| mrstickball said:
1) I'm trying to get you to understand that guns have no correlation with crime. The report you cited didn't even say they did, either. Just that homicides were performed more often with firearms in America than they were in Europe - but failing to mention if homicides were higher or lower, overall. 2) And isn't that the whole point of wanting to restrict firearms? That it somehow reduces murders and death? If there is no data that correlates with fewer guns yielding fewer murders, then why restrict the weaponry in the first place? |
1) You posted nothing I'm disagreeing with. Your point? Though I won't probabaly go as far as say "no correlation", but there's certainly not enough proof to say it otherwise.
2) My point is there's correlation between firearms availability and mass murder cases like this (note: not the homicide rate). You said "go after root causes the crime", given most cases of handgun kills in America are: victim shot during the robbery, offender shot by victim or police officer, banal domestic violence -- these could be addressed as they due to social causes most of the time, but how exactly you'd address the situation when some crazy fuck decided his life worth nothing and apparently yours too? Put all crazy fucks into detention and treat them? What about shooter before this one, and even before the one that was before this one? They were medically ok. Since there're no other options -- you either control guns or people, you stuck with "control guns" option, which is unlikely and probably not worth it. Hence my "get used to it" comment, this is what you gonna pay for >80% gun ownership per capita unfortuantely. Not a social problem of big magnitude, but a very vocal and painfull incidents.
