NIU shooting

[b-rabbit]

Shit like this has got to stop. I hope none of you guys lost someone...

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=4293081&page=1

[UG]

This is the fourth school shooting this week. It's actually the fifth if you count the dude that came in and shot his girlfriend/wife in front of her class.

As a teacher this is pretty fucking scary, there's really no way to stop this.

[will641]

This is the fourth school shooting this week. It's actually the fifth if you count the dude that came in and shot his girlfriend/wife in front of her class.

As a teacher this is pretty fucking scary, there's really no way to stop this.

what were the other 3?

yeah i just saw this shit on the news last night. very sad. its like you can just be an average college kid and blam, you get shot dead by some sick psychopath.

[Pythonic]

I live only 45 minutes away from NIU have a friend who works there. He said it was out of control panic yesterday.

[a500lbgorilla]

god damnit...

[givememyleg]

terrible

[shazbox]

...yet people still argue AGAINST gun control.

fucked up place we live in

[mrhappy333]

Random shootings suck. I fucking hate hearing shit like this. How do we stop it?

[gabe]

Random shootings suck. I fucking hate hearing shit like this. How do we stop it?

stop putting in in movies??

[shazbox]

Random shootings suck. I fucking hate hearing shit like this. How do we stop it?

I saw somebody on TV who seriously said we should give students guns, that way when a shooter comes in, all the students can shoot them first...


I guess in reality though, there isn't much you can do to stop them. They are random, and the shooter usually kills themselves. So there is no deterrent in them being caught (because they are dead), and there isn't a whole lot of warning (at least in some cases).

Best thing you can hope for is either you aren't there or you duck faster than other people.

Oddly it crosses my mind in class sometimes what I would do if somebody came flying through the door shooting.

[bigred]

1. deport charlton heston
2. deport 2nd amendment
3. life profit

[b-rabbit]

...yet people still argue AGAINST gun control.

fucked up place we live in

yea. but apparently this dude didn't have a criminal record at all and probably would have passed any additional tests or regulations on gun purchases. he was an "award winning" grad student in sociology. who knows what was going through this guy's mind. fuck

[flomo]

why do they have to shoot the place up, why can't they just make a bomb and blow it up

or poison gas

guns should be illegal

[mrhappy333]

1. deport charlton heston
2. deport 2nd amendment
3. life profit

It would be nice if there were no guns, but that just seems soooooo Impossible to happen.

I also think to myself just about everywhere I go, what would I do if someone started ...... whatever. I guess its good to be prepared, but I hate feeling paranoid about stupid Random shit happening.

[bigred]

why do they have to shoot the place up, why can't they just make a bomb and blow it up

or poison gas

guns should be illegal

hmmmmmm touche. It's going to happen anyway so use something that minimizes damage I guess. What about banning rifles?

[spoonitnow]

Making guns illegal won't stop people from doing stupid shit like this.

What were the other shootings?

[will641]

i think making guns illegal would be retarded. look at the article gabe posted in another thread about an 80 year old dude who shot 2 criminals trying to rob him. if guns were illegal, law abiding citizens such as that guy wouldnt have a gun to protect themselves, and in all likelihood he would be dead or badly wounded.

im sure criminals would love nothing more than to see guns illegalized. it would make their job a hell of a lot easier, and they would have much less resistance, because they would all still have guns!!

[UG]

This is the fourth school shooting this week. It's actually the fifth if you count the dude that came in and shot his girlfriend/wife in front of her class.

As a teacher this is pretty fucking scary, there's really no way to stop this.

what were the other 3?

yeah i just saw this shit on the news last night. very sad. its like you can just be an average college kid and blam, you get shot dead by some sick psychopath.

Along with Illinois there were school shootings in Ohio, California, Tennessee, and Louisiana this past week.




AFP

February 15, 2008 02:20pm

THE Illinois university gun rampage that left five people dead today was the fifth school shooting in a week-long wave of violence at US educational facilities.

The shooting at the Northern Illinois University came seven days after a woman teacher was shot and stabbed by her husband at a school in Ohio.

The woman survived while the gunman later killed himself during a stand-off.

On February 8, a woman at a school in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, shot dead two female students in a classroom before turning the gun on herself.

On Monday, a 17-year-old shot a classmate in the leg at a school cafeteria in Memphis before turning himself in. His victim survived.

A day later, a pupil at a school in Oxnard, California was shot in the head by a fellow student. The victim died of his injuries yesterday.

[will641]

damn. thats gotta be some sort of record for most school shootings in the span of 7 days.

[spoonitnow]

I'm not trying to be insensitive but I think that banning guns would just make these PMSing pussies become more dangerous because they'll actually have to plan something and become resourceful instead of sitting around cutting themselves in the dark listening to some emofag band talk about how their life sucks.

'Rapid-Fire Assault' in Lecture Hall Killed 5, Wounded 16 Other Students

The shooter fired 54 rounds from the weapons, killing six, including himself, and wounding 16.

Kazmierczak, dressed in black, was armed with three handguns and a shotgun, as students took cover beneath desks and ran out of the lecture hall. He was later found dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, police said.

You have got to be shitting me. This needle-dick fired 54 shots... and only hit 22 people (including himself in the fucking head). And of course he was dressed in black because emocockmunchers who think they're the fucking Crow do shit like this.

I guarantee you that if you gave my 13 year old brother 54 shots with just a fucking bow and a bowie knife in a crowded fucking lecture hall that he could do better than six kills and 16 wounded. It's so obvious that the problem here isn't guns -- it's stupid motherfuckers who dress in black and paint their toenails with blood taken from their pet rabbit's cunt while it's on the fucking rag.

If we take away guns, then we force these pussies to start getting creative, and that's when the really fucked up shit is going to start happening.

[boost]

I'm not trying to be insensitive but I think that banning guns would just make these PMSing pussies become more dangerous because they'll actually have to plan something and become resourceful instead of sitting around cutting themselves in the dark listening to some emofag band talk about how their life sucks.

'Rapid-Fire Assault' in Lecture Hall Killed 5, Wounded 16 Other Students

The shooter fired 54 rounds from the weapons, killing six, including himself, and wounding 16.

Kazmierczak, dressed in black, was armed with three handguns and a shotgun, as students took cover beneath desks and ran out of the lecture hall. He was later found dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, police said.

You have got to be shitting me. This needle-dick fired 54 shots... and only hit 22 people (including himself in the fucking head). And of course he was dressed in black because emocockmunchers who think they're the fucking Crow do shit like this.

I guarantee you that if you gave my 13 year old brother 54 shots with just a fucking bow and a bowie knife in a crowded fucking lecture hall that he could do better than six kills and 16 wounded. It's so obvious that the problem here isn't guns -- it's stupid motherfuckers who dress in black and paint their toenails with blood taken from their pet rabbit's cunt while it's on the fucking rag.

If we take away guns, then we force these pussies to start getting creative, and that's when the really fucked up shit is going to start happening.

in spoons fucked up own sort of way he has a point.

While there are huge differences, there are also pretty big parallels when you look at gun control and drug prohibition side by side. Outlawing guns and criminalizing drugs dont really solve any problems. People who want them still get them, and it just creates a seedy black market. I know that I feel strongly that prohibition is beyond retarded, but Im not sure about the gun control issue.

[Warpe]

[BankItDrew]

I wish the human species was more organized in groups during events such as this, like ants. Just imagine, a bank robber runs into a bank and gets jumped by everyone in the bank. Or, a gunman comes into a lecture hall with a shotgun and before two shots are fired the gunman has 6 students on his back.

There would be a hell of a lot less crime.

It'll never be like this until we are programmed differently, but it would be nice to live in a more organized manner.

[jyms]

Banning guns does nothing to get guns out of criminals/retards hands.

[will641]

also what really doesnt help is the media playing these stories to the hilt. i mean ffs the more they run the stories the more other psycho's will get the (right) idea that if they go out and kill a bunch of people their face will be on the news for a month. it inspires all sorts of copy cats.

[will641]

and thats not to say that they shouldnt be mentioned, because its a big deal, but they shouldnt run it for weeks and weeks.

[Warpe]

Gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in the world's 36 richest countries in 1994:

United States 14.24; Brazil 12.95; Mexico 12.69; Estonia 12.26; Argentina 8.93; Northern Ireland 6.63; Finland 6.46; Switzerland 5.31; France 5.15; Canada 4.31; Norway 3.82; Austria 3.70; Portugal 3.20; Israel 2.91; Belgium 2.90; Australia 2.65; Slovenia 2.60; Italy 2.44; New Zealand 2.38; Denmark 2.09; Sweden 1.92; Kuwait 1.84; Greece 1.29; Germany 1.24; Hungary 1.11; Republic of Ireland 0.97; Spain 0.78; Netherlands 0.70; Scotland 0.54; England and Wales 0.41; Taiwan 0.37; Singapore 0.21; Mauritius 0.19; Hong Kong 0.14; South Korea 0.12; Japan 0.05.

[Warpe]

god damnit...

[vqc]

the only way "gun control" would work would be if we destroyed EVERY gun in existence. Otherwise I don't believe any type of gun control that would put a reasonable dent in this type of tragedy.

[Jack Sawyer]

Gun-related deaths per 100,000 people in the world's 36 richest countries in 1994:

United States 14.24; Brazil 12.95; Mexico 12.69; Estonia 12.26; Argentina 8.93; Northern Ireland 6.63; Finland 6.46; Switzerland 5.31; France 5.15; Canada 4.31; Norway 3.82; Austria 3.70; Portugal 3.20; Israel 2.91; Belgium 2.90; Australia 2.65; Slovenia 2.60; Italy 2.44; New Zealand 2.38; Denmark 2.09; Sweden 1.92; Kuwait 1.84; Greece 1.29; Germany 1.24; Hungary 1.11; Republic of Ireland 0.97; Spain 0.78; Netherlands 0.70; Scotland 0.54; England and Wales 0.41; Taiwan 0.37; Singapore 0.21; Mauritius 0.19; Hong Kong 0.14; South Korea 0.12; Japan 0.05.

Well, I have read somewhere that guns were definitely banned in these countries. In the others, I'm not sure

These crazy fucks could've gone out and pulled the ol' suicide bomber act too, but they didn't, they simply go and start spraying bullets. Why is this? There is definitely some trend going on.

[DrivingDog]

the only way "gun control" would work would be if we destroyed EVERY gun in existence. Otherwise I don't believe any type of gun control that would put a reasonable dent in this type of tragedy.

Gun control won't work. LOL. In U.S., no gun control, 11,000 gun-related deaths / year. In UK, guns are illegal, 50 gun-related deaths/ year.

hmmm....

[spoonitnow]

Note that the "gun-related deaths" statistic includes suicide. You don't need a gun to kill yourself. If you don't believe that, then consider that despite not having guns, Japan's suicide rate is over 3x that of the United States. Also consider that the US and the UK run similar suicide rates.

Canada gun-ownership rates are similar to that in the United States, yet their gun-related death rates are much lower. The problem is obviously not the guns.

[spoonitnow]

Thought I'd post this since it has some more information that I'll likely come back to make fun of later:

From http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080216/...s/niu_shooting

A former employee at a Chicago psychiatric treatment center said Kazmierczak was placed there after high school by his parents. She said he used to cut himself, and had resisted taking his medications.

He also had a short-lived stint as a prison guard that ended abruptly when he didn't show up for work. He was in the Army for about six months in 2001-02, but he told a friend he'd gotten a psychological discharge.

On Thursday, Kazmierczak, armed with three handguns and a pump-action shotgun, stepped from behind a screen on the lecture hall's stage and opened fire on a geology class.

[spoonitnow]

I wish the human species was more organized in groups during events such as this, like ants. Just imagine, a bank robber runs into a bank and gets jumped by everyone in the bank. Or, a gunman comes into a lecture hall with a shotgun and before two shots are fired the gunman has 6 students on his back.

There would be a hell of a lot less crime.

It'll never be like this until we stop being fucking selfish retards, but it would be nice to live in a more organized manner.

[a500lbgorilla]

...yet people still argue AGAINST gun control.

fucked up place we live in

god damnit...

[DrivingDog]

Note that the "gun-related deaths" statistic includes suicide. You don't need a gun to kill yourself. If you don't believe that, then consider that despite not having guns, Japan's suicide rate is over 3x that of the United States. Also consider that the US and the UK run similar suicide rates.

Canada gun-ownership rates are similar to that in the United States, yet their gun-related death rates are much lower. The problem is obviously not the guns.

What does suicide have to do with it? The issue is not whether people need a gun to kill themselves, the issue is why there are so many mass shootings in the U.S.

Canada's gun deaths are more than 3x that of UK, despite having half the population. So yes, part of the problem is the guns.

The other part is the American culture where people say things like 'if everyone had a gun, they could defend themselves from psychopaths like this'. That's like saying give everyone a stick of dynamite because some people own sticks of dynamite. Sorry, but as much as I like the U.S., this kind of thinking is plain fucking retarded.

It may sound crazy, but try this on for size: If no-one had a gun, mass murders would be much less prevalent.

[a500lbgorilla]

I wish the human species was more organized in groups during events such as this, like ants. Just imagine, a bank robber runs into a bank and gets jumped by everyone in the bank. Or, a gunman comes into a lecture hall with a shotgun and before two shots are fired the gunman has 6 students on his back.

There would be a hell of a lot less crime.

It'll never be like this until we stop being fucking selfish retards, but it would be nice to live in a more organized manner.

Have you ever seen ants when you fuck with their scents?

[spoonitnow]

Note that the "gun-related deaths" statistic includes suicide. You don't need a gun to kill yourself. If you don't believe that, then consider that despite not having guns, Japan's suicide rate is over 3x that of the United States. Also consider that the US and the UK run similar suicide rates.

Canada gun-ownership rates are similar to that in the United States, yet their gun-related death rates are much lower. The problem is obviously not the guns.

What does suicide have to do with it? The issue is not whether people need a gun to kill themselves, the issue is why there are so many mass shootings in the U.S.

You totally missed the point so I'll try to explain. The majority of "gun-related deaths" are suicides, so if it says 1 in x people were subject to a gun-related death, you can't directly associate that to 1 in x people were shot by someone else. It's a statistic that's used when things like this happen, but it would be more useful to use statistics regarding the number of violent crimes instead.

Canada's gun deaths are more than 3x that of UK, despite having half the population. So yes, part of the problem is the guns.

The other part is the American culture where people say things like 'if everyone had a gun, they could defend themselves from psychopaths like this'. That's like saying give everyone a stick of dynamite because some people own sticks of dynamite. Sorry, but as much as I like the U.S., this kind of thinking is plain fucking retarded.

It may sound crazy, but try this on for size: If no-one had a gun, mass murders would be much less prevalent.

Guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous) and knives are a lot easier to get ahold of. There are tons of other weapons that could be used for mass killings that are 50x easier to get than guns and that are much more efficient. These idiots are just too busy feeling sorry for themselves and trying to out-do those Columbine pussies.

I agree that the "if everyone had guns" argument is stupid, and it would have more weight if guns weren't commonly owned here.

Imagine a scenario where guns have not existed yet, but society is otherwise similar to what it is now. Now say some dumbshits at some high school decide to kill a bunch of people with some widget that they find or make in their bedroom and they succeed, killing a dozen or so people. Over the next few years, more losers decide to take similar widgets and do similar mass killings. At that point are we trying to ban the widget?

Banning the widget will do nothing because there are hundreds of other widgets that can be used to kill groups of people, and much more efficiently than guns can. The problem isn't the widget, it's the people and the circumstances.

Any argument of wanting to ban guns has about as much merit as wanting to ban McDonald's food because it probably will be responsible for a similar number of deaths.

[spoonitnow]

Guns were around long before these types of mass killings.

[flomo]

don't let them ban guns
next they will want to ban porn

dominoooooeess motherfuckers

[DrivingDog]

Guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous)

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

[spoonitnow]

Guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous)

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I'm sure that this is a comment born of ignorance so I will disregard it.

[Jack Sawyer]

Guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous)

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I'm sure that this is a comment born of ignorance so I will disregard it.

Enlighten us, please.
How is it that guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous) ?
I'm curious as to your logic behind this statement

[jyms]

Because the gun is not the problem, it's the person. Just because the gun makes it easier, doesn't mean it won't happen. We need to deal with the problem. You don't think that if they didn't have guns they couldn't make bombs. I can find 50 sites on the net in 5 minutes that will tell me how to make one. Guns are easier, but it will still come down to convenience. They want to do this and will.

[Jack Sawyer]

Because the gun is not the problem, it's the person. Just because the gun makes it easier, doesn't mean it won't happen. We need to deal with the problem. You don't think that if they didn't have guns they couldn't make bombs. I can find 50 sites on the net in 5 minutes that will tell me how to make one. Guns are easier, but it will still come down to convenience. They want to do this and will.

Is it not supposed to be made more difficult in order to reduce the occurences of it?

[vqc]

the only way "gun control" would work would be if we destroyed EVERY gun in existence. Otherwise I don't believe any type of gun control that would put a reasonable dent in this type of tragedy.

Gun control won't work. LOL. In U.S., no gun control, 11,000 gun-related deaths / year. In UK, guns are illegal, 50 gun-related deaths/ year.

hmmm....

Dear Driving Dog,
First, just the fact that you aren't stating your facts in terms of per capita makes it so that you shouldn't be acting high and might. Second, even conceding the fact that the per capita numbers are lower, please do not be so quick to jump to conclusions; note the differences in culture, education, etc etc etc. I'm sure that if we replaced every American in the US with a Brit, the gun related deaths would also be lower, but we aren't British and we don't grow up British. Things are different here, it isn't always just about what the law is.
-Sincerely, vqc

[Pelion]

Guns are no more dangerous than knives

Uhhh what? Are you seriously saying that it is easier for someone to kill dozens of people with a knife than with a gun?

[vqc]

Guns are no more dangerous than knives

Uhhh what? Are you seriously saying that it is easier for someone to kill dozens of people with a knife than with a gun?

i think he was trying to make the point that guns dont kill people, people kill people.

Guns are clearly more efficient at killing people than pretty much anything else (stones, knives, spears, etc., NOT bombs).

[shazbox]

You dont necessarily have to ban guns altogether. But really, who NEEDS 4 guns? If he only had one gun he would have been a lot less efficient.

Although, then he may just take his time and aim.

Either way you are going to stop things like this from happening, because as everybody else says, there are lots of other ways to do things like this.

People should just keep on taking their medication and not go crazy...problem solved

[will641]

Guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous)

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I'm sure that this is a comment born of ignorance so I will disregard it.

Enlighten us, please.
How is it that guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous) ?
I'm curious as to your logic behind this statement

guns are more dangerous than knives ldo. obviously they are since they have long range.

heres an example of why non-psyco's people carrying guns is a good thing. not too long ago there was this guy in california who went into a church and killed a few people. then later he went into another church and was planning another massacre, but fortunately this lady had a gun on her, and shot him dead. he was heavily armed. if more people carried guns around, it would discourage it.

also, said it before and ill say it again. the media doesnt help the situation either.

a really funny bumper sticker ive seen says, "An armed society is a polite society."

[givememyleg]

guns are cool. i really like guns. shooting guns and destroying stuff is awesome. i like killing some animals with guns and deer tastes very good. some people need 4 guns because of different hunting seasons. also, you can only hunt certain animals with certain guns. and it is cool to shoot shotguns, rifles, handguns, etc because they're all a lot different and fun.

but killing people is lame. people who do that are twisted and it is a very sad thing. but you don't need to take away my guns, they're fun.

[DrivingDog]

the only way "gun control" would work would be if we destroyed EVERY gun in existence. Otherwise I don't believe any type of gun control that would put a reasonable dent in this type of tragedy.

Gun control won't work. LOL. In U.S., no gun control, 11,000 gun-related deaths / year. In UK, guns are illegal, 50 gun-related deaths/ year.

hmmm....

Dear Driving Dog,
First, just the fact that you aren't stating your facts in terms of per capita makes it so that you shouldn't be acting high and might. Second, even conceding the fact that the per capita numbers are lower, please do not be so quick to jump to conclusions; note the differences in culture, education, etc etc etc. I'm sure that if we replaced every American in the US with a Brit, the gun related deaths would also be lower, but we aren't British and we don't grow up British. Things are different here, it isn't always just about what the law is.
-Sincerely, vqc

Thanks for the note vqc. If I had stated the facts in terms of per capita, given that US has approximately 5x as many people as UK, how would that change anything? Instead of 200 times as many gun deaths in total you would have only 40 times as many gun deaths per capita. Given that the argument was that making guns illegal reduces the death rate from guns I don't see the relevance of your criticism. Nor do I think there is anything 'high and mighty' about my argument. I simply posed it as an argument in favour of gun control.

Moreover, the notion that making guns illegal would not change anything because Americans are inherently homicidal and would find other ways to kill each other is not very convincing imo.

[Jack Sawyer]

Guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous)

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I'm sure that this is a comment born of ignorance so I will disregard it.

Enlighten us, please.
How is it that guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous) ?
I'm curious as to your logic behind this statement

guns are more dangerous than knives ldo. obviously they are since they have long range.

heres an example of why non-psyco's people carrying guns is a good thing. not too long ago there was this guy in california who went into a church and killed a few people. then later he went into another church and was planning another massacre, but fortunately this lady had a gun on her, and shot him dead. he was heavily armed. if more people carried guns around, it would discourage it.

also, said it before and ill say it again. the media doesnt help the situation either.

a really funny bumper sticker ive seen says, "An armed society is a polite society."

The actual point is, if guns were a lot more difficul to come by, would the psyco be carrying the gun in the first place? How else would he have executed his massacre? Would the lady need to draw her own one to kill him?

Say I get a gun. I hate my neighbor. My neighbor knows I hate him, and he probably hates me too. He knows I just got a gun. Instead of caling the cops on me cause I got a gun, he goes out and gets his own, bigger gun. We have our own backyard version of the cold war, "legally", "for our own protection". Where will this lead?

The only ones I see benefitting from the "guns don't kill people" mantra is the gun manufacturers who sell their merchandise like hot cakes

[DrivingDog]

Guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous)

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I'm sure that this is a comment born of ignorance so I will disregard it.

Please enlighten us.

[flomo]

American drivers suck too
we should take away their cars

and while we are at drownings in pools for the US rose 3 fold in 2006
ban pools and jail pool diggers


GMML i agree with you
i like guns too

[givememyleg]

Guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous)

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I'm sure that this is a comment born of ignorance so I will disregard it.

Enlighten us, please.
How is it that guns are no more dangerous than knives (and in a lot of instances less dangerous) ?
I'm curious as to your logic behind this statement

guns are more dangerous than knives ldo. obviously they are since they have long range.

heres an example of why non-psyco's people carrying guns is a good thing. not too long ago there was this guy in california who went into a church and killed a few people. then later he went into another church and was planning another massacre, but fortunately this lady had a gun on her, and shot him dead. he was heavily armed. if more people carried guns around, it would discourage it.

also, said it before and ill say it again. the media doesnt help the situation either.

a really funny bumper sticker ive seen says, "An armed society is a polite society."

The actual point is, if guns were a lot more difficul to come by, would the psyco be carrying the gun in the first place? How else would he have executed his massacre? Would the lady need to draw her own one to kill him?

Say I get a gun. I hate my neighbor. My neighbor knows I hate him, and he probably hates me too. He knows I just got a gun. Instead of caling the cops on me cause I got a gun, he goes out and gets his own, bigger gun. We have our own backyard version of the cold war, "legally", "for our own protection". Where will this lead?

The only ones I see benefitting from the "guns don't kill people" mantra is the gun manufacturers who sell their merchandise like hot cakes

uhhhh how about you don't shoot your neighbor????????

[Jack Sawyer]

American drivers suck too
we should take away their cars

and while we are at drownings in pools for the US rose 3 fold in 2006
ban pools and jail pool diggers


GMML i agree with you
i like guns too

You use cars to drive around with
You use pools to swim around in
What do you use guns for?

I'm sorry I'm such a devil's advocate on this one, but I'd like to now how people think on such important issues

[givememyleg]

American drivers suck too
we should take away their cars

and while we are at drownings in pools for the US rose 3 fold in 2006
ban pools and jail pool diggers


GMML i agree with you
i like guns too

You use cars to drive around with
You use pools to swim around in
What do you use guns for?

I'm sorry I'm such a devil's advocate on this one, but I'd like to now how people think on such important issues

hunting, recreation, fun.

it's fun to swim in a pool and it's fun to shoot a gun at a target. why should i not be allowed to do something that i find fun just because some psychos use them for terrible things? it's absolutely ridiculous.

look, i'm all for what is better for the people on the country over my own personal beliefs or choices. but people will always find a way to kill people and people will always find a way to find guns. how long has marijuana/lsd/etc been illegal for? it is easier for underage kids to obtain these drugs over alcohol. it's a different thing yet, but it's the same concept.

[boost]

the only way "gun control" would work would be if we destroyed EVERY gun in existence. Otherwise I don't believe any type of gun control that would put a reasonable dent in this type of tragedy.

Gun control won't work. LOL. In U.S., no gun control, 11,000 gun-related deaths / year. In UK, guns are illegal, 50 gun-related deaths/ year.

hmmm....

Dear Driving Dog,
First, just the fact that you aren't stating your facts in terms of per capita makes it so that you shouldn't be acting high and might. Second, even conceding the fact that the per capita numbers are lower, please do not be so quick to jump to conclusions; note the differences in culture, education, etc etc etc. I'm sure that if we replaced every American in the US with a Brit, the gun related deaths would also be lower, but we aren't British and we don't grow up British. Things are different here, it isn't always just about what the law is.
-Sincerely, vqc

Thanks for the note vqc. If I had stated the facts in terms of per capita, given that US has approximately 5x as many people as UK, how would that change anything? Instead of 200 times as many gun deaths in total you would have only 40 times as many gun deaths per capita. Given that the argument was that making guns illegal reduces the death rate from guns I don't see the relevance of your criticism. Nor do I think there is anything 'high and mighty' about my argument. I simply posed it as an argument in favour of gun control.

Moreover, the notion that making guns illegal would not change anything because Americans are inherently homicidal and would find other ways to kill each other is not very convincing imo.

are you even reading peoples replies? Seriously you cant reply to someones reply with the original content that you used in the first place. It makes no sense, it makes you look retarded, and it clutters up an otherwise interesting debate.

One last time:

Suicides are lumped into "gun related deaths" when they are done using a gun. In England, a place with very strict gun control laws, the suicide rate is just as high as it is the U.S. In the U.S. we use guns to kill ourselves because they are readily available. In England however they use other methods because obtaining a gun is quite a hard task. Therefore our gun related deaths per capita compared to Englands is a skewed statistic and not an accurate portrayal how gun control laws prohibit violent crimes. This comparison does not show anything conclusive, it is not a good stance to take, please drop it.

Furthermore, it is really lame to see people scream "gun control!" after every incident like this. Legislation does not fucking solve everything. Clearly there are problems in our society that run very deep, they are very complex issues and they are not going to be fixed by some lawmaker in Washington. We as a society need to grow. It could even be said that enacting such a law or set of laws would be detrimental to our progress in this area of our society. Its a band-aid-on-a-leaking-dam fix to the problem at hand. People turn their backs and forget about it because its been 'solved.' What does it solve though?

Your car isnt fast enough for you so youve decided to install a body kit and paint a it a bright color.

[b-rabbit]

i would have to agree in some respect that arguing over guns doesn't solve problems. if someone has their fucked up mind set on killing some people, they probably wouldn't be concerned with or even deterred by better gun control regulations. gmml has a valid point. people who want to smoke weed can generally obtain it easily even though less than 1% of americans smoke weed on a DAILY basis. yet 39% of americans have daily access to at least one gun in their own home. i guess my point is even if stricter gun regulations were enforced, guns would still be easy to obtain by just about anyone...especially if there is a price involved. and if they can't get a gun, they'll use a different method. i'm not trying to argue against stricter gun regulations at all. i just think its impossible to predict whether or not someone plans to use a gun to commit murder. the shooter at NIU was seemingly a clean cut guy, respected by his professors and friends etc. but he did have a history of mental illness. privacy laws protect access to medical records by gun dealerships. not selling guns to the mentally ill would be a good thing imo. i'm kind of rambling but here is a good article about preventing mass murders not by gun control, but rather by focusing on taking away the incentive of attention
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=4267309&page=1

i didn't mean to open a can of worms over gun laws by starting this thread, but i do think its good to assess the problems and issues involved with individuals and situations that lead to these terrible events.

[spoonitnow]

Haha you people are so fun to fuck with. You take the Internet very seriously I see.

Nice reply boost.

FWIW, although I was just making things up as I went along, knives actually are more dangerous at short distance than guns, and there are statistics that would back this up but I'm too lazy and I guess I just assumed it was common knowledge.

[boost]

FWIW, although I was just making things up as I went along, knives actually are more dangerous at short distance than guns, and there are statistics that would back this up but I'm too lazy and I guess I just assumed it was common knowledge.

I know what youre saying, but I dont think its very pertinent to this discussion. Its just a side debate that will detract from whats important.

[a500lbgorilla]

Statistics themselves detract from what's important.

[boost]

If you feel this thread should be left for condolences and what not I think everyone would be fine with a split. If thats not waht you mean, Im not sure what youre getting at.

[flomo]

American drivers suck too
we should take away their cars

and while we are at drownings in pools for the US rose 3 fold in 2006
ban pools and jail pool diggers


GMML i agree with you
i like guns too

You use cars to drive around with
You use pools to swim around in
What do you use guns for?

I'm sorry I'm such a devil's advocate on this one, but I'd like to now how people think on such important issues

You use guns to shoot around with... when drunk
guns are used to put holes in stuff


suicide rates are lower in places where guns are illegal
true or false

[spoonitnow]

flomo, on suicide rates, both. Japan for example has over 3x the suicide rate as the US, but like a fuckton less guns.

[vqc]

as my constitutional law teacher said, quoting Tupac, " as long as I stay black I gotta stay strapped"

[will641]

how about this? washington d.c. and NYC have the strictest gun laws in the fucking country. do you see the crime rate or murder rate significantly lower there? i lol at gun control. its as big of a joke as the increased airport security. its just there to make it look like they are doing something.

actually the increased airport security is more effective, but you get the picture.

[boost]

how about this? washington d.c. and NYC have the strictest gun laws in the fucking country. do you see the crime rate or murder rate significantly lower there? i lol at gun control. its as big of a joke as the increased airport security. its just there to make it look like they are doing something.

actually the increased airport security is more effective, but you get the picture.

well to be fair you cant really say "look gun control is a failure because NYC and DC." Its pretty easy to drive to the boonies, go to a gun fair, and buy a bunch of shit then drive back up to NYC/DC. A strict federal gun control policy that was properly enforced would not make this possible, because now you would have to drive to mexico or canada. Clearly smuggling over state lines vs international lines is a huge difference. So you cant use and ineffective (in controlling the amount of guns on the street) and nearly impossible to enforce law as an example here.

[a500lbgorilla]

If you feel this thread should be left for condolences and what not I think everyone would be fine with a split. If thats not waht you mean, Im not sure what youre getting at.

No, simply put stats are very poor for arguments. That is, of course, in my opinion.

[boost]

If you feel this thread should be left for condolences and what not I think everyone would be fine with a split. If thats not waht you mean, Im not sure what youre getting at.

No, simply put stats are very poor for arguments. That is, of course, in my opinion.

well yah, often statistics are too easily skewed and have no direct relation to what they are being related to.

[vqc]

If you feel this thread should be left for condolences and what not I think everyone would be fine with a split. If thats not waht you mean, Im not sure what youre getting at.

No, simply put stats are very poor for arguments. That is, of course, in my opinion.

well yah, often statistics are too easily skewed and have no direct relation to what they are being related to.

but its usually better than the whole "but I think..."

[Lukie]

...yet people still argue AGAINST gun control.

fucked up place we live in

i argue AGAINST gun control

don't really feel like getting into it though. but a system where only criminals are armed, quite frankly, sucks.

[boost]

...yet people still argue AGAINST gun control.

fucked up place we live in

i argue AGAINST gun control

don't really feel like getting into it though. but a system where only criminals are armed, quite frankly, sucks.

more so a system in which only the government is armed really sucks imo..

[UG]

both of you guys win the argument, having a system where only the government AND criminals (which are one in the same amirite?) would be terrible.