So how about that Connecticut Elementary School Shooting; Troll at Your Own Risk

[Judai]

and fucks kangaroos

would rather nightly news stories about this then some guy slaughtering 20 elementary school children.

[Dimmauk]

Maybe take a page from Australia's gun control policies they enacted after a shooting over a decade ago and if you want proof that taking guns away will lower gun related violence rates, look at their statistics that clearly show massive drops.

The only reason people feel the "need" to own guns is due to fear. They are afraid the terrible things they see in the media will happen to them and become part of the problem by rushing out to arm themselves.

Could you also look at the US stats before and after the assault weapons ban, and after it expired?

[Seraph]

Australia didn't actually ban guns though did they? I thought it was just stricter gun laws and banning certain things like high capacity clips? Wouldn't that be classified as better regulation?

[archibaldcrane]

Well, unlike in the US, Australia's constitution doesn't give them the right to own a gun for the purposes of self defense.

[Judai]

Australia didn't ban guns(other then auto/semi-auto rifles and shotguns I think), they simply made their policies far stricter. The US also needs to grow up and realize that a document made 200 years ago in a time of war is outdated.

People are funny, they crave the newest technology and anything a few years old is considered out of fashion, yet they cling to ideals and laws that are hundreds and even thousands of years old, regardless of how asinine they are in today's society.

[hey]

Accidental deaths from electricity rarely (if at all) come from someone trying to kill someone else with electricity.

[Ksandra]

I see nothing wrong with that sentence, unless you got some huge statistics of Jimmy trying to kill Sally with a toaster but kills Tom instead.

[Dotsudoku]

Australia didn't ban guns(other then auto/semi-auto rifles and shotguns I think), they simply made their policies far stricter. The US also needs to grow up and realize that a document made 200 years ago in a time of war is outdated.

People are funny, they crave the newest technology and anything a few years old is considered out of fashion, yet they cling to ideals and laws that are hundreds and even thousands of years old, regardless of how asinine they are in today's society.

Never mind the fact that oftentimes those very same people are claiming that hot-ticket items in their holy texts are subject to interpretation, while the constitution is not

God makes mistakes, k? Founding fathers don't

[6souls]

lol, Dynasty Warriors, seriously?

Maybe if Koei would have released Orochi 3 as a physical release for PS3, none of this would have happened. Anyways..

[Lucavi]

Well, unlike in the US, Australia's constitution doesn't give them the right to own a gun for the purposes of self defense.

So the founding fathers, who were, themselves, the government, wanted an armed milita (IE: any male old enough to shoot a gun) against the government (IE: themselves) in-case they, themselves, went all evil? Sounds alright, but it sounds more like they wanted men ready to shoot the shit out of the English/Redcoats if they tried to enact some bullshit power-trip or land-grap, which they kinda did. Somehow I doubt that the men in power wanted the people to be armed enough to rise up against themselves, considering that they were men, and men love power.

Something doesn't add up there.

[archibaldcrane]

It's not my interpretation, it's the current supreme court's.

[Niiro]

Even attempting to interpret the 2nd amendment in regards to modern firearms is fucking ludicrous from the word "go". Before you even get into whether it was meant to secure personal ownership or that they be kept by a "well regulated militia" you only need to realize what "arms" were to them and that you simply cannot equate them to what arms are now.

Their "arms" were fucking muzzle loaded muskets that a highly trained soldier could fire 3-4 times a minute at best and couldn't be aimed properly beyond spitting distance.

I would feel safer if every single person in the country owned a revolutionary war musket than the gun situation in the US as it is now.

[Nephlite]

Friend of mine had shared this video with me so thought I'd share. It's old and the topic isn't about gun control but it does help educate people about being observant and taking action. Even if it's just a phone call, it's something. An idea I had to help with the psychological debate that's the other half of the gun control debate is to do Public Service Announcements that educate the public to take action if they think it's wrong. Could be used to help people identify potential indicators of a mass shooting and at least pick up the phone.

[Lucavi]

It's not my interpretation, it's the current supreme court's.

Its more of the NRA's and their lobbyists, but eh.

And yes, pre-breech-loading rifles for everyone! Seriously, crime would plummet.

[hey]

I see nothing wrong with that sentence, unless you got some huge statistics of Jimmy trying to kill Sally with a toaster but kills Tom instead.

Is that really what you meant to say? I mean, obviously trying to kill someone is rarely (if ever) accidental. If that's what you meant, i'm confused why you would even say that.

[Churchill]

kitty genovese

[Ksandra]

If that's what you meant, i'm confused why you would even say that.

might want to follow the conversation:

Nothing says protecting your family like bullets that can penetrate the walls and kill them by accident.

Rock salt shotgun shells or gtfo.

Shoot to kill and possibly shoot your family through a wall.

Lovely. An acceptable potential sacrifice, I suppose, because at least the perp is dead (possibly).

Telling someone who desires deadly force as a home defense that it could result in the possibility of accidental deadly force seems unnecessary and distracting.

Hundreds of people die from electrical shock every year, and even more die from house fires caused by electrical faults. Perhaps we should remove electricity from homes as well? Every time you allow power through the circuit breaker box your loved ones could very well die, so is the risk worth it? An acceptable potential sacrifice, I suppose...

basically, two people comment on a shotgun shooting and accidentally killing others in the process (bullet spread/strength). Seraph claims that is a silly argument because electricity hurts. I was pointing out why that claim is retarded and a terrible example, since "spread" accidental death doesn't apply to electricity.

[hey]

I guess that makes sense. My bad.

[Lucavi]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/16/us/con...html?hpt=hp_t2

Not much to do with anything now but TLDR the family was stacked. Momma got $250k a year in alimony and was already stacked from her previous job. Big houses in upper afluent neighborhood, socially awkward kid, ect. ect. If it all looks and sounds the same, that's because it pretty much is.

Momma kept assault rifles, handguns, ect., for shooting at ranges and for self-defense. Doesn't say if anyone was ever foolish enough to try to break in.

[Judai]

foxnews, so who knows about the credibility

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/18...adman-to-snap/

The gunman who slaughtered 20 children and six adults at a Connecticut elementary school may have snapped because his mother was planning to commit him to a psychiatric facility, according to a lifelong resident of the area who was familiar with the killer’s family and several of the victims’ families.

Adam Lanza, 20, targeted Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown after killing his mother early Friday because he believed she loved the school “more than she loved him,” said Joshua Flashman, 25, who grew up not far from where the shooting took place. Flashman, a U.S. Marine, is the son of a pastor at an area church where many of the victims' families worship.

“From what I've been told, Adam was aware of her petitioning the court for conservatorship and (her) plans to have him committed," Flashman told FoxNews.com. "Adam was apparently very upset about this. He thought she just wanted to send him away. From what I understand, he was really, really angry. I think this could have been it, what set him off.”

Blame him for being crazy or pity the mom for having to take care of him if you want. I want to know why someone people were attempting to have committed had access to at least 3 guns.