying.

Refer to my previous post for my stance on all this, I can't be fiddled to start quoting and replying.

(Jul 12, 2016, 06:33 AM)Safira Wrote: 'peaceful members of society'

If you're gonna shoot someone with intent to kill/seriously harm them because they're on your property I wouldn't call that peaceful, just saying.

Refer to my previous post for my stance on all this, I can't be fiddled to start quoting and replying.

(Aug 22, 2016, 08:36 AM)margo25 Wrote: Hello! Should guns be allowed at schools? Certainly, no! Despite it is dangerous, children shouldn't be accustomed to violence and aggression, if you're anxious about this problem as well, follow this source to read more 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: Limelight - Link watcher You're about to enter the following site: https://bigpaperwriter.com/blog/gun-control-essay-eats-shoots-and-leaves Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy. https://bigpaperwriter.com/blog/gun-control-essay-eats-shoots-and-leaves Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://bigpaperwriter.com/blog/gun-control-essay-eats-shoots-and-leaves

(Aug 22, 2016, 09:57 AM)jarz Wrote:

(Aug 22, 2016, 08:36 AM)margo25 Wrote: Hello! Should guns be allowed at schools? Certainly, no! Despite it is dangerous, children shouldn't be accustomed to violence and aggression, if you're anxious about this problem as well, follow this source to read more 

Limelight - Link watcher

You're about to enter the following site: Limelight - Link watcher You're about to enter the following site: https://bigpaperwriter.com/blog/gun-control-essay-eats-shoots-and-leaves Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy. https://bigpaperwriter.com/blog/gun-control-essay-eats-shoots-and-leaves Please note: You should only visit trusted sites. We are not responsible for any loss of your privacy.

https://bigpaperwriter.com/blog/gun-control-essay-eats-shoots-and-leaves

Not sure if bot... or...

(Jul 12, 2016, 05:32 AM)George Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 09:40 AM)jarz Wrote:

(Jul 11, 2016, 06:13 AM)George Wrote: Having a police officer in schools might be beneficial, but they don't need to be armed.

It's a cop. Cops have guns.

SRO's (School Resource Officers) get calls just like all other officers during their time on duty.

Then they're not "School Resource Officers" if they're not at the school.
Yes, yes they are. Police patrol "sectors" or "precincts" typically further subdivided into zones. Individual officers (depending on the agency) are assigned a zone. A SRO is just an officer with a much smaller zone, which will be the school + the surrounding area.

<snipped quote>
Now, on to your bit about the AR-15? So ONLY 285 people have been killed by them, no biggie. I mean, these guns hold no actual use for the standard civilian. Home protection doesn't require a rifle capable of shooting 25 rounds in a couple of seconds.