And only a few days after the mall shooting...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/14/sandy-hook-elementary-school-shooting_n_2300831.html
potgun control
people control
[quote=pot]gun control[/quote]
people control
Especially since it was his own mothers classroom, killing her and like 20 elementary students.
And the solution would have to be a combination of gun control and, as you say, "people control"
Especially since it was his own mothers classroom, killing her and like 20 elementary students.
And the solution would have to be a combination of gun control and, as you say, "people control"
i live in america and the right to bear arms is extremely outdated and dumb
i live in america and the right to bear arms is extremely outdated and dumb
He stole the guns.
The problem started when he developed a mental issue that wasn't taken care of
He stole the guns.
The problem started when he developed a mental issue that wasn't taken care of
I was really hoping not to see this shit here.
I was really hoping not to see this shit here.
4812622i live in america and the right to bear arms is extremely outdated and dumb
What makes you say that it is outdated and dumb?
[quote=4812622]i live in america and the right to bear arms is extremely outdated and dumb[/quote]
What makes you say that it is outdated and dumb?
shrtI was really hoping not to see this shit here.
Why? I don't see the harm of posting something that effects those living in the US. Furthermore, not everyone watches the news all the time, so they may not know about it yet. Yes, it's true that it causes some sort of arguments, but people always argue of message boards and this one would be no different.
[quote=shrt]I was really hoping not to see this shit here.[/quote]
Why? I don't see the harm of posting something that effects those living in the US. Furthermore, not everyone watches the news all the time, so they may not know about it yet. Yes, it's true that it causes some sort of arguments, but people always argue of message boards and this one would be no different.
'murika
Because everyone still think they are cowboys
'murika
Because everyone still think they are cowboys
Stop selling guns to people with mental issues
Stop selling guns to people with mental issues
MemphisVon4812622i live in america and the right to bear arms is extremely outdated and dumb
What makes you say that it is outdated and dumb?
The fact that it was authored in a time where modern guns were beyond imagination, war on American soil was a realistic possibility, and the population was not even a fifth of what it is today. We also treated diseases with mercury, bloodletting, and other treatments that we look at as hilarious today.
you can also replace "look at as hilarious" with "would condemn people for war crimes for"
[quote=MemphisVon][quote=4812622]i live in america and the right to bear arms is extremely outdated and dumb[/quote]
What makes you say that it is outdated and dumb?[/quote]
The fact that it was authored in a time where modern guns were beyond imagination, war on American soil was a realistic possibility, and the population was not even a fifth of what it is today. We also treated diseases with mercury, bloodletting, and other treatments that we look at as hilarious today.
you can also replace "look at as hilarious" with "would condemn people for war crimes for"
FzeroshrtI was really hoping not to see this shit here.
Why? I don't see the harm of posting something that effects those living in the US. Furthermore, not everyone watches the news all the time, so they may not know about it yet. Yes, it's true that it causes some sort of arguments, but people always argue of message boards and this one would be no different.
I'm going to guess that this is like how Bob Costas got a lot of blow-back when he his halftime analysis of a football game included an exposition on gun control policy. That is to say, let football be football and tf2 be tf2 and the news be the news.
(I'm not defending anything I'm just explaining)
[quote=Fzero][quote=shrt]I was really hoping not to see this shit here.[/quote]
Why? I don't see the harm of posting something that effects those living in the US. Furthermore, not everyone watches the news all the time, so they may not know about it yet. Yes, it's true that it causes some sort of arguments, but people always argue of message boards and this one would be no different.[/quote]
I'm going to guess that this is like how Bob Costas got a lot of blow-back when he his halftime analysis of a football game included an exposition on gun control policy. That is to say, let football be football and tf2 be tf2 and the news be the news.
(I'm not defending anything I'm just explaining)
kaceFzeroshrtI was really hoping not to see this shit here.
Why? I don't see the harm of posting something that effects those living in the US. Furthermore, not everyone watches the news all the time, so they may not know about it yet. Yes, it's true that it causes some sort of arguments, but people always argue of message boards and this one would be no different.
I'm going to guess that this is like how Bob Costas got a lot of blow-back when he his halftime analysis of a football game included an exposition on gun control policy. That is to say, let football be football and tf2 be tf2 and the news be the news.
(I'm not defending anything I'm just explaining)
off topic means anything that isn't tf2
shouldn't exclude the news
[quote=kace][quote=Fzero][quote=shrt]I was really hoping not to see this shit here.[/quote]
Why? I don't see the harm of posting something that effects those living in the US. Furthermore, not everyone watches the news all the time, so they may not know about it yet. Yes, it's true that it causes some sort of arguments, but people always argue of message boards and this one would be no different.[/quote]
I'm going to guess that this is like how Bob Costas got a lot of blow-back when he his halftime analysis of a football game included an exposition on gun control policy. That is to say, let football be football and tf2 be tf2 and the news be the news.
(I'm not defending anything I'm just explaining)[/quote]
off topic means anything that isn't tf2
shouldn't exclude the news
The constitution does not specifically state that American citizens have the right to bear arms, rather, that they have the right to bear arms IF they are part of a militia, many people of law however, want to interpret it the other way around.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
The constitution does not specifically state that American citizens have the right to bear arms, rather, that they have the right to bear arms IF they are part of a militia, many people of law however, want to interpret it the other way around.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
was at school in a neighboring town when this happened, got locked down for a few hours and tentatively released
was at school in a neighboring town when this happened, got locked down for a few hours and tentatively released
texas would threaten to secede if they couldn't bear arms
???
texas would threaten to secede if they couldn't bear arms
???
botmodetexas would threaten to secede if they couln't bear arms
???
what are we waiting for?
[quote=botmode]texas would threaten to secede if they couln't bear arms
???[/quote]
what are we waiting for?
I can't figure out whether I should +frag this thread so others will acknowledge this event or -frag since people were killed.
I can't figure out whether I should +frag this thread so others will acknowledge this event or -frag since people were killed.
I don't think there's any anti-gun-control argument to be made here. It's obvious that something needs to be done, mass forced recall, way tighter laws, etc.
sad part is there are probably people out there saying that the kids should have just had guns
Regardless of whether or not it would have prevented the incident, it would make the chances of something like this happening lower. I, for one, do not know where I would get a gun in the country I live in now. You would have to have some serious connections - much different than the situation in the US. Why? Because gun laws and availability are much stricter/lower. There is obviously something that can be done to help prevent this, so why not do it? It would be stupid to not support mass recall of guns and/or mandatory psychological testing in order to obtain a license - what is there to lose? So what if people cant hunt anymore? It's a sacrifice that would have to be made to make the country a safer place.
I don't think there's any anti-gun-control argument to be made here. It's obvious that something needs to be done, mass forced recall, way tighter laws, etc.
sad part is there are probably people out there saying that the kids should have just had guns
Regardless of whether or not it would have prevented the incident, it would make the chances of something like this happening lower. I, for one, do not know where I would get a gun in the country I live in now. You would have to have some serious connections - much different than the situation in the US. Why? Because gun laws and availability are much stricter/lower. There is obviously something that [i]can[/i] be done to help prevent this, so why not do it? It would be stupid to not support mass recall of guns and/or [b]mandatory psychological testing[/b] in order to obtain a license - what is there to lose? So what if people cant hunt anymore? It's a sacrifice that would have to be made to make the country a safer place.
The argument here shouldn't be about gun control - but it will be. The argument shouldn't be about what made this person do this, but it will be. I've already heard video games, facebook and reality TV being blamed. None of those things killed those people today. The guns didn't kill those people. They didn't decide to spontaneously fire their bullets into people. A very sick person made all those decisions. It was not "easy" for him to obtain firearms. In fact, Connecticut and New Jersey have extremely strict gun control, schools are a gun-free zone and the shooter was below the legal age to lawfully own guns. We don't need more control of guns, we need to make help for sick people more available, and more acceptable. Mental health in America is a taboo subject - if you openly talk about your feelings, you think you're going to be persecuted. The law failed everyone who was killed today, but not because it was done with a gun, but because the shooter didn't get the help he needed. He would have killed today, whether it was with guns, explosives, knives, poisons, or even his own bare hands. He didn't get the help he needed - we let him down as a society - but not because he got some guns, but because the underlying reasons or conditions that made him want to kill couldn't be treated in time.
The argument here shouldn't be about gun control - but it will be. The argument shouldn't be about what made this person do this, but it will be. I've already heard video games, facebook and reality TV being blamed. None of those things killed those people today. The guns didn't kill those people. They didn't decide to spontaneously fire their bullets into people. A very sick person made all those decisions. It was not "easy" for him to obtain firearms. In fact, Connecticut and New Jersey have extremely strict gun control, schools are a gun-free zone and the shooter was below the legal age to lawfully own guns. We don't need more control of guns, we need to make help for sick people more available, and more acceptable. Mental health in America is a taboo subject - if you openly talk about your feelings, you think you're going to be persecuted. The law failed everyone who was killed today, but not because it was done with a gun, but because the shooter didn't get the help he needed. He would have killed today, whether it was with guns, explosives, knives, poisons, or even his own bare hands. He didn't get the help he needed - we let him down as a society - but not because he got some guns, but because the underlying reasons or conditions that made him want to kill couldn't be treated in time.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-20723910
A man with a knife has wounded 22 children - at least two of them seriously - and an adult at a primary school in central China.
This happened today.
Good thing he didn't have a gun.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-20723910
[quote]A man with a knife has wounded 22 children - at least two of them seriously - and an adult at a primary school in central China.[/quote]
This happened today.
Good thing he didn't have a gun.
the thing is if someone wants to kill someone it doesnt matter what the gun regulations are, they'll find a way to get a gun.
gun regulations make it harder, yeah, but it wont effectively stop it.
the thing is if someone wants to kill someone it doesnt matter what the gun regulations are, they'll find a way to get a gun.
gun regulations make it harder, yeah, but it wont effectively stop it.
"he stole the guns"
OMG WE NEED TOUGHER GUN CONTROL LAWS
"he stole the guns"
OMG WE NEED TOUGHER GUN CONTROL LAWS
duderThe argument here shouldn't be about gun control - but it will be. The argument shouldn't be about what made this person do this, but it will be. I've already heard video games, facebook and reality TV being blamed. None of those things killed those people today. The guns didn't kill those people. They didn't decide to spontaneously fire their bullets into people. A very sick person made all those decisions. It was not "easy" for him to obtain firearms. In fact, Connecticut and New Jersey have extremely strict gun control, schools are a gun-free zone and the shooter was below the legal age to lawfully own guns. We don't need more control of guns, we need to make help for sick people more available, and more acceptable. Mental health in America is a taboo subject - if you openly talk about your feelings, you think you're going to be persecuted. The law failed everyone who was killed today, but not because it was done with a gun, but because the shooter didn't get the help he needed. He would have killed today, whether it was with guns, explosives, knives, poisons, or even his own bare hands. He didn't get the help he needed - we let him down as a society - but not because he got some guns, but because the underlying reasons or conditions that made him want to kill couldn't be treated in time.
I'd really have enjoyed to see him kill 20 and wound a dozen more with his bare hands. Gun availability is an issue every where in the nation no matter where you live, the northeast isn't an exception to that at all. Even if he stole the guns, the availability of the guns he stole is a symptom of a nation that has no major political party opposed to the NRA. Yes, mental health service availability is also a major issue in the nation, but saying that the discussion should be limited to that is ignorant of the last half a year (really last 50+ years) and the other tragedies that are the reason that a title with shooting in it has to be preceded by "yet another."
[quote=duder]The argument here shouldn't be about gun control - but it will be. The argument shouldn't be about what made this person do this, but it will be. I've already heard video games, facebook and reality TV being blamed. None of those things killed those people today. The guns didn't kill those people. They didn't decide to spontaneously fire their bullets into people. A very sick person made all those decisions. It was not "easy" for him to obtain firearms. In fact, Connecticut and New Jersey have extremely strict gun control, schools are a gun-free zone and the shooter was below the legal age to lawfully own guns. We don't need more control of guns, we need to make help for sick people more available, and more acceptable. Mental health in America is a taboo subject - if you openly talk about your feelings, you think you're going to be persecuted. The law failed everyone who was killed today, but not because it was done with a gun, but because the shooter didn't get the help he needed. He would have killed today, whether it was with guns, explosives, knives, poisons, or even his own bare hands. He didn't get the help he needed - we let him down as a society - but not because he got some guns, but because the underlying reasons or conditions that made him want to kill couldn't be treated in time.[/quote]
I'd really have enjoyed to see him kill 20 and wound a dozen more with his bare hands. Gun availability is an issue every where in the nation no matter where you live, the northeast isn't an exception to that at all. Even if he stole the guns, the availability of the guns he stole is a symptom of a nation that has no major political party opposed to the NRA. Yes, mental health service availability is also a major issue in the nation, but saying that the discussion should be limited to that is ignorant of the last half a year (really last 50+ years) and the other tragedies that are the reason that a title with shooting in it has to be preceded by "yet another."
But our forefathers said we need to all own guns...
But our forefathers said we need to all own guns...