OK Gun enthusiasts, I want an actual answer

[digger]

The world is full of fuckwits, fuckwits are always going to find a way to fuckwit but why give them the tools to inflict mass damage within a very short period of time? Especially when those tools have no real genuine use it society anyway. Is it so hard to sacrifice a bit of freedom? It might save the life of even just 1 person

[cale]

Sigh, statistically the chances of being involved are statistically insignificant. And again, with a left wing/relative moral mindset, these attacks will continue to grow the more we disarm.

Don't just move the goalposts, chop one down and walk away.

Which gun is used does not matter. Just like which knife. Or which hand. Or which vehicle.

Bad argument is bad, it most certainly does make a difference. Handguns are the most commonly used because they're easily concealable and manipulated by people who know nothing about them. You also don't see school shootings happen with muzzle loaders, so toss that argument right back into the water. As for "which hand", again pure garbage, unless you can point to an incident where someone broke into an elementary school and choked to death 20 kids? You're grasping for an argument about as far as you've placed those goalposts apart.

[myinfernalbmw]

So arm everyone to the teeth and nothing bad will happen? Please.

FYI, I was an NRA member in high school. My son is actually really good at shooting, I wonder if he'd like sports shooting (maybe there are scholarships?). But we don't own a gun, and I don't feel like my dick is smaller because I don't have an AR-15 in my closet

But I do feel safer. It's great to talk statistics, until you become one...

The fact that your argument keeps devolving to dick size should be a clear indicator that you've already lost. Is there a reason you continue to post in this thread while leaving my post at the top of the page unapproved? Just curious if the mods can see what users see on the new platform.

FYI sporting clays is one of the fastest growing high school sports. I don't really know if it's expanded to the collegiate level yet, but my niece got into it her senior year of high school. She had so much fun she wished they would have offered it in previous years.

[R3Z3N]

Not sure what the dick size reference is. Sexuality has nothing to do with this topic.

Which gun is used does not matter. Just like which knife. Or which hand. Or which vehicle.

As to the NRA, they have been been giving gun rights away since inception. The point of the NRA was first white supremacy, then they rebranded to be the sole supplier of CCW training with license from Big Brother. That organization can and should burn to the ground.

[nando]

Sigh, statistically the chances of being involved are statistically insignificant. And again, with a left wing/relative moral mindset, these attacks will continue to grow the more we disarm.

So arm everyone to the teeth and nothing bad will happen? Please.

FYI, I was an NRA member in high school. My son is actually really good at shooting, I wonder if he'd like sports shooting (maybe there are scholarships?). But we don't own a gun, and I don't feel like my dick is smaller because I don't have an AR-15 in my closet

But I do feel safer. It's great to talk statistics, until you become one...

[R3Z3N]

Sigh, statistically the chances of being involved are statistically insignificant. And again, with a left wing/relative moral mindset, these attacks will continue to grow the more we disarm.

[nando]

nando, background checks (special license) have failed to suppress any shooting that has happened. That is as close as one can ever get to stop these atrocities from a lawful standpoint. As stated, take away the guns for a dreamy minute, tools are still out there. The government rarely is the one to suppress any such actions, especially when the person has not been involved with the courts before. First accept that, and realize that no law will reduce this.

The Dayton killer was involved with Antifa, but the media suppresses that info. An organization that by action actually supports fascist methodology: suppressing speech and ideals through violence.

Well, private citizens *definitely* own functional tanks and rocket launchers. You and I agree on this explicitly. Yet, we have yet to ever see a private citizen commit mass murder by tank or rocket launcher - presumably, because the use of such weapons is heavily regulated by the government, as in "a well regulated militia".

You don't need a machine gun to "protect" your family. The most likely thing to happen if you own one, is you or you kids end up killing yourselves. Or worse..

Blaming divorce or video games and whatever the latest social ill du jiour, is probably the weakest argument you could try - and easily debunked.

Fascists, Nazis - the president. Whatever. Same ideas. But some use easily obtained military weapons to terrorize the public with bloodshed.

[cale]

Divorce is not a uniquely American problem, but mass shootings this frequently indeed are.

[R3Z3N]

^Homicides, especially mass murders, have been on the rise since divorce has been accepted and promoted over falling toward eachother to live life as marriage is intended.. The majority of these multiple killings are perpetrated by the fatherless and broken homes.

Honestly, a fix is for men to man up and take responsibility of their family, and rear thier children instead of lead them away to instagram so as to not be disturbed from the families career path, or lack thereof for self-centeredness.

Again though, our freedom of defense is DESPITE these anomalies and always has been. Used to be pirates, or cowboy gangs taking advantage of a town with few law enforcement, it's no different now, with these killers taking advantage of an overly disarmed populace, even in Texas. Increase the likelihood of self-defense, and I can only imagine such acts declining or failing, or to counter, more using it as suicide by law-abidiing-citizen (cop).

[CarpHunter]

Fixed the thread title to more properly reflect posters intent. “ I want an actual answer, that reaffirms my belief”

Gun laws do nothing to stop those who are already intent on breaking them. No more complicated than that really. Funny how in a lot of cases, not all to be sure, the same people who believe restrictive gun laws will be effective, argue how ineffective drug laws are and should be loosened.

The victim hood mentality is at core of these sick individuals. Many of them feel society is to blame for their misery. They feel they are victims not of their own doing and blame and hate everyone as a result. We as a whole have been brainwashed into blaming everything in society other than the truth. I mean hell were blamming guns for actions of individuals. Who blames an in-adamant object for the action of a sick individual. These young men have grown up in a society that is afraid to speak and seek the truth.

Gun laws are effective, although not a 100% guarantee that it will stop 100% of mass shootings. Australia is a perfect example of gun laws having a measurable effect. You can't argue it didn't. But I'll give that a portion of the success is due to cultural differences, it doesn't mean laws are ineffective.

Yes someone intent on doing this will find another means. It's about controlling access. After Oklahoma city your government began controlling access to chemicals used in the bomb making process. How many bombings have there been since? Logic would follow that the same could be achieved with military style weapons. In both the most recent events the police reacted within a minute, yet there was still a large body count. Not due to the skill of the shooter, but due to the style of weapon used. Think about the psychological reason why this style of weapon is the primary choice for such events. Now how much of a deterrent would not having easy access be? Might think twice if all you got is a pistol and hunting rifles.

As to the victim hood idea. Fear or insecurity is a large driving factor for firearm purchases as is. Not specific to mass shooters. Thus the "self defense" argument. Remember all these guys are always law abiding responsible gun owners just like everybody else. Right up until they pull the trigger. Then comes the mental health excuse bullshit. The hand wringing to paint the person as not normal, or mentally deranged. The excuses to make them seem like an outside anomaly. When the reality is their just like you, the only difference is something snapped and they pulled the trigger. After all, 1 in 3 americans are on some kind of anti depressant or anti psychotic medication. Mentally unhealthy is the american norm. Just the same as the fact there's roughly a mass shooting every day in america, it's not an outlier event. It's the norm.

Now I'm not saying that mental health doesn't play a factor. It most definitely does. But look how your country handles mental health care. All it consists of is giving people drugs, that aren't fully understood as to the effects on brain chemistry. That's about it. If your poor you don't even get that. All poor people get is shamed and driven further out of society. Thus increasing the exact reasons for the mental instability. If they're lucky they stay out of prison or becoming homeless. Most don't. If your middle class and have insurance, you get the drugs. But just the drugs. Which is probly a leading factor as to why all these guys are middle class, not the poor. But the middle class can't afford the actual things that would improve their lives and thus their mental health. It's not a supruse all these guys have a history of being on some sort or mentally altering medication.

I'm mean fuck man, look what your culture does to your own children. If a kids full of energy and curious about the world you guys think there's something wrong with them and start shoving pills down their throats. "Here's your adarol and a redbull to wash it down. Now sit down and shut up." Your literally drugging children with brain chemistry altering chemicals when their at the beginning of forming full cognitive function. And no one knows what the effects are. And that's admitted to. There's multiple cases of people having dramatic personality shifts due to medications. How many commercials do you see that list suicidal or homicidal thoughts or actions as side effects? Almost all of them.

[R3Z3N]

A license is the State’s way of looking at what you’re doing, thinking it can make some money from it, declaring it to be illegal, and then offering to give you an exemption from the illegal activity if you pay an extortion fee.

[turge]

Should you be able to own and use a rocket launcher? how about a tank?

You can legally own a tank. You can also own a rocket launcher with the right permits and tax stamp from the ATF.

[naplesE30]

They do work if they strip the availability of that firearm from the young person with nefarious intent. The argument can be made that they'll just buy them illegally instead of through proper channels, but as someone who lives in a country with restricted firearms access it's not as simple as going to the bad part of town and buying a firearm with similar ease of buying a bit of coke. There's a reason the firearms often used in crime are rusty old pieces of shit, often the ones the Native's up here use are cobbled together .22's with handmade stocks. Granted your country has the unique situation of having millions in circulation, but as those owners grow older their likelihood of perpetrating these types of shootings also diminishes, and their practice of responsible ownership increases.

That’s a big if isn’t it? I would say that’s an impossible task, especially in a country with an estimated 350mil+ and growing guns.

I think we can both agree America and Canada’s gun quantities and variety are vastly different. Many used in crimes hear are stolen as well. Sure a lot are what one would call P.O.S. but many are quality firearms as well. Outlawing them would only drive up costs and incentivize more theft.

I’m not sure what your point is by as the owners grow older? There are always going to be 16-30 year olds. Perhaps I am missing something in that line of thought. Are you implying further age restrictions?

In a hypothetical situation if all semi auto rifles were banned tomorrow, I as a law abiding citizen would never purchase one. I would not go through the black market for a firearm. However, one with criminal intent wouldn’t think twice about it. Who would that law in actuality really punish? It is the responsible citizen she respects the rule of law. It punished the very person you want to empower, and empowers and stacks the deck in favor of the people you wouldn’t want to.

[hkv]

Yes, you can buy them - but you can't use it without a special license. You can't get one at Walmart on your way to shoot up people at school.

Thats not true. You can buy and use a tank as much as you want, no license. However if you want a tank that doesnt have a demilled main gun then you will likely have to register it and/or the shells with the atf as a destructive device.

[cale]

Gun laws do nothing to stop those who are already intent on breaking them. No more complicated than that really. Funny how in a lot of cases, not all to be sure, the same people who believe restrictive gun laws will be effective, argue how ineffective drug laws are and should be loosened.

They do work if they strip the availability of that firearm from the young person with nefarious intent. The argument can be made that they'll just buy them illegally instead of through proper channels, but as someone who lives in a country with restricted firearms access it's not as simple as going to the bad part of town and buying a firearm with similar ease of buying a bit of coke. There's a reason the firearms often used in crime are rusty old pieces of shit, often the ones the Native's up here use are cobbled together .22's with handmade stocks. Granted your country has the unique situation of having millions in circulation, but as those owners grow older their likelihood of perpetrating these types of shootings also diminishes, and their practice of responsible ownership increases.