14 Dec 12
Originally posted by johnnylongwoodyI agree but unfortunently there are already so many guns out there and so many that would die rather then give them up, as they say, so I don't give much hope in anything improving.
I don't understand why they have not brought in
more controls, especially after similar incidents.
The Government should have learned this lesson
long ago. It does not matter who is in charge
be they Republican or Democrat, more controls
are needed to prevent whackos like this guy from
getting their hands on guns.
The NRA and similar gun lobbys have a lot
to answer for.
Originally posted by boononUtter garbage...what is the utility of a gun other than to put holes in things (often humans) with the secondary effect of catastrophic shockwave damage to whatever lies inside the vessel that now has a gaping hole in it!???
The gun did not kill those children. A very deranged individual did. It could have been done with any number of weapons. There is a deeper issue here other than guns, I would dare say that it is a spiritual matter. Would you agree?
It was a gun which is responsible for the death of those children. Sure there was some dickhead that had to be there pointing a killing machine at them but he would have accomplished far less murder had he been equipped with something that requires closer proximity and less ease to do his slaughtering.
By your reasoning we could say:
Nuclear bombs don't kill people, people kill people - with nuclear bombs!
Anthrax doesn't kill people, people kill people - with anthrax!
🙄
14 Dec 12
Originally posted by AgergI agree. If one needs guns to hunt for food that is one thing. But pistols and semi and automatic weapons are made to kill humans and nothing else and these idiots doing these horrible things know that.
Utter garbage...what is the utility of a gun other than to put holes in things (often humans) with the secondary effect of catastrophic shockwave damage to whatever lies inside the vessel that now has a gaping hole in it!???
It [b]was a gun which is responsible for the death of those children. Sure there was some dickhead that had to be there pointing a ...[text shortened]... uclear bombs![/i]
Anthrax doesn't kill people, people kill people - with anthrax!
🙄[/b]
- Joined
- 30 Dec 04
- Moves
- 94666
14 Dec 12
Originally posted by PsychoPawnI am not saying that the gun is irrelevant. I am saying that you can't blame the gun for what an individual did. The blame must rest on whoever this man was.
It is very unlikely he would have been as successful at killing as many as he did without a gun. Let's not pretend that guns are irrelevant.
14 Dec 12
Originally posted by boononDo you accept that if he wasn't armed with a gun, or four guns as the media is reporting, and instead was armed with a knife or baseball bat the death toll would be considerably less?
I am not saying that the gun is irrelevant. I am saying that you can't blame the gun for what an individual did. The blame must rest on whoever this man was.
- Joined
- 30 Dec 04
- Moves
- 94666
14 Dec 12
Originally posted by rwingettI never said the gun was irrelevant. I said that you can't blame the gun. It does not have a mind or make decisions. The human who killed these innocent people made that decision. Do you blame the cars for all of the DWI deaths? Of course you don't. They were the weapon that killed innocent people, but it was a human who decided to drive that car drunk. Should we ban all motor vehicles?
As usual, guns seem to be an irrelevant ingredient in the almost daily mass shootings we seem to be experiencing. Funny how that works.
14 Dec 12
Originally posted by boononNo one is truly doing that.
I am not saying that the gun is irrelevant. I am saying that you can't blame the gun for what an individual did. The blame must rest on whoever this man was.
No one is trying to punish guns or say that the person who did it is somehow not responsible.
14 Dec 12
Originally posted by boononIs the sole utility of a motor vehicle to kill?
I never said the gun was irrelevant. I said that you can't blame the gun. It does not have a mind or make decisions. The human who killed these innocent people made that decision. Do you blame the cars for all of the DWI deaths? Of course you don't. They were the weapon that killed innocent people, but it was a human who decided to drive that car drunk. Should we ban all motor vehicles?
14 Dec 12
Originally posted by boononJust my opinon but I think right now is not a good time to defend guns. Nothing personal but just my thought. If you feel you have to, it's up to you.
I never said the gun was irrelevant. I said that you can't blame the gun. It does not have a mind or make decisions. The human who killed these innocent people made that decision. Do you blame the cars for all of the DWI deaths? Of course you don't. They were the weapon that killed innocent people, but it was a human who decided to drive that car drunk. Should we ban all motor vehicles?
- Joined
- 30 Dec 04
- Moves
- 94666
14 Dec 12
Originally posted by Proper KnobI can't say for sure the death toll would have been less. It probably would have. I find any number of innocent people killed un acceptable. Are you saying that less is acceptable? As a society we need to get to the root cause of what caused this individual to do this. Going after his weapon of choice is what I find irrelevant. Our society seems to be getting sicker. I don't think the gun caused this mans 'illness'. Would you agree that our society is more violent than in the past?
Do you accept that if he wasn't armed with a gn, or four guns as the media is reporting, and instead was armed with a knife or baseball bat the death toll would be considerably less?