18 elementary school kids dead in school shooting 30 minutes from me

[maks]

yeah thats not really relevant, knives are not capable of wanton, unopposed carnage like an assault rifle or a handgun

tell that to those 22 kids

or these 8 kids http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanping_school_stabbings

or these 16 kids http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2...nt_9792007.htm

or these 3 kids http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10862175

or these 8 kids http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14706819

tell that to those 22 kids

or these 8 kids http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanping_school_stabbings

or these 16 kids http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2...nt_9792007.htm

or these 3 kids http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10862175

or these 8 kids http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14706819

these are isolated incidents, just like the school shootings

i am more concerned with the other 30,000 people that are killed by guns in the US every year than i am with the 20 or 30 that are killed in shooting sprees

and again I am not opposed to the right to bear arms, I believe people have a right to defend themselves and their property against other people as well as their government or anyone who may invade, and I think it sets a dangerous precedent that so many people would so quickly say "oh, we have armies and police forces now, gun rights are no longer relevant to modern society"

an armed populace is a liberated populace, but at the same time I think some more stringent steps need to be taken to reduce gun crime, both from a socioeconomic standpoint as well as a gun law standpoint, and I am not just necessarily talking about purchasing guns. So many guns that are used in crimes/shooting sprees are NOT registered to the people that used them, including in this particular incident (they were his mom's guns). With all the advances we've had in security, including biometrics, perhaps we could require gun owners to keep their guns stored in a safe or locker that is protected by a fingerprint scanner or something else? Maybe the mother already kept her guns locked up, but obviously her 20 eyar old son knew where to find the key.

I believe assault weapons especialyl should be subject to harsher restrictions. If not banned outright, perhaps they can be required to be kept at an approved location, such as a shooting range. If people insist on keeping them on their property then I believe they (assault weapons) at the very least, above all other weapons, should be required to be kept locked up under an aforementioned sort of locker or safe with a very high degree of security.

[Lexi Persimmons]

these are isolated incidents, just like the school shootings

i am more concerned with the other 30,000 people that are killed by guns in the US every year than i am with the 20 or 30 that are killed in shooting sprees

and again I am not opposed to the right to bear arms, I believe people have a right to defend themselves and their property against other people as well as their government or anyone who may invade, and I think it sets a dangerous precedent that so many people would so quickly say "oh, we have armies and police forces now, gun rights are no longer relevant to modern society"

an armed populace is a liberated populace, but at the same time I think some more stringent steps need to be taken to reduce gun crime, both from a socioeconomic standpoint as well as a gun law standpoint, and I am not just necessarily talking about purchasing guns. So many guns that are used in crimes/shooting sprees are NOT registered to the people that used them, including in this particular incident (they were his mom's guns). With all the advances we've had in security, including biometrics, perhaps we could require gun owners to keep their guns stored in a safe or locker that is protected by a fingerprint scanner or something else? Maybe the mother already kept her guns locked up, but obviously her 20 eyar old son knew where to find the key.

I believe assault weapons especialyl should be subject to harsher restrictions. If not banned outright, perhaps they can be required to be kept at an approved location, such as a shooting range. If people insist on keeping them on their property then I believe they (assault weapons) at the very least, above all other weapons, should be required to be kept locked up under an aforementioned sort of locker or safe with a very high degree of security.

oh fucking poo. I'll keep my guns right by my side thank you.

[maks]

these are isolated incidents, just like the school shootings

i am more concerned with the other 30,000 people that are killed by guns in the US every year than i am with the 20 or 30 that are killed in shooting sprees

30,000, eh?

"A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard.""

30,000, eh?

"A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard.""

yes, that is fine (of course if those criminals breaking into their homes didnt have guns either then what would those numbers be?)

but anyways my point is that guns can be used responsibly and usually are, but around 80% of the gun crimes that are committed are done so with illegally obtained firearms or firearms that are registered to someone else. The people that are using them in crimes are usually not the people that legally purchased them.

If you want to kepe them at your side in a holster and your state permits it, fine, whatever. Statistics support that people who carry guns are more likely to be killed by a gun so I'd rather not have one, thanks, but if you want to then whatever. The point is, gun crimes are committed primarily because of illegal gun sales and irresponsible gun owners whose guns are stolen or taken by others and then used to commit crimes/murders. Keeping a gun in a holster has nothing to do with it, but when it comes to storage I definitely think there should be some regulations on how to properly and responsibly store guns so that they do not fall into the wrong hands.

[maks]

yes, that is fine (of course if those criminals breaking into their homes didnt have guns either then what would those numbers be?)

but anyways my point is that guns can be used responsibly and usually are, but around 80% of the gun crimes that are committed are done so with illegally obtained firearms or firearms that are registered to someone else. The people that are using them in crimes are usually not the people that legally purchased them.

If you want to kepe them at your side in a holster and your state permits it, fine, whatever. Statistics support that people who carry guns are more likely to be killed by a gun so I'd rather not have one, thanks, but if you want to then whatever. The point is, gun crimes are committed primarily because of illegal gun sales and irresponsible gun owners whose guns are stolen or taken by others and then used to commit crimes/murders. Keeping a gun in a holster has nothing to do with it, but when it comes to storage I definitely think there should be some regulations on how to properly and responsibly store guns so that they do not fall into the wrong hands.

please stop being perfectly reasonable, I'm looking for an argument. tia.

[Genital Doli]

these are isolated incidents, just like the school shootings

i am more concerned with the other 30,000 people that are killed by guns in the US every year than i am with the 20 or 30 that are killed in shooting sprees

and again I am not opposed to the right to bear arms, I believe people have a right to defend themselves and their property against other people as well as their government or anyone who may invade, and I think it sets a dangerous precedent that so many people would so quickly say "oh, we have armies and police forces now, gun rights are no longer relevant to modern society"

an armed populace is a liberated populace, but at the same time I think some more stringent steps need to be taken to reduce gun crime, both from a socioeconomic standpoint as well as a gun law standpoint, and I am not just necessarily talking about purchasing guns. So many guns that are used in crimes/shooting sprees are NOT registered to the people that used them, including in this particular incident (they were his mom's guns). With all the advances we've had in security, including biometrics, perhaps we could require gun owners to keep their guns stored in a safe or locker that is protected by a fingerprint scanner or something else? Maybe the mother already kept her guns locked up, but obviously her 20 eyar old son knew where to find the key.

I believe assault weapons especialyl should be subject to harsher restrictions. If not banned outright, perhaps they can be required to be kept at an approved location, such as a shooting range. If people insist on keeping them on their property then I believe they (assault weapons) at the very least, above all other weapons, should be required to be kept locked up under an aforementioned sort of locker or safe with a very high degree of security.

I did not read this FaGGOt.............................................................................. I HAVE black OPs 3 to sataiate my need for blood... for now...