I served 22+ years in the USMC. I don't need a firearm, no one does. This shit has got to stop. Don't hand me the 2nd Amendment crap. I don't want to go into why the NRA and their supporters are wrong about the constitution AGAIN. 57 dead and more than 500 injured by one man with a bunch of FUCKING GUNS!
I am so sick of this fake macho shit I can't see straight.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
I could not agree more.
More gun laws wouldn't stop them from getting guns. If they are criminals do you think they care about laws. I just want a gun so I can protect myself. If someone in that crowd had a gun that could have fired back and killed him before he shot all those people and lessened the number of death and injuries that occured.
Really rattail? What a fucking stupid statement! You don't know what you are talking about. I know how to use a weapon. I am in fact, an expert. That guy was on the 32nd floor firing an automatic weapon. If you were there and you had a handgun you couldn't even come close to hitting him.
Plus even if you have a gun and you train every week with said gun, you don't have experience in a REAL firefight. It takes experience. Even if you had a shot, I doubt that you would hit him. I have been in dozens and dozens. I know how effective I was in the first few or so which was to say ineffective.
But lessening the number is stupid. How about just ending the possibility but not allowing guns!
BTW the last dozen or so mass shootings were done by people that were legal to have a gun.
Hey, guess what, the one thing in common all of these mass shootings have in common is that the shooter has a FUCKING GUN!
They don't have this problem in Japan, in England!
Gun massacres have happened in England.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_massacre
The difference is the Brits tightened gun laws significantly after this tragedy. That's never happened in the US.
Japan has very strict gun laws, and shooting incidents are extremely rare. Massacres happen, but usually knives are involved. I think I'd rather face a nut with a knife than a nut with a gun.
mykcob4,
This is America where freedom to have and to keep slaves was won with guns. We settle our disagreements with violence and not yakking about them over tea and cookies. When people tick us off, whether it's our mother, father, brother, sister, next door neighbor, stranger, or some people in another country we start shooting. It's been that way here since 1620. It's our culture and heritage and we love it and we do it very well.
Tradition does not imply goodness or any advantage. My country has a tradition for bullfighting, and it's an abhorrent tradition that we should have already banned.
Look at the attached image. Your country's pride...
(source: New York Times)
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
@Rattail
Did you even read the coverage? Even the police took quite a few minutes to figure out where the shots were coming from.
If someone illegally brought a firearm to that concert they would of only added to the chaos and gotten themselves or someone else injured or killed with their that they thought they would save the day with.
You statement is so ignorant, and incredibly insulting to all the people that were there at that concert in vegas, and anyone else of the millions of americans who's lives have been harmed one way or another by guns.
RatTail788,
You do know that there were armed cops in the crowd. I think one or two got killed.
Who needs 42 guns and EXPLOSIVES?!
mykcob4,
The guy didn't use all 42 guns and he didn't use any explosives so maybe he didn't need all of that stuff. But it made him happy to have it and it gave him comfort to possess it.
Its funny how the Boston Massacre, an event that enraged Americans and practically solidified the revolution and changed the history of the world..... only killed 5 people.
Doesn't sound like much of a massacre by today's standards.
@mykcob4
First of all I'll have to agree with you on rattail788, a pistol at 300 yards is a hail marry unless you have a broomstick gun.
"Not allowing guns"
So breaking the laws this nation is built on is ok!?
Not that you could even take them all. Not all mine are registered. I'm merely one of most gun owners.
England by the way has one of the highest crime rates since they took their guns.
I would mention Switzerland with the lowest crime rate with absolutely no gun restrictions, but since they allowed refugees their crime rate has skyrocketed.
I love watching English car chases, first they have to box them in, then beat on the car windows with billy clubs as it maneuvers back and forth.
Well, Closet_atheist you are misleading. The ban on guns in England came in 1997 after which there was a dramatic drop in the crime rate.
"1997
Following the Dunblane massacre, the government passed the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 and the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997, defining "short firearms" as Section 5 Prohibited Weapons, which effectively banned private possession of handguns almost completely."
The crime rate raise was and is due to the loss of policeman that began in 2009 and has increased every year since.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/20/official-figures-show-bi...
The Swiss do have gun control.
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/switzerland.php#Development
@Closet Atheist
As an Englishman I can tell you that your statement "England has one of the highest crime rates...etc" is a bucket of horse shit. I suggest you get back into that closet and shut the door.
Sweden has considerable gun restrictions/regulations.
My apologies, in my drunken stupor I said sweden instead of Switzerland.
Are you also up at 2am or are you from somewhere else?
It was 11pm for me, but yeah.
They do, but they have fewer than we do. They also have no minimum wage-
America ha very large number of people who are living in the "self created imaginary life believing" that the zombies are coming. Hence guns are needed for that eventuality.
Have a look at the movies, zombies after zombies after zombies and more zombies.
self created imaginary life believing" that the zombies are coming."
I can't say I know a single damn person that believes zombies are coming. Not only is that a sweeping generalization, it's a horribly erroneous one. Please, think before you speak nonsense.
I think the underpinning problem is a failure to address mental and brain health.
The brain seems to be the only part of the body that is typically treated with talking. We routinely look at blood and urine. X-rays, CT scans, mammograms, colonoscopies are all routine and common. But we leave off at the brain. I suspect many problems could be treated before they erupt into tragedy if we just looked at this organ as routinely as we look at others.
A brilliant idea, though I don't know how long it would take for that to come around en mass.
I really can't stand the whole "there will always be criminals breaking laws" nonsense. If that's how you feel, then what's the point of any of our laws if people will just break it? Drugs are illegal and there are still people using and dying from them. But does that stop the "war on drugs"? No. The Gov still tries to enact new laws and ways to get drugs off the street. But with guns, they couldn't care less, thanks to the NRA. Proposing a bill that let's mentally ill people buy guns is not the answer. Not having enough mental health facilities/help is not the answer. This won't get fixed in a day or year, but I want them to at least try. Thoughts and prayers do nothing. DO SOMETHING!!!!!
FYI- It's been reported that there were many people who had legal guns on them, but couldn't protect themselves for the OBVIOUS reasons that 1- They didn't know where the gun fire was coming from. 2- Being on the 32nd floor of a high rise made it impossible to shoot him down.
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
To me, one of the biggest problems with guns, without even getting into a pro-gun/anti-gun debate, is that they are REACTIVE defensive weapons. We need to stop relying on them and start talking about PROACTIVE defense.
I always hear, "Well, if more law abiding citizens had guns this could have been prevented."
No. That might reduce the death toll, but it would not prevent it from happening in the first place. Dropping the number of people killed from 50 to say 5 is NOT success. One death is failure.
In the large # mass killings by guns of late, citizens being armed would not have made any difference, and would of likely raised the death toll rather than as lower it.
Las Vegas, Orlando, Aurora colorado theaters, in the 2 more recent there was armed, practiced professionals already there with guns, did them zero good.
And a dark loud theater during a fight scene in batman? Anyone that has done actual gun encounter training would tell you that is a nightmare scenario.
Citizens private carying guns would only cause problems in such scenarios.
Okay, some people think if everyone had a gun at that concert fewer people would not have been killed. That is not close to being true. All it would do is cause a shootout that possibly and highly likely cause more harm.
Take the situation. A man takes a room on the 32nd floor over an area that a concert is going on. Nearly 20,000 people are out in the open A target rich environment. He has fully automatic weapons and starts spraying the crowd. So everyone at the concert pulls their weapon and starts shooting. Most of them don't even know where the shooting is coming from and who is doing it. In the confusion they see other people shooting. They shoot at them, other people see these people shooting and they start shooting at them. The police arrive and see everyone shooting at each other. In the meantime, the original shooter can just take his time and pick off anyone he chooses or continue to spray a chaotic gun crazed crowd.
Some of you people have said that this nation was built on NO gun laws. Not so. There is a difference between a farmer with a musket and a lunatic wielding a machine gun.
Here is the 2nd Amendment:
"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."
Notice the part "A WELL REGULATED militia" There is nothing about just everyone owning every fucking kind of weapon they want and as many as they want and nothing about no regulations. In fact, REGULATION is a very big part of it.
I am so sick and tired of NRA nuts saying that gun registration restriction is unconstitutional. Unless you are in a WELL REGULATED militia you don't need a gun or actually have a constitutional right to have a gun.
Why can't people THINK?!
Let's say you know how to use a gun. Let's even go so far as to say that you are an expert with a gun. If you haven't been in a few firefights you aren't an expert with your weapon anymore, you are actually a problem for the police and a danger to yourself and everyone around you.
I doubt if any of you have ever been shot at on a consistent basis. I have. I know that it is something that you have to mentally get through to be able to use a weapon effectively.
Let's go through some of the things one has to do mentally just to be effective in a firefight.
1) Cover- you must first secure a protection point TO PREVENT BEING SHOT.
2) Assessment-You must assess what is going on, not just react.
3) Target acquisition- You must determine the target and acquire it.
4) Friendlies-You must know who the friendlies are, allies, innocents.
5) Fire superiority-You have to gain fire superiority through superior firepower or effective targeting.
6) Ammo discipline- You can't just reel off a bunch of wild shots. Each round must have a purpose even if it comes from a fully automatic machine gun.
7) Kill- you must take out the threat as quickly and efficiently as possible with no collateral damage to person or property if possible.
8) Recovery- YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHEN TO STOP SHOOTING!!!!!!
That is just the first split second of a firefight whether you are ambushed or set up defensively. That doesn't account for the actual shot you take and how to do it which also has to be instinctive controlled and effective. Otherwise, you are adding to the danger instead of neutralizing it.
Fucking idiots watch too many blow 'em up macho bullshit movies. That shit isn't real! It's like every numbskull thinks that they can fight because they have seen it on TV. Oh, and BTW video games are NOT realistic. In a video game, you aren't in danger, you're not hot or cold, there is no wind rain or weather etc!
Even if the 2nd said explicitly that you can own a gun, any gun, as many guns as you want of any kind, as much ammo and any kind of ammo that you want (AND IT DOESN'T), it's time to start getting rid of guns. No one needs one. I want one(a billion) isn't a valid reason. And if we have to repeal the 2nd (we don't) that's fine. The Constitution is a living document designed to change to suit the nation and its needs. We don't NEED guns. Let the police and the military have all the guns they need. The average citizen doesn't need a gun.
Wish I could click the agree button more than once. Very well said.
Here I will click it for you and thanks Discere
mykcob4,
You do know that each State has its own State Constitution and the Nevada State Constitution Declaration of Rights doesn't mention a militia =
Text of Section 11:
Right to Keep and Bear Arms; Civil Power Supreme
1. Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes.
https://ballotpedia.org/Article_1,_Nevada_Constitution#cite_ref-nv_1-0
@Diothephes
It doesn't matter what is in a "State" constitution. All constitutions are superceded by the US Constitution. We fought the Civil War and the "States Rights" assholes lost.
Pages