The US Politics |OT|

[collint0101]

KLAMarine said:

the-pi-guy said:

>criminals don't obey laws

And yet we don't use that argument with any other laws.  Why make laws against stealing?  Criminals don't follow laws, anyways.

Just because someone is willing to break the law, doesn't mean that a law can't stop someone.  

I'm not talking about any gun bans, but suppose there was a gun ban.  Where would someone get a gun?  If you take 40 people who would cause a mass shooting, you'd likely find that most of them are neither knowledgable enough to make their own or connected enough to be able to get one illegally.  That might mean 4 mass shootings instead of 40.

>when seconds count, police are minutes away

The issue is that when someone has a gun, another gun usually isn't what saves the day.  For every "good guy with a gun", there's 10 shooting incidents that could have easily been avoided in the first place.  Even in some of these recent mass shootings, there was a "good guy with a gun", who knew better not to use theirs.  You'll have some incidents where police can't tell the difference between the good guy and the bad guy. 

Secondly, just because someone has a gun doesn't mean it can be used, let alone should be used.  People that are shooting up a place, aren't going to take time to be extra careful.  They aren't going to try giving you time to use your gun. 

And thirdly, there are issues where people aren't trained.  They aren't well trained on how to use their gun, they aren't trained on how to safely manage the situation.  

1. Well in practice, most laws are used to punish the act itself rather than prevent it. There are laws against theft and yet we still have thieves. Laws against ownership of powerful weapons isn't going to end the ownership of these weapons. I agree though on making it as difficult as possible for people to get their hands on high-powered weapons.

2. The chances that anyone here be involved in a mass shooting is tiny. If caught in such a situation, I'd prefer to be armed than not. Do you feel the same?

konnichiwa said:

That's why I said 'if all the points are confirmed'

The suspect is believed to be the author of a text posted on 8chan, an online message board frequently used by the far right, which describes a "cultural and ethnic replacement brought on by an invasion", alluding to Hispanic people in the US.

The four-page document, reportedly posted some 20 minutes before police received the first emergency call, also expresses support for the gunman who killed 51 people in Christchurch, New Zealand, in March.

So where can I read this text?

Jaicee said:

By THAT logic, maybe we should just legalize the private sale of rocket launchers. I mean why be stuck with mere assault weapons when you can cover the basis? So you might blow up your home in the process of defending it. So a dozen other people might be killed by your hypothetical act of self-defense. Sacrifices have to be made!

If my attacker showed up with an armored car, I could go with a rocket launcher. Of course, that's likely not to happen so I'll settle for a powerful firearm.

collint0101 said:

Universal mental health care, gun control, more aggressive law enforcement in regards to white supremacy. Like this isn't some uncontrollable force of nature it is very much so a uniquely American issue that is a result of our culture and or policy

"more aggressive law enforcement in regards to white supremacy"

Why stop there? Any media that could encourage gun violence: GTA 5 might be in trouble.

What the fuck kind of leap in logic BS is this? White supremacy and people with connections to those who support it are a very specific group just like any other organization that supports or encourages political extremism and you're trying to compare it to the 100 million+ that have played gta5. I barely even know how to respond to this post because you're either too dense or to dishonest to warrant a proper response