By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - House minority leader trying to blame video games for mass shootings. Update: Walmart pulls violent video game ads for 2 weeks

Ganoncrotch said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Ding Ding.

Took longer than expected.

Theres actually a whole Wikipedia article about that specific argument explaining how historians tend to think it is pretty terrible, so he went beyond just dinging the "Hitler" bell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_gun_control_argument



Around the Network
Azzanation said:
curl-6 said:

So what, only the US has mentally ill people? Mental illness is prevalent in every country on Earth, why do countries like Japan or Australia or Canada not have this problem?

I understand your point however, its not the fact USA has guns which is why they have these killings. Ask any US citizen and they will say their* educational system is bad, they dont invest enough resources into schooling etc. 

Also we cannot compare countries with 40m people to a country with 400m. Its a lot* easier to control crime with a lower number of citizens and in this case, Australia or Canada make up 1 entire US city. Thats how big the USA is to those countries. Also Canada and Australia have a better educational system or at least invest more into it than the States. 

Crime is crime, if they wont kill you with a gun, they will kill you with something else. Its why in my opinion taking away something from people to stop crime is just a quick patch up to an issue that wont last long. If a killer wants a gun, they will get one regardless of the laws.

Yes, yes it is. It is distinctly the ease in which any non-felon and non-diagnosed insane person in this country can walk into any random Wal-mart and purchase a weapon. Hell, apparently even if you were expelled from school for having a hit list and a rape list you can still grab weapons and body armor no problem.

The US education system is not the best at the K-12 level due to its one-size-fits-all approach, but at the collegiate level it's leagues above the rest which is why people flock here from across the globe to take advantage of it.

It's vastly more difficult for someone to commit the types of mass slaughter that have become prevalent with something other than semi-automatic rifles. Running away is a viable option against a knife, not so much against a bullet.



Pemalite said: 

SIP

Alright so do you honestly believe if they take the guns away from the people (it will be the only way to come anywhere close to stopping shootings, we cannot just place laws as laws can be broken) that it will actually stop shootings? You believe that a criminal master mind or some mental head wont be able to get a gun or cause a massive crime scene in the US? 

What if after banning guns, another shooting happens, what will they take away next? Video Games? 

Australia is a heavily monitored country where the lack of freedom is laughable compared to the US. You cannot do anything in Australia without being looked at or fined. Cannot even lower your car height to much without it being illegal. But hey, if lowering a car too low is a danger to lives than I guess it makes sense.. oh wait it has nothing to do with saving lives. Its government control. Heck we have the most speed cameras in the world compared to anywhere else because placing cameras down hills and on roads where the speed changes drastically helps prevent lives.. or is it a money making industry? hmm

Drugs and Guns are very different. If you are saying they are the same thing than we might as well put everything into the same barrel. Everything can kill you so we need to monitor and restrict everyone from doing everything. We live in a Country that is so controlled its beyond a joke. We gave in to Gun laws a long time ago, but than shortly after, we gave them everything else, video games getting banned, knifes getting banned, bats, Cars cannot be lowered or have neon lights, highly restricted on modifying cars etc. Australia gave in and now basically we lost more than just guns. People waste there money paying fines they cannot afford because of our government. 

USA still has all that freedom because the public doesn't want to start the dictatorship and start taking freedom away from the citizens. Having a gun is a form of freedom, just like everything else (Not drugs, Drugs are designed to be evil)

But the stupidest thing Australia has going for it, is its Justice system, We allow murderers to walk free after 4 years, we allow mental heads to drive cars and allow idiots to walk the street. Take something away, they will find another avenue or still get what they wanted anyway. 

My final opinion on this matter is I am all for adding more gun laws and removing guns form the streets however.. I don't believe it will solve the shootings. US is too deep with its own problems that the only way to stop these shootings is to actually find these mental idiots and remove them from the streets. 

If you disagree that's okay, but that's just my opinion.



There is no way in hell that Americans will give up their guns. Myself included. I don't care how much money is offered to me.

My guns are my legacy. They and the ones before them, will be passed on to responsible family members.



Azzanation said:
Pemalite said: 

SIP

Alright so do you honestly believe if they take the guns away from the people (it will be the only way to come anywhere close to stopping shootings, we cannot just place laws as laws can be broken) that it will actually stop shootings? You believe that a criminal master mind or some mental head wont be able to get a gun or cause a massive crime scene in the US? 

What if after banning guns, another shooting happens, what will they take away next? Video Games? 

Australia is a heavily monitored country where the lack of freedom is laughable compared to the US. You cannot do anything in Australia without being looked at or fined. Cannot even lower your car height to much without it being illegal. But hey, if lowering a car too low is a danger to lives than I guess it makes sense.. oh wait it has nothing to do with saving lives. Its government control. Heck we have the most speed cameras in the world compared to anywhere else because placing cameras down hills and on roads where the speed changes drastically helps prevent lives.. or is it a money making industry? hmm

Drugs and Guns are very different. If you are saying they are the same thing than we might as well put everything into the same barrel. Everything can kill you so we need to monitor and restrict everyone from doing everything. We live in a Country that is so controlled its beyond a joke. We gave in to Gun laws a long time ago, but than shortly after, we gave them everything else, video games getting banned, knifes getting banned, bats, Cars cannot be lowered or have neon lights, highly restricted on modifying cars etc. Australia gave in and now basically we lost more than just guns. People waste there money paying fines they cannot afford because of our government. 

USA still has all that freedom because the public doesn't want to start the dictatorship and start taking freedom away from the citizens. Having a gun is a form of freedom, just like everything else (Not drugs, Drugs are designed to be evil)

But the stupidest thing Australia has going for it, is its Justice system, We allow murderers to walk free after 4 years, we allow mental heads to drive cars and allow idiots to walk the street. Take something away, they will find another avenue or still get what they wanted anyway. 

My final opinion on this matter is I am all for adding more gun laws and removing guns form the streets however.. I don't believe it will solve the shootings. US is too deep with its own problems that the only way to stop these shootings is to actually find these mental idiots and remove them from the streets. 

If you disagree that's okay, but that's just my opinion.

Legit question for ya, considering your main desire for good guys to have guns is so that good guys can stop bad guys with guns.... how many mass shooters have been stopped by good guys with guns, that aren't cops?

How many of these active shooter situations have been stopped by a civilian taking out their gun and shooting the one who is doing the mass shooting?

I personally would not draw my gun in a situation where cops were joining a scene and I was a civilian with a weapon... because I would perfectly expect the cop to assume I was the shooter and to put me down.

But yeah... just wondering if you know how many times a gun wielding Civilian has stopped a mass shooting.

As for your ... if they put laws in to stop killers being able to get guns, then they'll try to stop us putting neon lights on cars... will you also get cats marrying dogs down that same route? What I mean to say is, don't do that in an argument. If you allow X to happen..... then what's next! It's not a good practice for discussion the topic at hand.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Around the Network
sundin13 said:
Ganoncrotch said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Ding Ding.

Took longer than expected.

Theres actually a whole Wikipedia article about that specific argument explaining how historians tend to think it is pretty terrible, so he went beyond just dinging the "Hitler" bell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_gun_control_argument

I wasn't even aware of that being a thing, very interesting read that wiki article, so Hitler put laws in place for gypsies and jews to have difficulty in getting guns because he was aware that if you make it harder for people to get guns then they are less likely to have guns to start shooting at you/each other.

It's kinda sad to think that he was more on the ball with how gun control would work to prevent shootings of his people.

Article is fairly cool as well when it goes into the sheer numbers and power that the German and then Nazi army had in comparison to the possible amount of power you could have ever mustered against that force if you had armed each Jew and Gypsy in the state at the time considering they made up less than 1% of the population and the general population at the time was very pro Nazi, the only differences of arming them would have been them being shot on the streets or shot premptively instead of being able to gather them up into camps. Just that it would never have been a factor in stopping Hitler if civilian jewish people would have had 1940s era pistols Vs the military power of the 3rd Reich.

Thanks for the link though, I love a good study on history / revisionist history to try to back up a modern day argument.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Ganoncrotch said:
Azzanation said:

Alright so do you honestly believe if they take the guns away from the people (it will be the only way to come anywhere close to stopping shootings, we cannot just place laws as laws can be broken) that it will actually stop shootings? You believe that a criminal master mind or some mental head wont be able to get a gun or cause a massive crime scene in the US? 

What if after banning guns, another shooting happens, what will they take away next? Video Games? 

Australia is a heavily monitored country where the lack of freedom is laughable compared to the US. You cannot do anything in Australia without being looked at or fined. Cannot even lower your car height to much without it being illegal. But hey, if lowering a car too low is a danger to lives than I guess it makes sense.. oh wait it has nothing to do with saving lives. Its government control. Heck we have the most speed cameras in the world compared to anywhere else because placing cameras down hills and on roads where the speed changes drastically helps prevent lives.. or is it a money making industry? hmm

Drugs and Guns are very different. If you are saying they are the same thing than we might as well put everything into the same barrel. Everything can kill you so we need to monitor and restrict everyone from doing everything. We live in a Country that is so controlled its beyond a joke. We gave in to Gun laws a long time ago, but than shortly after, we gave them everything else, video games getting banned, knifes getting banned, bats, Cars cannot be lowered or have neon lights, highly restricted on modifying cars etc. Australia gave in and now basically we lost more than just guns. People waste there money paying fines they cannot afford because of our government. 

USA still has all that freedom because the public doesn't want to start the dictatorship and start taking freedom away from the citizens. Having a gun is a form of freedom, just like everything else (Not drugs, Drugs are designed to be evil)

But the stupidest thing Australia has going for it, is its Justice system, We allow murderers to walk free after 4 years, we allow mental heads to drive cars and allow idiots to walk the street. Take something away, they will find another avenue or still get what they wanted anyway. 

My final opinion on this matter is I am all for adding more gun laws and removing guns form the streets however.. I don't believe it will solve the shootings. US is too deep with its own problems that the only way to stop these shootings is to actually find these mental idiots and remove them from the streets. 

If you disagree that's okay, but that's just my opinion.

Legit question for ya, considering your main desire for good guys to have guns is so that good guys can stop bad guys with guns.... how many mass shooters have been stopped by good guys with guns, that aren't cops?

How many of these active shooter situations have been stopped by a civilian taking out their gun and shooting the one who is doing the mass shooting?

I personally would not draw my gun in a situation where cops were joining a scene and I was a civilian with a weapon... because I would perfectly expect the cop to assume I was the shooter and to put me down.

But yeah... just wondering if you know how many times a gun wielding Civilian has stopped a mass shooting.

As for your ... if they put laws in to stop killers being able to get guns, then they'll try to stop us putting neon lights on cars... will you also get cats marrying dogs down that same route? What I mean to say is, don't do that in an argument. If you allow X to happen..... then what's next! It's not a good practice for discussion the topic at hand.

It is essentially impossible to answer how many were stopped by a good guy with a gun.  They were stopped.  So, some of them ended with just one or two victims, rather than the larger number that would have happened without the armed person bringing an end to it.  Those aren't reflected in the mass shooting stats, obviously. There are lots of stats about defensive gun uses available though.  A Google search will give you lots of good info about that.  

I'll note that anyone with a gun and a chance to stop a shooting in progress, scared of being shot or not, damn sure better do everything they can to stop it.  I can't think of anything more cowardly that to see a gunman killing people right in front of you, *while you have a reasonable chance of bringing the gunman down* and just doing nothing.   

Last edited by VAMatt - on 11 August 2019

Ganoncrotch said:
Azzanation said:

Alright so do you honestly believe if they take the guns away from the people (it will be the only way to come anywhere close to stopping shootings, we cannot just place laws as laws can be broken) that it will actually stop shootings? You believe that a criminal master mind or some mental head wont be able to get a gun or cause a massive crime scene in the US? 

What if after banning guns, another shooting happens, what will they take away next? Video Games? 

Australia is a heavily monitored country where the lack of freedom is laughable compared to the US. You cannot do anything in Australia without being looked at or fined. Cannot even lower your car height to much without it being illegal. But hey, if lowering a car too low is a danger to lives than I guess it makes sense.. oh wait it has nothing to do with saving lives. Its government control. Heck we have the most speed cameras in the world compared to anywhere else because placing cameras down hills and on roads where the speed changes drastically helps prevent lives.. or is it a money making industry? hmm

Drugs and Guns are very different. If you are saying they are the same thing than we might as well put everything into the same barrel. Everything can kill you so we need to monitor and restrict everyone from doing everything. We live in a Country that is so controlled its beyond a joke. We gave in to Gun laws a long time ago, but than shortly after, we gave them everything else, video games getting banned, knifes getting banned, bats, Cars cannot be lowered or have neon lights, highly restricted on modifying cars etc. Australia gave in and now basically we lost more than just guns. People waste there money paying fines they cannot afford because of our government. 

USA still has all that freedom because the public doesn't want to start the dictatorship and start taking freedom away from the citizens. Having a gun is a form of freedom, just like everything else (Not drugs, Drugs are designed to be evil)

But the stupidest thing Australia has going for it, is its Justice system, We allow murderers to walk free after 4 years, we allow mental heads to drive cars and allow idiots to walk the street. Take something away, they will find another avenue or still get what they wanted anyway. 

My final opinion on this matter is I am all for adding more gun laws and removing guns form the streets however.. I don't believe it will solve the shootings. US is too deep with its own problems that the only way to stop these shootings is to actually find these mental idiots and remove them from the streets. 

If you disagree that's okay, but that's just my opinion.

Legit question for ya, considering your main desire for good guys to have guns is so that good guys can stop bad guys with guns.... how many mass shooters have been stopped by good guys with guns, that aren't cops?

How many of these active shooter situations have been stopped by a civilian taking out their gun and shooting the one who is doing the mass shooting?

I personally would not draw my gun in a situation where cops were joining a scene and I was a civilian with a weapon... because I would perfectly expect the cop to assume I was the shooter and to put me down.

But yeah... just wondering if you know how many times a gun wielding Civilian has stopped a mass shooting.

As for your ... if they put laws in to stop killers being able to get guns, then they'll try to stop us putting neon lights on cars... will you also get cats marrying dogs down that same route? What I mean to say is, don't do that in an argument. If you allow X to happen..... then what's next! It's not a good practice for discussion the topic at hand.

how many mass shooters have been stopped by good guys with guns, that aren't cops?"

it happened routinely in past, its what the whole western movie genre is based on



o_O.Q said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Legit question for ya, considering your main desire for good guys to have guns is so that good guys can stop bad guys with guns.... how many mass shooters have been stopped by good guys with guns, that aren't cops?

How many of these active shooter situations have been stopped by a civilian taking out their gun and shooting the one who is doing the mass shooting?

I personally would not draw my gun in a situation where cops were joining a scene and I was a civilian with a weapon... because I would perfectly expect the cop to assume I was the shooter and to put me down.

But yeah... just wondering if you know how many times a gun wielding Civilian has stopped a mass shooting.

As for your ... if they put laws in to stop killers being able to get guns, then they'll try to stop us putting neon lights on cars... will you also get cats marrying dogs down that same route? What I mean to say is, don't do that in an argument. If you allow X to happen..... then what's next! It's not a good practice for discussion the topic at hand.

how many mass shooters have been stopped by good guys with guns, that aren't cops?"

it happened routinely in past, its what the whole western movie genre is based on

You can't be serious lmao. The wild west was a period of lawlessness and incredible violence, crime and corruption. But even besides that, the western movie movie genre is a fictive glorified version of what happened in those times LMAO 



Azzanation said:

Alright so do you honestly believe if they take the guns away from the people (it will be the only way to come anywhere close to stopping shootings, we cannot just place laws as laws can be broken) that it will actually stop shootings? You believe that a criminal master mind or some mental head wont be able to get a gun or cause a massive crime scene in the US? 

Uh. It's not taking guns away from people... You are looking at it incorrectly. - You do not loose your constitutional right to bear arms.
You need to educate yourself on what Australia did, how it did it and why it did what it did... Because it worked.

Even if Australia has a massacre tomorrow, the gun legislation that it brought in decades ago still worked, the scheme was successful.

Essentially the first phase was the legislative phase, this is where the debates were had... Where Pro-gun nuts used the same arguments you did... (And were historically proven incorrect!) From there we formed and came up with the new laws and legislation that would go on to form the ground work of our gun control scheme.

The second phase was a voluntary gun buy-back scheme, where you would go to the Police station and hand in your weapon for cash, this reduced the amount of devices in the country substantially, people rushed to it.

The third phase was where education of the population would occur, to guide people through the appropriate avenues to purchase weapons, how to store weapons, how to use the weapons... For example we need to store guns in a locked safe, bolted to the ground with an active alarm system monitoring it. (I.E. No gun stored in a shoebox for a kid to reach into!)

It is a process... It is a process that still continues. - The guns didn't just disappear from existence over night you know and there is a talk for another buy-back effort after the last couple were so successful.

Azzanation said:

What if after banning guns, another shooting happens, what will they take away next? Video Games? 

Isn't that what they are talking about in the USA anyway despite guns being legal? Ergo your argument holds zero weight.

...But our Gun control works, so we aren't even having this discussion in Australia!

Azzanation said:

Australia is a heavily monitored country where the lack of freedom is laughable compared to the US. You cannot do anything in Australia without being looked at or fined. Cannot even lower your car height to much without it being illegal. But hey, if lowering a car too low is a danger to lives than I guess it makes sense.. oh wait it has nothing to do with saving lives. Its government control. Heck we have the most speed cameras in the world compared to anywhere else because placing cameras down hills and on roads where the speed changes drastically helps prevent lives.. or is it a money making industry? hmm

This is absolutely Fake news.

You can lower your car. - You can lower your car by no more than one-third of the original suspension travel that was set when the car was manufactured.. And there is very fundamental reasons for such limits... And it results in me going out to less car accidents and cutting gear heads out of vehicles.

Australia's "Freedoms" ranks far more highly than the United States in various indices. - Have you not done your research?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_and_surveillance_by_country

As for being heavily monitored... That is laughable when compared to the nation who pushed for the NSA to have Mass Surveillance on all American Citizens! Hahahaha
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance_in_the_United_States

And Australia is worst off? Puhlease.

Azzanation said:

Drugs and Guns are very different. If you are saying they are the same thing than we might as well put everything into the same barrel. Everything can kill you so we need to monitor and restrict everyone from doing everything. We live in a Country that is so controlled its beyond a joke. We gave in to Gun laws a long time ago, but than shortly after, we gave them everything else, video games getting banned, knifes getting banned, bats, Cars cannot be lowered or have neon lights, highly restricted on modifying cars etc. Australia gave in and now basically we lost more than just guns. People waste there money paying fines they cannot afford because of our government. 

Yes Drugs and Guns are very different, that isn't up for dispute.
But what is the same is the reasoning/excuses that you can use to justify both, meaning your original argument is highly flawed.

We also have not lost access to guns. You can still buy and own guns. - Stop with the fake news!

Azzanation said:

My final opinion on this matter is I am all for adding more gun laws and removing guns form the streets however.. I don't believe it will solve the shootings. US is too deep with its own problems that the only way to stop these shootings is to actually find these mental idiots and remove them from the streets. 

Again, we need to look at what has worked. And Gun control has proven to work in more than 1 nation.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--