Another shooting.

http://gma.yahoo.com/jersey-shoppin...eral-dead-110051705--abc-news-topstories.html

Am I the only person that thinks that these shootings are going to just keep happening all over the country/world, at the same pace they are going now?

When the shooting at Aurora, Colorado happened in the theater I thought that the shooter, James Holmes, opened the door for a lot of the crazy people to go do what he did.

Thoughts?

 

Its basically the Republicans and the NRA's fault for not wanting stricter gun control laws.

 

Gun control doesn't take guns out of the hands of criminals, it takes them away from the people who need protection from criminals. I think these shootings show that you aren't safe anywhere, not the movies, not a mosque/church/temple, not a grocery store, not anywhere, so having a gun for protection is a smart choice in my opinion.

 

People who go on spree shootings are not statistically criminals. They're usually people with mental problems with no previous record. Therefore restricting guns and taking them out of the hands of those who are mentally unstable will lessen the amount of crazy people who go shoot. Though keep in mind if people REALLY want to kill people not having guns won't stop them. Bombs are easily made.

 

So you think the situation would actually improve if everyone walked around with a gun?

 

This. Jared Loughner who killed 6 people and almost killed Giffords seriously injured DID NOT have a criminal history, except for a few speeding tickets.

Anders Breivik who killed like 77 in Norway DID NOT have a criminal record.

James Homes DID NOT have a criminal record either and actually was on track to getting a Ph.D before he dropped out.

Lastly, the person who killed those people at mosque (forget his name) was a white supremacist.

All of these mass murders were mentally-ill at the time of the shootings and stricter gun control laws could have prevented some of the tragedy they caused and/or without a doubt, significantly reduced the number of people they killed.

 

Well, firearms are illegal in the UK, although you can get a special license to have one here. Illegal or not though, it's guaranteed people will illegally own a gun in the UK, especially in the cities and such. Banned or not, you can still get your hands on one if you wanted to.

 

..."Former Marine".....

Is it just me or do all .. never mind

This is pretty bad now, and I think it's getting to a point where people will no longer be comfortable in public places knowing that ANYTHING can happen without warning.

 

How do we know who is not mentally stable?

 

There will always be crazy fruit loops around, this is what happens.

 

Yeah but how many crazy people are there compared to normal people? I'd say it's a very very very small fraction of people who would actually go on a shooting spree. Like you said, if somebody really wanted to kill somebody, they could use anything, a knife, gun, bomb, etc so why shouldn't civilians be able to get access to guns, so when some psycho comes into a grocery store with a gun, you have something to fight back with if you have to, instead of being defenseless.

No, I do agree there should be a more difficult process to get a gun, including a mental health test, but people should always be allowed a gun if they are eligible to have one. The thing is, if somebody wants to commit a crime with a gun, whether its a robbery or shooting spree, they are going to get the gun, legally or not, so people who want them for protection should be able to obtain them.

 

True, but these things seem to happen way more often in the USA than in Europe.

Actually, now that I think about it, maybe they don't. For every country individually is happens alot less often, but if you combine all that...

The world is filled with crazy people, they'll find a way to get their hands on a gun if they need one.

 

I dunno, but a mandatory psychological evaluation before having the ability to legally purchase a gun would help weed out those who are obviously mentally ill. Even if it doesn't weed out everyone it is a bit of a start. I am all for owning guns because I shoot for sport personally but I also believe in contolling the gun trade and gun safety.

 

These people did not go out on a whim and kill people, they planned these attacks, and part of the plan was obtaining a gun. Yes, some may have obtained them legally, and more gun control may have prevented some of those shootings, but do you really think that somebody who is planning on killing a mass amount of people care if the guns they get are legal? If James Holmes couldn't have gotten those guns legally, do you think he would've said oh man, guess I can't get any guns to kill a bunch of people, might as well just not do it at all. No, he would've found guns and went and killed people anyway.

 

First of all, the term is mentally ill or mentally unstable, not "crazy people." Also you should do some research. Statistically, most people who buy guns to "fight back" for self-defense end up getting more hurt and cause more damage because they don't know how to be responsible and operate a gun safetly.

I do respect the 2nd Amendment, but I'm sorry..stories of these massacres just further prove that only a handful of people should only be able to buy a a firearm.

 

So everyone should have SEMI-AUTOMATIC weapons capable of firing 100 rounds off in a minute if they wanted to?

 

First off the MEDIA is CHOOSING to publicize these types of shootings. THEY ARE MORE COMMON THAN YOU THINK. It literally happens daily, but the media is CHOOSING to SENSATIONALIZE recent gun crimes.

Also please maybe I'm the only one who sees this but are you seriously trying to pass a law ( gun restriction ) that CRIMINALS will follow?

How about you look at some statistical facts on violent crime in gun regulated areas then get back to me.

First of all, nitpicking over correct grammar or term usage when you understood the message only makes you look like a prude. Secondly your second claim has no grounds in evidence whatsoever. Provide a source because I know your statement is false.

 

Who are you referring to? 0.o

 

95-99% of the time people will never have to use their gun to defend themselves, but having a gun gives a person some security when and if a situation arises. I would agree with limiting the amount of people who can legally carry guns on streets/outside of their houses, but it shouldn't be more strict for people who just want to have them in their house just in case. Yes I know they can take them outside of the house, but most people who own guns are not mentally ill/unstable, and just want them for protection, and if they take them outside their house they risk getting busted and going to jail, which is something most people wouldn't want. It has been stated in this thread multiple times but if a mentally ill/unstable person or criminal wants to commit a crime or kill people with a gun, they are going to get a gun legally or illegally. So people should be allowed to have protection against those people if they are ever caught in that situation.

 

Oh really? Can you tell me the last time a MASS SHOOTING happened that wasnt in the news that hasnt already been mentioned on this thread? Thought so. And you got me, damnet. I'm secretly trying to pass a gun restriction legislation here on Sythe.org.

Oh, and you said you wanted to see facts, statistics, evidence? http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/news/News_Releases/2009/09/gun-possession-safety/

Good-bye; you can stop talking now.

Edit: And Soccer is Life, you too should read the article.