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

Forums - Politics - Another Shooting, Another Gun Free Zone

Barozi on 17 July 2015
DialgaMarine said:
MikeRox said:


Reaction times prevent the good guy with the gun from preventing the bad guy with the gun before they are dead. You'd realistically need 2 good guys or someone else to fall first for the pro gun argument to work.

 It's called mutually assured destruction. The majority of criminals aren't suicidal. They simply want to commit their crime, gain what they can, and disappear. Knowing that at any moment someone else could pull a gun on them dampers their will to commit the crime in the first place. It's why places with the least restcitive gun laws end up having the least gun related crimes. If people are so set banning guns because people can use them to kill other people, then you might as well ban the other million and one items people can use to kill other people. 

you mean like the death sentence already does ? lol



Around the Network
Sharpryno on 17 July 2015
Barozi said:
DialgaMarine said:
MikeRox said:


Reaction times prevent the good guy with the gun from preventing the bad guy with the gun before they are dead. You'd realistically need 2 good guys or someone else to fall first for the pro gun argument to work.

 It's called mutually assured destruction. The majority of criminals aren't suicidal. They simply want to commit their crime, gain what they can, and disappear. Knowing that at any moment someone else could pull a gun on them dampers their will to commit the crime in the first place. It's why places with the least restcitive gun laws end up having the least gun related crimes. If people are so set banning guns because people can use them to kill other people, then you might as well ban the other million and one items people can use to kill other people. 

you mean like the death sentence already does ? lol

Gotta get caught first.  You think this terrorist was worried about someone having a gun?  Gun free zone, military around, perfect place to act.  If it was not a gun free zone you think he would have took time to study this place?  



Conina on 17 July 2015
DialgaMarine said:

Knowing that at any moment someone else could pull a gun on them dampers their will to commit the crime in the first place.

 


That doesn't seem to work very well. Or how do you explain that in most crime categories the US of A have a higher crime rate Per population than the majority of European countries?



MikeRox on 17 July 2015
Conina said:
DialgaMarine said:

Knowing that at any moment someone else could pull a gun on them dampers their will to commit the crime in the first place.

 


That doesn't seem to work very well. Or how do you explain that in most crime categories the US of A have a higher crime rate Per population than the majority of European countries?


There's also the small thing of countries that had a mass shooting then introduced Gun Controls in the aftermath, tend to find they were the last mass shootings they had.



RIP Dad 25/11/51 - 13/12/13. You will be missed but never forgotten.

gooch_destroyer on 17 July 2015

I think we should make guns harder to get...



Around the Network
sc94597 on 17 July 2015
melbye said:

It is funny how these things almost never happens in Europe, which is essentially one big gun free zone


 Charlie Hebdo and  Anders Breivik didn't happen? Sure they might happen less frequently in Europe, but when they do more people die, because the lunatic is the only person with a gun.



sc94597 on 17 July 2015
MikeRox said:
Conina said:


That doesn't seem to work very well. Or how do you explain that in most crime categories the US of A have a higher crime rate Per population than the majority of European countries?


There's also the small thing of countries that had a mass shooting then introduced Gun Controls in the aftermath, tend to find they were the last mass shootings they had.

And there are plenty of examples that still have mass shootings because there is a black market in weapons.



MikeRox on 17 July 2015
sc94597 said:
MikeRox said:


There's also the small thing of countries that had a mass shooting then introduced Gun Controls in the aftermath, tend to find they were the last mass shootings they had.

And there are plenty of examples that still have mass shootings because there is a black market in weapons.


You'll never completely eradicate it without completely eradicating guns... however, the black market is a much more difficult way to obtain them than general sale. Hence the US has a much bigger problem than many other places.



RIP Dad 25/11/51 - 13/12/13. You will be missed but never forgotten.

mornelithe on 17 July 2015
MikeRox said:
sc94597 said:

And there are plenty of examples that still have mass shootings because there is a black market in weapons.


You'll never completely eradicate it without completely eradicating guns... however, the black market is a much more difficult way to obtain them than general sale. Hence the US has a much bigger problem than many other places.

Yeah, I'll never understand folks who won't lift a finger to try and solve the problem, because 'you can't stop it all'.  What an obtuse world view.



mornelithe on 17 July 2015

By the way, just so we're clear here (since 'surprise' SocialistSlayer didn't include this), the ban is the result of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which prohibits the Government from using the military for domestic law enforcement.  And let's not pretend that Texas just didn't go full retard over the US Military's exercises in Texas thinking that Obama was invading (Yes, I know, it's kind of hard to invade a place you already control...but...Texas).  So, the US Government and Military are quite sensitive about having armed military personnel in within the US. 

Additionally:

Military officials said security at recruiting and reserve centers will be reviewed, but the Army's top officer said it's too early to say whether the facilities should have security guards or other increased protection.

"I think we have to be careful about over-arming ourselves, and I'm not talking about where you end up attacking each other," Gen. Ray Odierno, chief of staff of the Army, told reporters. Instead, he said, it's more about "accidental discharges and everything else that goes along with having weapons that are loaded that causes injuries."

Source

So, the Army Chief of Staff disagrees with arming soldiers inside the US (Obviously referring to off-base activity).  Go figure.