tell me what more strict laws could have prevented this or the other mass shooting? please im waiting.
All the more reason for strict control and reduced proliferation.
guns make people feel powerful. also, it creates a detachment from the person you're trying to kill, thus making it a lot easier.
yeah, you're right. nutjobs will still try and kill people. however, it will make it more difficult to do and the likelihood that they would do something would be less.
it isn't about stopping crazy people from doing crazy things. it's about decreasing the likelihood or desire for someone to do crazy things as well as decreasing the number of potential casualties.
i'd much rather see a crazy person try and take out an office building with two revolvers and a bag of bullets than seeing a crazy person take out an office building with two glocks with 20 magazines.
it's not very likely that people would resort to camping blowtorches to kill people or pipe bombs or whatever with the frequency that people go on shooting rampages. gun violence is A LOT higher than blowtorch violence or bomb violence.
Lol have you ever had one? At first they kind of scared me honestly. Thats why people flinch when they shoot them.
I think the Lanza guy was on some type of meds that made him out of touch with reality, like almost all the mass murderers.
I'd rather see crazy people locked up, where they can't get ANY kind of weapon. I'd rather see everyone educated about how to identify and report crazy people, so that they can get help BEFORE a tragedy like this happens.
If that were the standard, we wouldn't need ANY gun control.
i don't own one yet, but i have shot many. i also had a hunting license.
guns are engineered to make people feel powerful and to entice the person holding the gun to pull the trigger. it's no different than a car being engineered to entice the person to drive it or make a person feel safe while they're driving.
the weight of the gun, the feel of the gun, how attractive the gun looks, etc. all come into play. gun manufacturers pay lots of money to get into the heads of gun owners and create a gun that would tempt them to shoot. that's part of why going to the gun range is so fun. there's a lot of psychology behind gun engineering and manufacturing.
And so what if they are? There's a big leap between feeling powerful and safe, and wanting to kill innocent people at a school or a mall or a movie theater.
and how are you gonna find out who's crazy and who's not? who is going to make that call? how can you be so sure that one diagnosis is more correct than another? what does a person do if they've been incorrectly diagnosed or labeled? how are you gonna round up these "crazy" people?
honestly, this draconian idea of "round up the crazies" and leave our guns alone is ridiculous. the ONLY reason we need guns is for protection and hunting. that's it. you don't need a fucking uzi to go hunting or to shoot a person who's breaking into your house. just change the kinds of guns that are allowed in america and let that be the end of it. everyone gets what they want: people who need guns for protection or hunting can still have have what they need and those who don't want scores of people getting shot up every other week get what they want.
if you minimize their grandiose feelings of power, they're less likely to do something. you never see mass shootings happening with a mauser or of revolver... it's always high-powered, semiautomatic/ automatic weapons that can quickly and easily be reloaded.
Crazies don't go out and commit mass shootings because they feel powerful. They do it because they want to hurt people.
See the difference?
So all I get from the anti-gunners is that people should let criminals do whatever they want. They don't care about people who are victims of rape, assault, murder, robbery, etc, they actually want more people to become victims.
so wait a minute...why did the UK ban knives? couldn't have anything to do with knife crime increasing exponentially when guns were banned, could it?
and that seems to be working out well for them too...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/jul/22/knife-crime-deaths-rise
OK overvolt and Eits you just proved my point.
The problem is the PEOPLE. Not the guns. The people and the way their brains work are whats causing the murders.
WTF are you to decide what I NEED?
And YOU're the one incorrectly diagnosing and labeling gun owners. There are a LOT more perfectly sane and respectful gun owners than there are crazies who will hurt people. Don't make the job more complicated than it has to be.
Crazies don't go out and commit mass shootings because they feel powerful. They do it because they want to hurt people.
See the difference?
you don't need an ak-47. that's not a need. that's a want. you're not fighting a war, you're either protecting yourself, your family, your belongings, or you're hunting. it takes one or two shots to kill a person or at least to stop them from being a threat anymore.
that's like saying that you need a sports car with 400 horsepower to drive to and from work. you don't.
and i am not diagnosing anyone or labeling anyone. not sure where you got that idea.
i'm not making the job more complicated than it has to be. regulating which guns are legal and which ones aren't is pretty simple. going all nazi germany to figure out who's crazy and who isn't is more complicated and unamerican than simply changing the kinds of guns that would be deemed legal.
crazy people commit mass shootings for various reasons, but the more common reason they do it is because they can inflict more precise damage to people and gain a sense of power and importance in the world. they want to see and feel important. they can't feel important if they can't see what they are capable of doing because they're blown to bits. that's why you see them using guns at unsuspecting people rather than simply walking into a crowded airport terminal with a bomb and blowing themselves up at the security line.
the crazies who blow themselves up or hijack things do it because they believe in a cause that is greater than themselves, whether it be an ideology or religion or politics or whatever. they aren't concerned with seeing the damage they inflict because they are doing it for something they feel is important.
Horsefeathers. There is no reasonable objection to target shooting for pleasure, and anyone not making threats or taking action to harm others should have the right to choose whether to engage in that activity, regardless of whether you sanction the activity or the kinds of guns used to do it.
It looks to me like you're the one going all "nazi germany" on innocent gun owners, instead of focusing your efforts on those who actually do pose a danger to themselves and others.
But those attitudes are not shared by millions of law-abiding citizens who own all kinds of guns. And yet you want to interfere with their hobbies for no valid reason.
The media plays a heavy role in glorifying mass murder.
lol you can't be serious...
shooting for pleasure = not a necessity for protection/hunting
maybe there should be shooting ranges where you can rent semiautomatics and automatics for people to shoot them for fun. other than that, you don't need them.