Newtown School Shootings

[Crazed Rabbit]

Guns are a tool with the sole purpose of killing, there is no other purpose at all. People argue "So why not ban cars? people die due to those" and it is simple, because cars are used for transport and travel, they are not for mowing people down in and they are regulated.

And when someone is attacking you or your family, you want a weapon that can kill them. So a tool with the purpose of killing someone is a good thing when innocent people are being attacked and need to defend themselves. They are the most effective tools of self defense available. Have you considered dhow many people would be killed or raped by criminals if they didn't have a gun to protect themselves?

I guess it is the advantage of knowing I won't be shot whilst walking down the street, no random psychopath is suddenly going to come out guns blazing and shoot people in the middle of the town centre, they simply don't have access. Most of the gun crimes are illegally-obtained guns 'borrowed' from Legal owners, in the UK, that is virtually no one, in America, it is virtually everyone, this is why a kid can takes mommy's gun and just blast apart a school. They have access.

Making legislation based on extremely rare events is just plain stupid. The Patriot Act was wrong and any new gun ban they pass will not work. Handguns are explicitly constitutionally protected, and that's what was used in the largest school shooting spree. And even if all guns were banned, there'd still be access - even in Europe many millions of guns are unregistered:
http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/2...ys-bred-defian

And you're wrong - this would not prevent massacres. It would just shift the attack. It's like the TSA banning liquids; useless because it ignores the attacker and focuses on the weapon.

If the access to the guns were not there, then these incidents would not happen. It is really that simple, unfortunately. Protection against 'mythical' overthrow of government is a really bad argument, since a successful overthrow would require defectors from the armed forced, popular support and foreign intervention.

Even if it did require those things, widespread civilian gun ownership would make things much easier and maybe scare the government off from becoming tyrannical in the first place.

Because our police arent so broke they cant even keep people in jail. Seriously dude, if its that bad why are the right wing pro gun american orginizations spreading blame on the media, video games, mental health etc, when they have such a blatant problem in thier police forces?

And that's not a hypothetical question, why?

The NRA and other gun rights groups don't want to go up against the police unions.

Now, you could argue that getting rid of other rights - like privacy and requiring the police to get warrant before searching everyone or tapping their phones, and the right to not self-incriminate - could be ended and save a lot of people.

But we don't throw away our rights - or we shouldn't, at least - because of some hysteria.

CR

[Tellos Athenaios]

Have you considered dhow many people would be killed or raped by criminals if they didn't have a gun to protect themselves?

Killed? Fewer, because even the criminals would ordinarily not have a gun to protect themselves either. They wouldn't need to.
Raped? About the same. You see, rape is typically committed by a person who is implicitly or explicitly trusted by the victim. Or by someone with apparent authority who cannot be challenged. For example, a police officer raping a teacher at gun point as you pointed out in the police abuse thread IIRC. Or law enforcement abusing their position to rape sex workers in the USA (depressingly common).

Again it seems we're back at this funny place called the United States of Assault, wherein every issue is best solved with a gun. Until you realise that yes, the bad guys carry guns and will use them too. So it solves exactly nothing.