Mass shooting at Gay night club in Orlando

Grinner said:
A way to appease the 2nd amendment crowd would be to make it legal to only own a musket as the FFs intended. Shit, make it mandatory too so that we're all even.
Click to expand...
Kennesaw, Georgia has a crime rate 85% below that of state and national averages. Their gun law, created in 1982, is as follows...


(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
 
Carolina Red said:
I could care less why politicians today want to keep the 2nd Amendment alive. What I care about is that it exists as it does, as it was created by our Founding Fathers, as a safeguard against those who want to harm me.

I'm not brainwashed by a myth. I don't particularly like my government or many facets of my country's history. What I am concerned with is the fact that by some random chance, I was born here, and by being born here I am endowed with the right by keep and bear arms, and that means I am going to exercise that right to protect those who I love, and I am going to speak out in protection of that right because I want to be able to protect those that I love in whatever way I legally can.

If that is being a "little person", then so be it.
Click to expand...
You may well be entirely sincere but much of that reads like the usual 'rally round the flag' nonsense.
 
Carolina Red said:
Kennesaw, Georgia has a crime rate 85% below that of state and national averages. Their gun law, created in 1982, is as follows...


(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.

(b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
Click to expand...


http://www.snopes.com/kennesaw-gun-law/
 
So, if the density of guns, and law abiding people owning guns are the only reason that this shit happens in the US, why doesn't it happen all the fecking time in Canada, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, Uruguay and Cyprus with about the same, or slightly less gun density than that of the US?
 
Nanook said:
Even if you remove suicides the US still has far more gun murders than any other developed country.
Click to expand...
I don't dispute that.

I would wager that if you banned guns, we would therefore either have a) criminals still committing gun crime or b) higher knife murders than any other developed country.
 
SwansonsTache said:
He has also stated that he lives in a city in South Carolina which is in the top50 of the most violent cities in the US. Which would mean that they have everyday crime like people like you from Ireland and me from Norway never can imagine. It is just a whole different world.
Click to expand...

I don't really mind that argument though.

If I'm going to get attacked by someone with a gun, I might want a gun to protect myself. That seems relatively logical – I'm not saying I'd necessarily get one, just that I could understand that line of argument – but that wouldn't change my underlying feeling that I shouldn't have a gun, they shouldn't have a gun and that guns should be illegal.

It's how the most ardent gun nuts go from that line of reasoning to the sort of logic Carolina Red is exhibiting here which is that any attempts to infringe on his rights to own a gun, even if it would demonstrably lead to the death of fewer people, is an affront to the flag, the constitution and whatever else pseudo-patriotic mumbo-jumbo these people espouse.
 
Carolina Red said:
I wasn't aware that inanimate objects committed crime.
Click to expand...
What? You're the one who objectified guns alongside rape and murder, not as something used as a tool for them.

"Ban guns"
"But we banned rape and murder and that didn't work out"
"But guns are objects.."
"Yeah but objects don't cause crime."

The feck are you smoking?
 
Massive Spanner said:
What? You're the one who objectified guns alongside rape and murder, not as something used as a tool for them.

"Ban guns"
"But we banned rape and murder and that didn't work out"
"But guns are objects.."
"Yeah but objects don't cause crime."

The feck are you smoking?
Click to expand...
You're for banning an inanimate object. If banning the act altogether doesn't work, what will banning an inanimate object do?

According to the Bible, the first murder was committed with a rock. Should we ban rocks? Should we ban hands, since hands hold the weapons?

If it seems like nonsense, then you get my point.
 
Carolina Red said:
You're for banning an inanimate object. If banning the act altogether doesn't work, what will banning an inanimate object do?

According to the Bible, the first murder was committed with a rock. Should we ban rocks? Should we ban hands, since hands hold the weapons?

If it seems like nonsense, then you get my point.
Click to expand...

How can somebody shoot if they can't get a shooter?
 
Perhaps people could calm down and not go on this massive "houlier than thou" attitude binge against a single poster? We must just realize that the everyday situation and the general mindset are quite different in the US from here in the Europe.

I dont agree on everything Carolina Red says, but I dare wager that most of us living in a city which is in the top50 of crime ridden places in the US would given the option own a legal handgun for our own and our familys protection.

Get off your high horses.
 
barros said:
The guy was a Muslim and attacked a gay bar, doesn't ring a bell? Like terrorism attack? Or only in Europe any mass shooting is called terrorism and in US only mass murder?
Click to expand...

No, you are twisting the facts there. Paris and Belgium were organised attacks carried out by members of a terrorist organisation to achieve political goals and cause terror and in retaliation for events in the Middle East. They were part of Jihad against the West.

This Orlando attack was (apparently) carried out by a lone madman intent on killing gay people simply because he didn't like them and they were evil in his eyes due to his fecked up beliefs.

All are acts of terrorism really, but there are clear differences between the two. Surely you can see that? And surely you can see this is more like the shootings at Sandy Hook or Columbine than Paris and Brussels?
 
SwansonsTache said:
Perhaps people could calm down and not go on this massive "houlier than thou" attitude binge against a single poster? We must just realize that the everyday situation and the general mindset are quite different in the US from here in the Europe.

I dont agree on everything Carolina Red says, but I dare wager that most of us living in a city which is in the top50 of crime ridden places in the US would given the option own a legal handgun for our own and our familys protection.

Get off your high horses.
Click to expand...

He can defend himself...he's got shooters and has seen Jason Bourne films.
 
Carolina Red said:
You're for banning an inanimate object. If banning the act altogether doesn't work, what will banning an inanimate object do?

According to the Bible, the first murder was committed with a rock. Should we ban rocks? Should we ban hands, since hands hold the weapons?

If it seems like nonsense, then you get my point.
Click to expand...

Lets assume you wanted to plan a mass murder.

You are presented with a rock or a gun. Which is your weapon of choice?

And if its a gun, which it is, then can you not see why what you just wrote is nonsense?
 
Carolina Red said:
You're for banning an inanimate object. If banning the act altogether doesn't work, what will banning an inanimate object do?

According to the Bible, the first murder was committed with a rock. Should we ban rocks? Should we ban hands, since hands hold the weapons?

If it seems like nonsense, then you get my point.
Click to expand...
You seem like a bit of a lost cause to me, which is putting it mildly, however I'll try keep this simple for you.

Banning guns means people can no longer can their hands on something created to do one thing. Kill. Ergo it will help to prevent murder, not in every case, no, but in many cases. There are many proven facts and arguments for this. That you choose to ignore them is your prerogative.

Banning murder does not prevent murder, it is not an object that can be controlled. Guns however, are an object that can be controlled.
 
Carolina Red said:
You're for banning an inanimate object. If banning the act altogether doesn't work, what will banning an inanimate object do?

According to the Bible, the first murder was committed with a rock. Should we ban rocks? Should we ban hands, since hands hold the weapons?

If it seems like nonsense, then you get my point.
Click to expand...
:lol: feck me, do you work for the NRA? This nonsense is straight out of their handbook.
 
Grinner said:
No, I infer that banning guns leads to drops in gun crime. Do you not agree?
Click to expand...
Gun crime.. maybe. Unless you acknowledge that banning guns in this country would have the same effect as banning alcohol did... making millions of law abiding Americans into criminals.
 
NinjaFletch said:
Lets assume you wanted to plan a mass murder.

You are presented with a rock or a gun. Which is your weapon of choice?

And if its a gun, which it is, then can you not see why what you just wrote is nonsense?
Click to expand...
Which brings me back to the recent incidents of mass shootings in gun banning Europe...
 
Carolina Red said:
Gun crime.. maybe. Unless you acknowledge that banning guns in this country would have the same effect as banning alcohol did... making millions of law abiding Americans into criminals.
Click to expand...

It's not maybe, it's yes.

A gun ban is normally phased in so that's another bullshit argument.
 
Carolina Red said:
What is funny is that I represent the average American in this debate. Hell, I voted for Bernie Sanders...

If wanting the right to protect my family is being "unreal" or "John Rambo" to you folks, then so be it.
Click to expand...
I was joking. But on a serious note, don't you feel something has to be done? You lot can't continue like this.
 
Rado_N said:
:lol: feck me, do you work for the NRA? This nonsense is straight out of their handbook.
Click to expand...
Nope. Not even a member.

I do find it funny though that you lot automatically stereotype people who actually like having the right to defend themselves with the same amount of force that the criminals have.
 
Jippy said:
I was kind of getting at the point that banning certain types of gun, while admirable and surely positive, will not mean that there aren't still shitloads in circulation.
Click to expand...
There aren't in Ireland, comparison with the lunatic asylum that is America is unfounded. Even during the troubles very few ordinary Joes had access to firearms bar the Republican movement and farmers who have licensed guns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.