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

well not in this case, this guy had terrible gun control. fortunately he didnt kill more than 2. if he would have had competent gun control many more would have died.

to bad the was no armed law abiding citizen with great gun control, they could have prevented this


Ughh, If gun control was better, an idiot like that wouldn't own a gun in the first place not needing your "law abiding citizen"

 

Prevention is the key.

when has gun laws ever kept criminals from owning guns? because criminals follow laws, right?

and even if he somehow couldnt get his hands on a gun illegally, could he not have killed people with a sword, knife, bat, poisin, ninja stars, etc. he "only" killed 2 people, someone could easily kill more people with nothing other than their fists.

and you do know that according to the FBI, bats are the most used weapon in violent crimes, knives are second, gun dont rank in the top 5.

If the guns were destroyed and managed/sold properly I'm sure it would work. We did it here in Australia. I remember seeing an add for a free gun if you made a bank account in the US. How ridiculous. Bats are more accessible which is why they're used.... It's like comparing alcohol drinkers to people on heroin. You can't because it would be stupid.