There are other countries where gun ownership is just as...and even more common than in the U.S. Switzerland for example doesnt just allow but requires all military age men own and have in thier personal possesion a military rifle. Specifically a selective fire assault rifle. Machine guns for those who dont know what selective fire means. Many other homes in Switzerland also have various military style assault weapons in them as a matter of normal practice. But the level of violence in Switzerland is a fraction of what it is in the U.S. and is generaly lower than many of their peers in Europe.

The question is... why? How is it possible to have a populace that is heavily armed and still have low violence? The simple fact is the most countries have substantialy better availability of mental health care than the U.S., and have more effective means of applying mental health care to the average citizen. People who need help are more likely to get it by either requesting it or by having a concerned family member jam it down their throte. In the U.S. we long ago lost the ability to involuntarily commit a person unless they have commited a crime, and parents have absolutly no one they can turn to if they have a child that has a serious problem. never mind that even if they do have someone to talk to about the issue they probably cant afford it.

There are already hints that this clowns mother new her son was fucked up in the head...but the police are still being very closed mouthed about this. Then there are medical confidentiality laws that prevent mental health workers or doctors from informing the authorities of a persons unsuitability to own a gun. In my line of work, the only thing I am allowed to discuss outside of the relationship between myself and my clients is suspected child abuse. Beyond that I am not allowed to say shit, even if I am aware that a person may pose a threat to him/herself or others. The law stands in the way of keeping people safe from dangerous peopl who dont have anything on their criminal histories that would prevent them from obtaining firearms.

things like this always come down to banning guns, in spite of the fact that Mexico has extremely strict gun control laws that make the U.K. look like the U.S. and even still they are up to their eyeballs in guns. Many of the countries that are the most dificult to aquire firearms are starting to see a gradual increase in the number of incidents involving gun violence. And violence overall is on the increase everywhere. People are simply getting more and more angry. But rather than address the issues leading to increased anger and frustration and mental health problems, everyone imediately leaps on the "ban the guns" bandwagon. The assault weapons ban in the 1990s reduced crime in the United States by exactly zero percent. Thats right. There was absolutly no indication that it had any effect whatsoever. It was poorly crafted, random and silly. It banned such things as bayonet lugs on rifles...which obviously cut down on the number of drive by bayonetings. It limited magazine capacity to ten rounds. Which forces the shooter to reload more frequently but does absolutly nothing to actualy reduce the number of rounds the shooter can fire. As was demonstrated time and time again on ranges using even novice shooters equiped with multiple magazines. Seriously...its time to address the real issues of violence rather than a tool that violent people use. Its time to figure out why people are so fucked up and try to help unfuck them.

 

[YOUTUBE]rwcuj7BrzYg[/YOUTUBE]

 

Gun control is hitting what you aim at.

 

Sorry guys the killer is a legal gun owner- just like you.

killed and wounded more people in one day than a seal sniper in his whole career.

sorry gun defenders using the axe , knife sword approach, I dont care how many times you have watched "kill Bill" you can't kill and wound 72 in a few minutes, with your stake/letter knife at maybe 20 feet away, sorry ex marines, seals I now that may shrink your ball size egos
Guns kill from from a distance beyond, way your arm/ leg reach.

the concealed (ccp) argument is nonsense they probably would have just killed others in their panic to escape and shoot anyone that got in their way.

2nd amendment was written to form militias against state oppression, not to carry or shoot the pizza delivery guy, or black kid walking in your street.

we live in a democracy , we elect our Govt.

 

yes he had 4 guns and 6000 rounds all legally purchased ejis, you need to hone up your reading skills.

point being HIS guns

 

Excuse me, but you're the one that stated it was a guy and his gun. I explained how inaccurate your description was. Perhaps I'm not the one that has to hone up on reading skills. I read and quoted correctly.

Anything else?

 

Not giving up my guns. A gun is like a hammer. It won't hurt anyone if an idiot doesn't abuse it. One licensed gun owner in that movie house would have saved alot of lives. I will give up my right to bear arms when liberals give up their freedom of speech.

 

when i first posted we knew not how many guns he had and used, just how many at that time he had killed and wounded.

but i guess once its your loved one bleeding out, the gun count will be so important to you .

 

TO CONQUER A NATION YOU MUST FIRST DISARM ITS CITIZENS -ADOLF HITLER-

 

Gun Right/gun owndrship is like one right to reprocreate. Not everyone should.

I always been told that the differents betweem a geniusan insane is one brain cell. You never know what might set a person off. It been proving time after time if someone want to attain a gun or other weapon it can be ready done leagally or illeagal.

 

Even the earliest news reported multiple weapons. And I don't believe that you told us you were there, with your loved one bleeding out.

 

GUNS

I a lot might not have this opion, but if you remove the guns from the citizens than the only ones that them crooks and cop and now days who whn.

 

Any chance you can stay on topic ?

the guy with his legal guns killed lots of peopleand wounded many more, can you with your duster ?
well maybe, smoking crack , and you think that's cool to have a AR assault rifle for fun.

 

Nymph, I would not need 4 guns and 6k rounds to kill 12 people. I can walk into any hardware store, spent less than $100 and walk out with enough material to make a nail bomb that would kill a hell of a lot more people than 12, and guess what you don't need to be x-military to do it. The information is on the net, so anyone with a computer would be able to do it.

So by your reasoning we should outlaw computers. Oh wait we would have to outlaw books also as most major libraries have books with the same information. Oh and we can't teach science either any chem majors have the knowelege also.

The problem is people, humans. You can not stop people from doing stupid stuff!

 

I've been on topic the entire time - just side-stepped a bit to point out the inaccuracy of your reporting.

 

no did the guy just killed 12 and wounded 50 + with not with chop sticks, his laptop or his beer bottle, no he did it with a weapon design for no other purpose than to shoot and kill and to do it at distance

 

Almost all posts have stayed on topic and have given you informative answers, you however keep getting emotional and telling us that a gun has only one use and that is to kill, we know that, however a hammer has only one normal use but can smash a head in nicely. Stop posting here and go defend yourself in your other thread, that is more fun for us.


@Tim.

The reason the Swiss do not use their militia weapons in the cause of a crime is that it will stack ten years on the sentence, and other weapons are readily available.

They are peaceful because of cuckoo clocks and Toblerone chocolate, the latter is full of Chlorpromazine and the former are spy devices.:excited::excited:

 

........and the only purpose of the Bill of Rights is to protect Americans from an overzealous government.............

This is not an argument you can win. The right to bear arms is as sacred as the right to vote and to gather for peaceful purposes. I don't own a gun (OK I have a BB gun around here somewhere) but I damn sure get nervous when people who claim to know what's good for me want to take away my rights.

Aurora is a tragedy, and another tragedy happened in Arizona a couple of years ago. The whack jobs who committed those crimes are the villains here, not the guns they used, and not the people who would defend the right to own guns.

You don't want to own a gun? Fine, don't own one. You want to deny me the right to own one because some vermin wasn't breast fed and kills a bunch of people, we have an issue.

And I resent you using this tragedy as an opportunity to take away my rights.

 

Got anything better, a better argument, than you have have the right to buy guns and then go kill at your whim, I guess not.

 

QUOTE=richief;5238867]Almost all posts have stayed on topic and have given you informative answers, you however keep getting emotional and telling us that a gun has only one use and that is to kill, we know that, however a hammer has only one normal use but can smash a head in nicely. Stop posting here and go defend yourself in your other thread, that is more fun for us.


@Tim.

The reason the Swiss do not use their militia weapons in the cause of a crime is that it will stack ten years on the sentence, and other weapons are readily available.

They are peaceful because of cuckoo clocks and Toblerone chocolate, the latter is full of Chlorpromazine and the former are spy devices.:excited::excited:[/QUOTE]

Got anything better, a better argument, than you have have the right to buy guns and then go kill at your whim, I guess not.
of course we must always and not question, but trust vets with PTSD and the lonnys that have have never killed yet, lets give them all the guns.
to protect ourselves martial arts, gun mastery, IED ,SWAT ,SAS, thats just for the girls, while the boys do domestic science classes.