I don't care how insane, crazy, sociopathic, anti-social you are. If you can't get access to guns

[kelliekat44]

you can't shoot anyone. IT IS STILL THE GUNS. IT IS STILL THE GUNS. IT IS STILL EAST ACCESS TO GUNS.

[pipoman]

1. I noticed you said, "you can't shoot anyone", and not

"you can't kill anyone"... there are many ways to kill a lot of people quickly. It is a desire to kill a person or people, the gun is the tool. Without the desire to kill, people wouldn't be murdered...

[daleanime]

6. From the 'Bring a Horse to Water' school of opinion....

I could kill a person with my pen, but pens are good, so that means guns are good.

[pipoman]

10. No it is dispelling faulty thinking and painfully flawed logic....

[kcr]

12. Yep. Daleanime did a great job of pointing out the flaw n/t

[pipoman]

13. Only if you haven't a clue what you're talking about...

[kcr]

14. Disagreeing with pipoman equals not knowing what one is talking about?

[pipoman]

15. No, not knowing what one is talking about is demonstrated by what one says..

[kcr]

16. Pipoman knows all n/t

[pipoman]

17. lol

[daleanime]

21. Yes, I tried to....

but on this subject it doesn't seem to take hold for some.

[GGJohn]

19. Guns are neither good nor bad,

it's nothing more than a hunk of steel/carbon fiber, how it's used is the determining factor on whether it's good or bad.

[daleanime]

20. Guns are a tool, tools are made for a purpose.....

why are guns made?

To kill things. Feel free to make your justifications now.

[GGJohn]

23. Wrong,

guns are designed to propel a projectile down a hollow steel tube, how it's used is up to the user.

[daleanime]

24. Got it, discussion with you is pointless....

take care of yourself, I hope you and your delusions have a peaceful life.

[GGJohn]

25. No delusions on my part.

But you take care of yourself also and have a peaceful and productive life.

[Heidi]

28. I look forward to your heartfelt defense of blowguns. (Nt)

[GGJohn]

31. Huh?

The same would apply, it's how it's used is what determines if it's good or bad.

[justiceischeap]

37. Do you think if the Sandy Hook shooter didn't have access to guns

That he would have tried driving a car through the school? Or taken a knife instead? Do you think he could have killed as many children with a knife?

The real problem isn't about banning guns but being able to have any kind of civil discussion with people about controlling access to who can have guns. This thread is ample evidence that we, supposed liberals, can't talk about what gun violence is doing to this country.

[pipoman]

38. Discussion means people stating ideas, others critiquing

That is what discussion is.. ..frankly nearly 100% of stated ideas for gun control are asked and answered constitutional impossibilities....it pisses people off to hear the truth sometimes.

[Snobblevitch]

2. You don't care.

How progressive of you.

[KittyWampus]

3. You can still use a car, a pressure cooker, your oven if you live in an apartment complex

a plane if you are a pilot.

If you are suicidal and planning on acting out for whatever reason, you can kill a lot of people without a gun.

Yes, guns are too easy to access.

But it seems our society now has a growing norm of suicidal people turning their anger outwards to take a lot of people down with them.

[flamin lib]

18. When the total of all intentional deaths by cars, pressure cookers, and planes

equals the number of intentional deaths by guns come back and we'll talk.

It's the guns.

[beevul]

27. And yet it isn't.

There are 300 million+ guns in the hands of 80+ million people in America.

Less than .1 percent of the guns are misused by less than .1 percent of the people that own them.

If it were 'the guns', as you assert, that would not be the case.

[kelliekat44]

30. But you can't shoot people. nt

[sarisataka]

4. We know

It has become painfully obvious that, to a certain segment, it is all about the guns.

They don't care about the violence, crime or why it happens- it is simply about guns.

[jack_krass]

40. And we know

That there's a certain segment of the people who care about nothing but banning or controlling guns, "disbarring&quot lol) the NRA, and trying to demonize gun owners. These people aren't interested in things like what is motivating these mass killers, and actually seem physically incapable of exploring ANY solution that doesn't involve "TEH GUUNNNZZZZZZ".

This, to me, represents the ultimate form of closed and simple mindedness. I think the general public is finally starting to understand that halfass, warmed over gun control measures will do NOTHING to stop, or even slow down this outbreak of mass killings (which is occurring despite a long term overall reduction in all gun violence and crime).

My feeling is that wall to wall media coverage of these events is a large contributer (certain types of wackos are attracted like flies to this attention), and if the media would tone this down, that would do 1000 times more good than another restriction on cartridge sizes, or adding a week to the waiting period.

[snooper2]

5. There are hundreds of millions of guns in this country, you just going to drive around

and pick them all up?



What we should do is have an easier way to have people checked into an institution. This guy had all the signs of going off the farm but his mom didn't do shit-

I wonder if he complained to her about never having a girlfriend and being a virgin-



She should be culpable in my mind.

[still_one]

7. The bogus argument that we hear is that longer waiting periods, background checks, etc. wouldn't

stop the gun deaths. Those against any form of gun control are incorrectly, and intentionally reframing the argument. The point isn't that it would completely stop all gun deaths, but that it would reduce them. Making it illegal to drive an automobile if intoxicated, doesn't eliminate drunk driving deaths, but it does reduce them. There are all kinds of examples. Taking blood pressure medicine doesn't mean you won't get a heart attack or stroke, but it removes a risk live that improve your odds.

There is a direct correlation with the liberalizing of gun laws, and increased gun deaths. There are some who say the facts don't substantiate that argument, however, the facts say just the opposite. In fact Congress went out of their way to extend a ban on CDC research on gun violence:

"Dr. Fred Rivara, a professor of Pediatrics and Epidemiology at the University of Washington at Seattle Children's Hospital, has been involved with injury research for 30 years. He was part of a team that researched gun violence back in the 1990s and personally saw the chilling effects of the NRA’s lobbying arm. Rivara says that the NRA accused the CDC of trying to use science to promote gun control.

“As a result of that, many, many people stopped doing gun research, [and] the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically," he told The Takeaway in April. "It was really chilling in terms of our ability to conduct research on this very important problem.”

In 2013, some 34,000 Americans died from gunshot wounds. So Takeaway Washington Correspondent Todd Zwillich decided to ask House Speaker John Boehner why his party is trying to block research on gun violence.

“The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect public health,” Boehner said at a press conference last week. “I’m sorry, but a gun is not a disease. Guns don’t kill people — people do. And when people use weapons in a horrible way, we should condemn the actions of the individual and not blame the action on some weapon.”

But does the CDC research blame the public health issue of gun violence on the weapons themselves?

“The original concern from the National Rifle Association back in 1996, which Dr. Rivara mentioned, made that very implication,” says Zwillich. “The NRA complained to Congress that the CDC was using the results of its research to essentially advocate for gun control. They called it propaganda. And back at that time, Congress slashed the CDC’s funding by the exact amount that was used for gun-related public health research.”

Rivara and his team discovered that having a gun in the home is associated with a threefold increase in the risk of a homicide — they released this information in a series of peer-reviewed articles that appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine. The CDC both funded Rivara’s original research and stood by the findings.

But after Congress seemingly retaliated against the CDC for publishing Rivara’s findings, Zwillich says researchers with the agency have shied away from conducting gun research.

“There is other research that goes on at the CDC that does have to do with guns,” says Zwillich. “There is a National Violent Death Reporting System, which does record the causes of all violent deaths, including in domestic abuse, youth violence, and child abuse. If a gun is the cause, that’s recorded — it’s not like they ignore it entirely. But gun deaths and gun injuries as a public health issue, as Rivara said, are still basically anathema to CDC researchers and anyone who gets CDC funding, which is potentially millions of dollar"

http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence

[Brickbat]

8. "I don't care how insane, crazy, sociopathic, anti-social you are."

Which seems to be a big part of the problem, in some ways.

[Skittles]

32. can we have some critical thinking here?

she's not saying she doesn't care about those folk, she's saying that is irrelevant regarding the issue of gun violence

[Brickbat]

33. I disagree. There's a lot that goes into our nation's version of gun violence, and understanding

what drives it and where it comes from is important to those who want to reduce it.

[Skittles]

34. it is fine to disagree with that assessment

I just do not believe the OP is saying she doesn't CARE about those folk

[Nuclear Unicorn]

36. Then I'd be interested to know what the OP thinks should be done about the dangerously mentally ill

Someone determined to commit murder-suicide will find the means. And they are determined by virtue of the fact so few of them allow themselves to be taken alive. You can't disarm that.

These individuals number maybe a few dozen at any given time in a population of 330 million. Yet, supposedly, the solution is to disarm 80 million people contrary to the constitution and legal precedent and against the will of the electorate. Logistically speaking intercepting the dangerously mentally ill ought to be the point of focus because it would be easier. Particularly since they seem to express themselves prior to their rampages.

It would also be more human for the mentally ill. These spree killers may have earned our derision but consider the emotional torment they are in that drives them to their acts. How can we claim to be a humane society leaving them wandering the streets believing their inner demons?

So, when the target of action is 80 million good people while leaving a few dozen in anguish I suspect helping the mentally ill is dismissed as not relevant to the final objective.

[Lee-Lee]

9. I don't care how big an addict you are, if we ban heroin you won't be able to overdose

Let's apply your logic to a place where we have tried full prohibition and massive police action to enforce it.

How well is that working?

Why do you expect your fantasy land gun ban to be any different in how well it works?

[One_Life_To_Give]

11. Even in London a gun can be had within the hour

Police in London have admitted that any criminal could obtain a gun within an hour. making the number absolutely Zero is not practical anymore than making drugs non-existent. The only thing we can control is Who does/does not have access and what is the process that they must go thru to obtain them. Will they be the exclusive domain of our self appointed betters or will we create an equitable process.

[Codeine]

22. Methamphetamine is banned

but I can't swing a dead cat without hitting a tweaker in his rotten grill; why would firearms prohibition be any different?

[HooptieWagon]

26. Axe-wielding man attacks pedestrians, shot by police.

Transient with history of mental problems.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/st-petersburg-police-shoot-man-near-downtown-post-office/2143531
Police just happened to be there, otherwise....

[loyalsister]

29. And if you can't shoot anyone

you've lost the easiest, most efficient method to kill them.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

35. If you don't have access to a commercial airliner cockpit you can't kill 150 people.

[Throd]

39. That is why I own one.

To possibly shoot an intruder who intends my family harm.

I don't want to. But I will.