334 days and 351 U.S. mass shootings in 2015

[MonsterOfSpain 8,331]

Just now, Chic said:

Gun control is not the answer, but gun enthusiasts are irritating as **** and the way people get so smug over these incidents is idiotic. And people need to stfu with the "I wouldn't be able to save someone in a mass shooting if I didn't have a gun to shoot the killer" logic because that almost never happens. People would like to delude themselves and others into thinking they're the white knight hero King of the world, but it's not realistic. The realistic justification is that the concept of a gun-laden area is preventative of crime in nature, which does have some factual backing to it.

And I still can't get a rational explanation for that affirmation  

[Didymus 34,380]

Just now, MonsterOfSpain said:

But most people in America have cars + guns. I don't really get what you're trying to say in the second paragraph.

Right now there are lots of deaths provoked by cars and guns. Yet in Europe there are only lots of deaths by cars. The number of deaths by guns is pretty residual. So in Europe there's half he problem that in America because one of the biggest problems is non-existant here. And why's that? Because normal citizens aren't able to buy a rifle in their nearest Target store.

That's not true lol.

Anyway, I get what you mean and it does make sense but if you think about it a little deeper, the situation in Europe is still far from ok so just remedying gun violence in a "See? Now we're doing just as bad as Europe!" fashion would be a solution for sure, but it's an easy excuse to do nothing else too.

[MonsterOfSpain 8,331]

3 minutes ago, Didymus said:

That's not true lol.

Anyway, I get what you mean and it does make sense but if you think about it a little deeper, the situation in Europe is still far from ok so just remedying gun violence in a "See? Now we're doing just as bad as Europe!" fashion would be a solution for sure, but it's an easy excuse to do nothing else too.

I know the situation is not perfect here of course, but it's really much lower and a much smaller problem. But you can't get to the tip of a mountain if you don't take the first step. Gun deaths won't stop from a day to another but it's important to start questioning the gun model in America and rethink the situation. And being at Europe's level can be a good first objective.

[Didymus 34,380]

Just now, MonsterOfSpain said:

I know the situation is not perfect here of course, but it's really much lower and a much smaller problem. But you can't get to the tip of a mountain if you don't take the first step. Gun deaths won't stop from a day to another but it's important to start questioning the gun model in America and rethink the situation. And being at Europe's level can be a good first objetive.

Hmm. Yeah, ok, I can agree with that

[MonsterOfSpain 8,331]

1 minute ago, Didymus said:

Hmm. Yeah, ok, I can agree with that

Well at least it's something lol

[Kattys 4,319]

This mentality in America that banning guns is a bad thing is just  You think having gun is a freedom? You think is helping your country? Think again, and look at all of the victims, specially in schools.

Look at Europe, compare the statistics. Less guns=less violence.

[MonsterOfSpain 8,331]

3 minutes ago, Kattys said:

This mentality in America that banning guns is a bad thing is just  You think having gun is a freedom? You think is helping your country? Think again, and look at all of the victims, specially in schools.

Look at Europe, compare the statistics. Less guns=less violence.

Thank you 

[Chic 20,830]

24 minutes ago, MonsterOfSpain said:

And I still can't get a rational explanation for that affirmation  

Simply because it wouldn't work.

[Morphine Prince 109,926]

Banning guns in America WONT work. This is not Europe. American citizens have been brainwashed by the NRA and their delusion is backed up by the Constitution (2nd Amendment). Some people literally FEAR that having no guns will result in the government taking over their lives and the anti-Christ enslaving us all. 

The gun culture in the US has gone to the extreme that IF the 2nd Amendment is ever overturned (which will NEVER happen, or at least not while we're alive) people will KILL for their right to own guns. Martial law WILL be set if this happens because citizens will protest and we might even enter a Civil War. I know I'm sounding like I'm exaggerating but you guys don't understand how people in America think unless you live here. 

Banning guns would only bring chaos. A strict FEDERAL gun control law sounds much better. We need more limits on what guns can be sold. It will be a slow process but I hope someday people in this country will wake up.  

[Goosey 3,017]

4 hours ago, Morphine Prince said:

Banning guns would only bring chaos. A strict FEDERAL gun control law sounds much better. We need more limits on what guns can be sold.

Eh... not we don't. A US citizen has the right to be at least as well armed as the police that protect them. In fact they probably have a right to be as well armed as your average infantry soldier. The purpose of the Second Amendment isn't duck hunting...

[Morphine Prince 109,926]

12 minutes ago, Goosey said:

Eh... not we don't. A US citizen has the right to be at least as well armed as the police that protect them. In fact they probably have a right to be as well armed as your average infantry soldier. The purpose of the Second Amendment isn't duck hunting...

Yes, we do. Just look at the weapons available. It's ridiculous. Average citizens don't need those things. 

The police is armed how it is BECAUSE this is an armed population. 

Look at other countries where the population is less armed... police don't even carry guns at times. 

[Goosey 3,017]

1 minute ago, Morphine Prince said:

Yes, we do. Just look at the weapons available. It's ridiculous. Average citizens don't need those things. 

The police is armed how it is BECAUSE this is an armed population. 

Look at other countries where the population is less armed... police don't even carry guns at times. 

What's ridiculous? That someone can buy an AR-15? The rifle has been commercially available for over 50 years now. This is nothing new. Thanks to its modular construction and large aftermarket it's a great choice for everything from targets to hunting to home defense, for teaching new shooters or for serious work. Americans have always been able to purchase their nation's former and/or current service rifles or civilian versions thereof, since about... 1776. It's not only practical, it's kind of necessary for service rifle competitions.

Second, police do carry guns in many other nations. Often it's a submachine gun or rifle, not just a pistol. Unarmed police like the UK are the exception. Most nations are far less liberal and go for the "heavily-armed police and unarmed populace" combination.

 

[Goosey 3,017]

1 minute ago, Morphine Prince said:

Yes, we do. Just look at the weapons available. It's ridiculous. Average citizens don't need those things. 

The police is armed how it is BECAUSE this is an armed population. 

Look at other countries where the population is less armed... police don't even carry guns at times. 

What's ridiculous? That someone can buy an AR-15? The rifle has been commercially available for over 50 years now. This is nothing new. Thanks to its modular construction and large aftermarket it's a great choice for everything from targets to hunting to home defense, for teaching new shooters or for serious work. Americans have always been able to purchase their nation's former and/or current service rifles or civilian versions thereof, since about... 1776. It's not only practical, it's kind of necessary for service rifle competitions.

Second, police do carry guns in many other nations. Often it's a submachine gun or rifle, not just a pistol. Unarmed police like the UK are the exception. Most nations are far less liberal and go for the "heavily-armed police and unarmed populace" combination.

 

[Morphine Prince 109,926]

15 minutes ago, Goosey said:

What's ridiculous? That someone can buy an AR-15? The rifle has been commercially available for over 50 years now. This is nothing new. Thanks to its modular construction and large aftermarket it's a great choice for everything from targets to hunting to home defense, for teaching new shooters or for serious work. Americans have always been able to purchase their nation's former and/or current service rifles or civilian versions thereof, since about... 1776. It's not only practical, it's kind of necessary for service rifle competitions.

Second, police do carry guns in many other nations. Often it's a submachine gun or rifle, not just a pistol. Unarmed police like the UK are the exception. Most nations are far less liberal and go for the "heavily-armed police and unarmed populace" combination.

 

Yes, it is. Sale should be restricted for hunting. Regular citizens don't need that stuff. 

Americans are paranoid of the "heavily-armed police and unarmed populace" structure, obviously. 

[Goosey 3,017]

25 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Yes, it is. Sale should be restricted for hunting. Regular citizens don't need that stuff. 

Americans are paranoid of the "heavily-armed police and unarmed populace" structure, obviously. 

Regular citizens don't need rifles? Why not? Is a rifle not useful for self-defense, hunting and recreation? I don't understand your point. The Constitution and Supreme Court say differently. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The Supreme Court found this amendment protects an individual's right to own firearms.

Yeah, with good reason. Americans are not real fond of the idea that "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".