Well the point was that only criminals having guns can't really be a bad thing because it leads to less people getting shot because there are less people with gun's overall (The really interesting thing is that if the public doesn't have guns then criminals don't use them because they don't need them and it's not worth the extra jail time if they get caught which is why this shit doesn't happen on a regular basis in other countries)Kuilui said:I'm sorry was there a point in my post where I said that the rivers in those or any countries were running red with blood? All I said was that if criminals can get guns and they can. Then civilians should be allowed access to them as well. That's all.theonecookie said:Yes the perfect train of thought the only problem with it is everything you just saidKuilui said:As opposed to what? Letting only criminals have them? For all we know that dude bought his gun(s)illegally. Criminals will always find a way to get guns. Citizens who follow the law wont.Mr.Squishy said:How's that "guns for everyone" attitude going, america?
This is terrible but because one psycho who probably got his weapons illegally isn't a reason to start swinging the "throw the guns away" flag.
I mean just look at the UK , France, Germany , Italy , Spain and so on there just falling apart with rivers of blood because the public isn't armed to the teeth but then again what what would I know I'm writing this a gun point
(I wrote a really long response but then my browser crashed, so i'll make this quick)Mr.Squishy said:Do you have any idea how much fetilizer you need for that kind of bomb? Breivik set up a puppet company, as well as rented a farm, and used that to evade the suspicion that would otherwise have been raised if he'd otherwise bought that much fertilizer. Besides, the bomb took out 5-6 people (may they rest in peace), while Breivik made his way to the youth camp in the guise of a policeman and used a GUN (actually, I think his main weapon was a semi-automatic rifle), to shoot over 60 people. He was extremely careful in how he acquired everything, getting a hunting license, going to several places that had no communication with each other, purchasing wares that weren't out of the ordinary. Much as I hate to say it, he was smart.Edible Avatar said:He could have made a V-BIED out of fertilizer and things found around home . Isn't that what happened in your country?Mr.Squishy said:How's that "guns for everyone" attitude going, america?
It is the single worst act(and only, I am glad to say) of terror that has happened upon Norway since the nazis invaded in WW2. Otherwise, we have very little crime, very few murders (though some are inevitable no matter where you go) and no school shootings that I can remember.
In short: Guns were definitely part of the problem here too, and this is one isolated incident in 60-70 years, with no other recorded terror or extreme mass murder.
That'd be the right course to take if it would help. And that doesn't seem to be the case. Not only that, but in Western Europe we can easily do without. I think that's what theonecookie is trying to say to you.Kuilui said:I'm sorry was there a point in my post where I said that the rivers in those or any countries were running red with blood? All I said was that if criminals can get guns and they can. Then civilians should be allowed access to them as well. That's all.
That's a fair point I suppose. I still like knowing I can go own a gun for my own protection but I feel either extremes are a bad thing in the end for reasons beyond self defense but that's not something I'd like to get intotheonecookie said:Well the point was that only criminals having guns can't really be a bad thing because it leads to less people getting shot because there are less people with gun's overall (The really interesting thing is that if the public doesn't have guns then criminals don't use them because they don't need them and it's not worth the extra jail time if they get caught which is why this shit doesn't happen on a regular basis in other countries)Kuilui said:I'm sorry was there a point in my post where I said that the rivers in those or any countries were running red with blood? All I said was that if criminals can get guns and they can. Then civilians should be allowed access to them as well. That's all.theonecookie said:Yes the perfect train of thought the only problem with it is everything you just saidKuilui said:As opposed to what? Letting only criminals have them? For all we know that dude bought his gun(s)illegally. Criminals will always find a way to get guns. Citizens who follow the law wont.Mr.Squishy said:How's that "guns for everyone" attitude going, america?
This is terrible but because one psycho who probably got his weapons illegally isn't a reason to start swinging the "throw the guns away" flag.
I mean just look at the UK , France, Germany , Italy , Spain and so on there just falling apart with rivers of blood because the public isn't armed to the teeth but then again what what would I know I'm writing this a gun point
so really this is the perfect reason to throw the guns away (bit late for the US though to many people with guns to get rid of them now)
*Looks at the news*Cowabungaa said:Mind you, I wasn't just talking about gun ownership, I'm talking about the big picture. It's just the large amount of shootings like these compared to any other part in the Western world, the amount of violence there just shocks me.qwerty19411 said:Goddamn do I love this site.Cowabungaa said:Isn't that like, the third time or something? Damn, something really is wrong in the United States of America.
I'll see your sarcasm, and raise you that the last student who did a campus shooting acquired his gun legally.Yopaz said:This is actually a great idea. There's never been a single incident where the shooter has ever been a student.Frizzle said:At this point it's less of a joke, and more foresight. You know it's going to happen. "he was bat shit crazy" is never good enough for the general public, so they have to blame something.NinjaDeathSlap said:Duskflamer said:What video game do you think is going to be blamed this time?
I was going to say Skyrim, but then I took a gunshot in the knee.While I get as pissed off when games are blamed for stuff like this as everyone else on this site, I think the bigger issue here is that there is a homicidal maniac on the loose in a school full of kids as we speak. Get some perspective. Also, making jokes about it while its still happening, that's definitely too soon.Fighterace10 said:IT MUST BE VIDEO GAMES.
OT: How can this possibly happen twice in the same place! You would think, after the first time, they'd make the security on campus much tighter.
Maybe they'll consider letting people carry on campus now so they can defend themselves.
I've been quoted a few times, but I'll answer yours for the burning question.Frankster said:Im not sure giving everyone on the campus free reign to have firearms would reduce the chances of this type of incident happening, this would make the process of bringing weapons to class mundane and any prospective loon will find the initial phases of his/her killing spree much easier.Frizzle said:Maybe they'll consider letting people carry on campus now so they can defend themselves.
I won't argue it would make the killing sprees shorter though (since the victims would be armed), but meh... The idea of arming everyone to make everyone safer seems contradictory to me. Metal detectors at the entrances instead maybe? :\