40inches long. May as well called them swords lol

In a busy train station attacked slow older people who couldn't move fast.

It would have been much worse if it was guns.

What a fucked up country.

But then again, I'm not even surprised anymore.. it's going to keep happening and they arent going to anything to solve the problem.

No Hitler pushed an ultra patriotic notion and vision of Germany and not adhering to the rest of the world kind like what your current President in his run did, you now admit Hitler didn't rise up through oppression yet tried using that as a basis for your argument for guns to begin with. You do realize the Government already has so much power to begin with right they had it long before you were even born and still retain it.

Tell us how are you and your little handgun or rifle going to stop things when they're too late? If the military complies with the Government it won't be people with guns dealing with you it will be military vehicles like tanks and bombers which your guns do nothing against not to mention they can remotely bomb your location and many others from a safe distance. Stop watching too much Rambo and be realistic you'll be there with you guns as a long range missile makes you and everyone with in a significant radius disappear.

The big problem here is yes at the beginning it started out as rare occurrences.

Yes in a utopia world guns don't kill people but the people who use them.

However the more these acts happen and no action is taken, the more others get inspired to do the same for ever fucked up justification they may have.

"No Hitler pushed an ultra patriotic notion and vision of Germany and not adhering to the rest of the world "

which is irrelevant

'Hitler didn't rise up through oppression yet tried using that as a basis for your argument for guns to begin with."

why is your reading comprehension so bad?

i stated this like twice now

"hitler rose to power because people demanded more security from their government"

i hold the position that people should have the means to be able to defend themselves and not have that responsibility taken from them by governments, that is my argument for guns

Ironic you try complaining about reading yet it's you in that very statement who has not read the post properly congratulations on self ownage. The Government has great power to the point it allows you those rights that's the the point the are many loopholes and rules it uses to get around them and they're employed everyday an example was Bush's Government introducing a law preventing the families of those who are incarcerated from voting, the rule was later removed but long after Bush had gone and benefited from it.

You didn't answer the question you said guns are for when things are too late so how is that gun going to deal with tanks and bombers? The military has people with differing views but guess what they're all trained and conditioned to follow commands of those in charge many of them had differing opinions when going to Vietnam, Iraq or Syria but still did because they feel a sense of duty in doing so.

1) You're right. It's people who have no business carrying a firearm that kill people.

2) Yes, that's the case. And those are exactly the type of people I am talking about! So wouldn't it make sense to limit their access to the most convenient and easiest option that can lead to the deadliest results and highest casualties? The argument of "they're going to try to kill anyways and they'll find other ways to do it besides guns" is the most counterproductive and foolish argument of this issue. All you're essentially telling them is, "Hey you guys are going to go crazy anyways. We know you're a lost cause, so.... here ya go! We'll make it easy for ya!"

3) Have you ever heard or seen a completely safe environment? There's no such thing. There never was. There is always going to be danger no matter what and we're never going to be 100% safe as long as we live in a society of free will. But that's not an excuse to not even bother trying at all. In that case, why even bother with a police force? The entire point is to limit that danger and violence as best we can. To make our environment as safe as we can possibly make it. To a point where, while we don't feel absolutely, completely safe, we do feel comfortable. And whatever problems come up, we don't just leave them unintended and allow them to get worse. We sit our asses down, put our heads together and try to come up with solutions

4) And when that happens, sooner or later, revolution occurs to overthrow the government. Some are successful, some are not.

5) And on the flip side, if that group of terrorists had guns instead of knives, the death count would have skyrocketed.
Furthermore, if those citizens had a gun in addition to the terrorists having them, then the death count could very easily climb even higher. Especially if those citizens are not properly and expertly trained in those types of situations.

It's not the 1700s anymore, when the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788, horse carriage was the primary method of travel, radio hadn't been invented yet, slavery was still a thing, Ludwig van Beethoven was just getting started in the music industry, there was no such thing as the FBI or CIA which wouldn't be founded until 120 and 159 years later, respectively, and George Washington had not assumed his role in office as the 1st president of the (Just 13) United States yet.

The argument that we need guns to protect us from the government was dead and long gone by the time we reached the 20th century. Now that we live in a modern age where everything, especially weaponry, has advanced to astronomical proportions, the idea that we need guns to protect ourselves from government and oppression is nothing more than a delusion we tell ourselves to cope with our own personal insecurities. If the government really wants you dead, guess what, pal? You're dead. Whether it be via bombing, plain crash, "accidental" overdose, or any other type of conspiracy theory there is in the book, or a more direct approach like the Army coming to your town. Having an AK-47, a 9 mm calibur, etc. isn't going to do jack shit to protect you at that point.

The real reason, no matter what anybody says, why people want to own guns in the 21st century is simple: "Because I want one." That's it. It's not a necessity, it's a luxury. A very dangerous luxury if placed in the wrong hands. If you want one, fine. I don't think banning guns is the answer, I actually think that would actually do more harm than good. But, a common misconception people make that they really need to get over is this: Gun Control =/= Banning Guns
If you want to own a gun, you better understand the implications and responsibility that comes with it and be willing to undergo the training, education, and prerequisites necessary in order to own one.

" The Government has great power to the point it allows you those rights"

this is not only stupid but dangerous thinking

the government is nothing without the consent of the people outside of dictatorships

" the rule was later removed"

exactly because the people chose to put someone there who removed it

"The military has people with differing views but guess what they're all trained and conditioned to follow commands of those in charge"

that's a big insult to the military to basically call them brainless slaves, its not only insulting but wrong

"If everyone was allowed to carry nukes"

we allow people access to bomb making materials

should we ban pvc piping while we are at it? 

"Not to outright ban guns."

how are you going to stop shootings if your goal is not to ban guns completely?

"No, you would debate if it's reasonable for a civilian to have that kind of weapon. "

 an ever ending list of things could fit this criteria

i just posted a situation where over 100 people an 33 people were killed in china through the use of knives

incidents where people in the double digits are killed like this happen in china at about the same frequency as mass shootings in the us

not to mention that guns exist at a rate of about 6 to each person in the states what will you do about all of them?

"But what we're talking about here is the ability for one person to kill an extraordinary amount of people at once, with ease."

like with bombs?

"In Japan"

japan is a very poor example, from what i've been hearing their country is on the verge of collapse because men have become so feminised they don't even want to associate with women lol

" Which is what happened in countries such as Australia and the U.K. after they imposed strict gun control."

killings in the uk has been on the rise steadily for the past few years; i don't know about australia

"Show me one single civilian who ever needed an AR-15. "

well shit i didn't realise you were the arbiter of what people should desire in their lives

people don't need much besides food, water and shelter but they often have other possessions for various reasons not because of need but because of want

people don't need alcohol either and alcohol causes more deaths per year, are you going to ban alcohol too?