[quote]Loose Tool wrote:
A The lawfully armed patron has not been charged, pending the investigation regarding his use of deadly force. Under the facts that have been reported, I’d be very surprised if he is charged. Gee, how do you suppose he have been treated under British law?
But that situation is FAR less likely to happen in Britain. The only people who carry guns over here are gangs. And they tend to stick to killing each other.
If guns aren’t the problem then what is? Their are more murders there than here aren’t there?
[quote]Diablo9845 wrote:
Condolences go out to everyone affected.
BUT… enough with the gun law talked. Britain has much higher rates of violent crime than the USA. Canada has more guns per capita than the USA and less violence. So don’t blame the guns. Blame the wackjobs who weild them.[/quote]
It is likely a cultural issue, as many have said, as opposed to a gun or no gun issue. The fact that guns have been invented makes their use inevitable, restricted or not. If a person has set their mind to do something that is reasonably possible (shooting spree) they will do it.
And even though I am not a huge advocate of gun carrying I would agree that lawful carriers would have been able to drop that crazy bastard and saved lives.
this is the number one reason I have learned to use and carry a knife. At the range of 0 - 6 feet the knife has been shown to neutralize gun users before they get the shot off. Plus it functoins for thousands of other everyday uses.
Of course who knows what is going to happen but I’m always glad to have force multipliers on hand. I’m even glader not to have to use them. It’s nice to live in a passive country. But it’s sad to hear about tragedy next door. this same shit happens in here though becasue Canada and the US are very similar in their cultural influences.
Reverse-edge methods FTW!
My condolences to all the families and friends of the victims.
[quote]AdamC wrote:
Loose Tool wrote:
A The lawfully armed patron has not been charged, pending the investigation regarding his use of deadly force. Under the facts that have been reported, I’d be very surprised if he is charged. Gee, how do you suppose he have been treated under British law?
But that situation is FAR less likely to happen in Britain. The only people who carry guns over here are gangs. And they tend to stick to killing each other.
If guns aren’t the problem then what is? Their are more murders there than here aren’t there?
[/quote]
In 2005, the U.S. murder rate (not just with guns) was 5.6 per 100,000. England it’s 1.41 per 100,000. But, prior to having any gun controls, England already had a homicide rate much lower than the United States. By the way, the murder rate in New Hampshire is 1.37 per 100,000.
[quote]AdamC wrote:
Rather than arming everyone to the teeth shouldn’t you be trying to stop people getting hold of weapons so easily. Maybe it’s too late for that, i don’t know.
All i know is, I wouldn’t know where to get a gun and I have absolutely no fear of anyone pulling a gun on me.[/quote]
It’s too far gone. After the Port Arthur massacre in Australia, the govt bought back all the semi automatic weapons in the country. It cost them many, many millions and not that many people own or need guns over here. And they made the gun laws much stricter so you have to own over 500 acres or something like that before you can even apply for a permit.
The Yanks couldn’t do a buy back because there are more guns than people in some states. It would send the country broke.
Students at large Universities are becoming increasingly vulnerable to attacks of all kinds. This type of attack can happen anywhere in the U.S, at any moment, and what`s going to stop it, a gun wielding bystander, maybe, but these educational institutions should be afforded more than the “occasional”, police patrols.
I mean, arent the students, that are going to these schools, to increase their education, and to someday graduate, and go out into the world and make it better place, arent these people worth protecting!!?
[quote]AdamC wrote:
Loose Tool wrote:
A The lawfully armed patron has not been charged, pending the investigation regarding his use of deadly force. Under the facts that have been reported, I’d be very surprised if he is charged. Gee, how do you suppose he have been treated under British law?
But that situation is FAR less likely to happen in Britain. The only people who carry guns over here are gangs. And they tend to stick to killing each other.
If guns aren’t the problem then what is? Their are more murders there than here aren’t there?
[/quote]
In 2005, the U.S. murder rate (not just with guns) was 5.6 per 100,000. England it’s 1.41 per 100,000. But, prior to having any gun controls, England already had a homicide rate much lower than the United States. By the way, the murder rate in New Hampshire is 1.37 per 100,000.
[quote]sugarfree wrote:
AdamC wrote:
But that situation is FAR less likely to happen in Britain.
United States - Population: 298,444,215 (July 2006 est.)
United Kingdom - Population: 60,609,153 (July 2006 est.)
I should hope so.
[/quote]
The population is not the reason for that being less likely. The reason it is less likely is that in the UK, not every single wack job has the right to have a gun.
[quote]Man O’ War wrote:
sugarfree wrote:
AdamC wrote:
But that situation is FAR less likely to happen in Britain.
United States - Population: 298,444,215 (July 2006 est.)
United Kingdom - Population: 60,609,153 (July 2006 est.)
I should hope so.
The population is not the reason for that being less likely. The reason it is less likely is that in the UK, not every single wack job has the right to have a gun.
[/quote]
Not to put too fine a point on it, but wack jobs in the U.S. are not allowed to have a gun.
RIP to all the victims, and my condolences to the families.
What scares me about this, is the potential for copycats. It would be so easy for these psychos to come into a classroom, or onto a central area of campus, and kill HUNDREDS.
There are classes at my school on the freshman level with close to 300 people. If a gunman were to enter, most of the students would have no chance of exiting.
[quote]Loose Tool wrote:
Not to put too fine a point on it, but wack jobs in the U.S. are not allowed to have a gun.
[/quote]
I might end my comments here as I know that gun control was a passionate subject over here and I could only imagine how intensified that would be in the states.
over 30 dead now… witnesses say it was a student. The police force have issued some statements that make me believe there is something fishy about this. It doesn’t seem right to me that there was 2+ hours between shootings.
Ok I’ll say it, I want to know what nationality this M-f’er is? Where he is from? How long has he been in this country? Is he here legally?
Why the fudge hasn’t the FBI released this info yet? Probably because they are trying to wait until tempers calm, when everyone is mourning, and the flowers are on the graves to soften the blow!
I don?t understand why this always happens in America. What is it with crazy people shooting people in schools in that country ???
It?s a pretty rich country you would think it would be pretty chilled out and most people would have food and shelter and be happy.
Like in India and Africa sure there?s crazy crimes but the people are just doing it to get money or food to survive.
Why does America have so many mentally ill people who commit these crimes ???
is it just that they are the media central so we hear about all there attacks, and other countries might have the same thing but we don?t hear about them, or is there something seriously wrong with American culture ??? or gun laws or some other factor cos this doesnt seem to happen any where else in the world…
Here in Australia we have strict gun laws and very few shootings, you can get a gun but it is hard and costly. If we have problems with people we just fight with our fists and then its over with and every body goes home.
is it modern pop culture that glorifys violence,gangsta rap music, violent movies about mentally ill killers, violent tv shows, these problems didnt seem to happen as oftern before all this violent media like before we had tv and movies like in the 1920s things where pretty chilled out and society’s morals seemed to be alot more respected…
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
This is twice now in a couple days that I’ve reminded myself why I avoid these kinds of discussions here for the most part.
Ben Franklin’s oft cited quote is all about times like this. Benjamin Franklin said:
“A man who would sacrifice freedom for security is deserving of neither”
My heart goes out to all those effected and I’ll leave it at that.[/quote]
Only you paraphrased the quote and got its meaning completely wrong:
It is: “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”
What you wrote means that there should be no laws at all and we should all be free to do as we please.
Still a nutcase with a gun can do a lot more damage than, say, a nutcase with a rusty pitchfork. Like it or not, no one can deny that a gun gives a guy a lot more power.
That doesn’t mean that banning guns would do anything (they’d still be readily available on the black market for anyone who wants to kill someone… or the guy could have made a bomb if he couldn’t get a gun).
Still if there were no guns, everyone would be safer (which is, of course, impossible… but I’m just saying…).
I’ve been talking with my good friend who was at the engineering building when shots were fired. He is saying that the “official response” as to why classes weren’t cancelled and the students given precautions after the first shooting was that the school feared it would complicate the issue by putting more people out in the open. He says it’s bullshit and I agree. This would have been acceptable if precautions were taken in the classrooms so that a person couldn’t just opened the door and start lining up people for execution but that obviously didn’t happen. They’ve got lots of splaining to do as to why all those kids died in the second event.
[quote]Diablo9845 wrote:
Condolences go out to everyone affected.
BUT… enough with the gun law talked. Britain has much higher rates of violent crime than the USA. Canada has more guns per capita than the USA and less violence. So don’t blame the guns. Blame the wackjobs who weild them.[/quote]
It’s a lot tougher to get guns in Canada though… legally anyhow, illegally it’s not all that hard.
And if there are more guns per capita in Canada, those would probably be more alongs the lines of hunting rifles than purely hand guns.
But you are right, it’s the fault of the wacko… however, a wacko with a weapon is more dangerous than a wacko without one.
That’s the double-edged sword of allowing citizen to carry guns. Yes you can protect yourself and your family with your weapon, but it also means that the bad guys and the wachos have more access to weapons too… that’s the trade-off that you have to live with.
[quote]jjoseph_x wrote:
<<< Only you paraphrased the quote and got its meaning completely wrong: >>>
[/quote]
Yes, I cited it from memory, forgive me Ben. I consider the “right to keep and bear arms” an essential freedom as did the founders of this country. If someone were to actually to read what they said it would be revealed that the 2nd amendment was added to the constitution as a measure to prevent tyranny.
In other words to ensure that the citizenry had a way to protect itself against governmental oppression such as what they had just fought to be free from. This raises a bunch of other modern twists that will not be solved here.
In any case, we may not agree, but you seem a decent, level headed feller which is appreciated.
[quote]P-DOG wrote:
Ok I’ll say it, I want to know what nationality this M-f’er is? Where he is from? How long has he been in this country? Is he here legally?
[/quote]
Nationality is irrelevant, don’t you think? What difference does it make?