She didn't miss the point. Speaking for myself, I see the point from another vantage than you do.
School attacks couldnt happen without guns? Bombs and other means of mass attacks
- Thread starter Angel4Truth
- Start date
She didn't miss the point. Speaking for myself, I see the point from another vantage than you do.
Greg Jennings
New member
What? Not sure what you were looking at but it's basically impossible to make a bomb out of a gallon of gasoline. That would actually make me right. But say whatever you want to say
MarcATL
New member
The dude killed himself.
This Charming Manc
Well-known member
are there facts to back that up?
As US murder rates are significantly higher than other developed countries and you have a lot more guns than anyone else.
If guns save alot of lives, it would suggest Americans are 10 time more murderous in intent than us europeans, I don't think thats true.
As US murder rates are significantly higher than other developed countries and you have a lot more guns than anyone else.
If guns save alot of lives, it would suggest Americans are 10 time more murderous in intent than us europeans, I don't think thats true.
This Charming Manc
Well-known member
jzeidler
New member
I don't know about the US but in the UK a suspicious person storing or carrying suspicious material can be held to account. A suspicious person keeping or carrying a gun can be arrested because of gun controls, but Americans nevertheless apparently feel that they must all have the right to keep and bear guns whatever the cost in innocent lives.
This is because our founding fathers were smarter and gave as the second amendment. Also, here in the U.S. we are smart and fair as do this think called "innocent till proven guilty." We're just good people like that.
jzeidler
New member
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Quetzal
New member
Blind nationalist pride without any thought to consequence is dangerous. In short, don't be an arrogant jerk based on the country you are from.
jzeidler
New member
I'm not, I'm just saying that it is much more fair to be "innocent till proven guilty." Rather than, "your suspicious we're going to arrest you because we are weak and scared of what you might do even if we're totally wrong."
jzeidler
New member
Criminals don't obey the law. What makes you think they would obey gun laws? It only restricts law abiding citizens that should have guns.
This Charming Manc
Well-known member
It works because it makes firearms very hard to get hold of. Criminals generally don't get guns.
A few years ago when London had a gang violence problem, the issue was knives not guns, still not good but a lot lower body count than if guns were in play.
How to work that into a system that currently has 300,000,000 guns would however be challenging.
A few years ago when London had a gang violence problem, the issue was knives not guns, still not good but a lot lower body count than if guns were in play.
How to work that into a system that currently has 300,000,000 guns would however be challenging.
It doesn't work because, here in America, illegal firearms are easily obtained.
PureX
Well-known member
That's true of any law. So are you suggesting we just eliminate the laws because the criminals don't obey them, anyway?
This Charming Manc
Well-known member
because they are so easily legally obtained.
Unless you change the first you can never change the second.
Realistically if America decided tomorrow to end the right to bear arms and become and unarmed society its a 25 year project to do it safely and justly.
Unless you change the first you can never change the second.
Realistically if America decided tomorrow to end the right to bear arms and become and unarmed society its a 25 year project to do it safely and justly.
Tyrathca
New member
And illegal firearms are easy to obtain because legal firearms are easy to obtain (redirecting weapons, theft of said legal firearms, criminals buying 'legal' firearms, limited checks on 'legal' sales, etc)
alwight
New member
That seems more like a possible argument to allow people the right to bear bombs. :shocked:
I at least accept that some things, in reasonable society, have to be clearly labelled as being against the common good.
However the fact that bombs are illegal gives the authorities some control over anything that might be used to create them and who possesses them.
I suspect that might not exactly please some right wingers regarding their own perceived personal freedoms but then again a personal freedom to do whatever we like within a reasonable human society would be a myth anyway.
More guns = more safe? Really? :sherlock:
The fact that more guns are used to deal with the guns routinely carried by bad guys committing crimes in the US is hardly a convincing statistic to me. :nono:
The fundamental purpose of guns is only ever to kill or to at least incapacitate, not save lives.
Guns don't plant seeds nor cure cancer.
Killing a nutter with a gun, with a gun, is a poor argument for guns.