At least 15 dead in US college shooting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Let us hope that this attack is taking place in a state where the death penalty is actively operating so at least justice can be served.



No it won't.

What might make it stop is an investigation into cannabis and proscribed drugs which almost all of the shooters seem to be on. There's a lot of suspicion that the literal drugging of a nation (and it is happening here with violent attacks too) may have something to do with people being proscribed the likes of anti-depressants for years on end or the use of cannabis. In addition as to what might make shootings like this stop would be the end of "No gun zones" or "No conceal and carry" which is often where these attacks take place: of course by the time the Police arrive to a Gun-free zone to shoot the madman, the damage is already done.

Switzerland has lax gun laws like the US of A, but does not have the shootings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_po...in_Switzerland

It's a culture/drug problem.

---

Have you ever smoked weed before? It doesnt make people go on violent rampages if anything it mellows people out.

To move on to your other point the second amendment was great meal when they had muskets, but they have drones tanks and apache helicopters mate, I don't see an assault rifle being much help against them.

I'm pretty sure i've refuted your point about Obama a few times, but I'll do it again since you're so obsessed with calling him a moron,Infact I know I'll find a quote from a man you probably admire his name was Ronald Reagan http://i2.wp.com/samuel-warde.com/wp...size=500%2C308
http://40.media.tumblr.com/1b5ad3c42...k9cuo1_500.jpg

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/003...00_xlarge.jpeg


Obama is only for taking away assault rifles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lucaskf390

The point of the ones that agree with guns is we must have the right to protect our life. Why do you think you can just take off that right? As I said, anything can happen anytime, the gun is your insurance and the reason to anyone trying to steal your house to think twice. If the stealer has a gun and you got nothing you don't even have a chance.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by conservative

When are you going to face reality? As Obama says, in 10 years 74 people have died due to terrorism in your country. Gun violence in America has killed 8,300 in one year.

Guns are not protecting you, they are destroying America. The world has changed since the second amendment. It's time America changed with it.

---

I can understand why there are Americans who feel the need to protect themselves and their family with a gun because there are so many people (probably even millions) in this nation who shouldn't own a gun, but are able to obtain 'em quite easily. The use of guns has saved many people, but it has also killed many more - intentionally and accidentally.

I used to believe though that if the UK could go without carrying guns around - then why not we, the United States of America, not able to do so? Well one - we do have the Constitution which is used in different situations, like some political arguments for example, to remind people that they have the right to bear arms and all that jazz. I'm not going to get into all that though lol. Anyways, what I also know now is that there are millions of people who own guns (many guns are not even registered) so it would be difficult (impossible even) to go track 'em and head to each household and ask for guns to be handed over.

I do wish we could have taken more action in the past to reduce innocent deaths caused by people using guns. I don't even like saying 'reduce' to be honest because it's just horrible when any innocent life is taken. I'd much rather say 'eliminate', but I've got to be realistic here. Besides, there will always be violence because there are people who do wish to intentionally cause harm to others with the use of other items, but the thing is - it can take one shot from a gun for a quick death. If you survive that gun shot and end up getting hit with one, two, three more bullets, etc - you're going to lose your life.

What's important though is to take (reasonable) action in now, the present, in order to keep more people safe in the future.

I feel weird saying the use of guns kill people when obviously it would take a loaded one with bullets to do so, but y'all know what I mean. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by conservative

But America does have this problem. And unlike almost every Western civilised country on earth which doesn't have this problem, America has very lax gun laws. The second amendment was also made before the USA had the world's most powerful army, meaning that any dictator could destroy the entire population whether they have guns or not.

Skewed? Don't blame the British media for reporting about mass shootings, blame the American's for allowing them to happen. Oh, and as you are well aware, I spent a lot of time overseas. And it is reported just as much as it is in Britain.

---

And again, so-called "lax gun laws" (they're not actually lax by the way as anyone who knows the background checks etc you have to endure can tell you) aren't the cause as Switzerland to cite one example has lax laws yet doesn't have this problem. So you're targeting the wrong thing.

As for the Second Amendment, nice try but that doesn't wash. The Second Amendment is timeless (hence it cannot be removed) as the Founding Fathers knew that in the time of any nation there's always a risk of tyanny arising. No government, whether it has a powerful military or not, cannot survive an armed uprising of even quite a small percentage of the population. It's believed revolutions can occur even with under 10% of the population fighting against the government and government forces.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by conservative

When are you going to face reality? As Obama says, in 10 years 74 people have died due to terrorism in your country. Gun violence in America has killed 8,300 in one year.

Guns are not protecting you, they are destroying America. The world has changed since the second amendment. It's time America changed with it.

---

The numbers killed by guns are tiny compared with other things such as car deaths, tobacco deaths and so on. In addition to this, of those killed by guns a large number will be gang related violence (good riddance) and criminals breaking in and threatening people's property/lives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thordenhime

To move on to your other point the second amendment was great meal when they had muskets, but they have drones tanks and apache helicopters mate, I don't see an assault rifle being much help against them.

---

Guns and people can still overthrow the most sophisicated military equipment.

The Saudi Government has the most sophisticated weapons yet that still doesn't make the House of Saud immune to being overthrown tomorrow. As we have seen before with the Iranian Revolution in 1979 with the overthrow of the Shah, the French revolution and the overthrow of the Bourbons, the American revolution and the overthrow of the most powerful world power by a few colonies: the British Empire. Other examples would include the Fall of South Vietnam in the 1970s, the overthrow of the Mubarak government in Egypt, the overthrow of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe in the 1990s and so on and so on and so on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thordenhime

I'm pretty sure i've refuted your point about Obama a few times

---

You seen to be under the illusion that I am a supporter of the GOP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

And again, so-called "lax gun laws" (they're not actually lax by the way as anyone who knows the background checks etc you have to endure can tell you) aren't the cause as Switzerland to cite one example has lax laws yet doesn't have this problem. So you're targeting the wrong thing.

As for the Second Amendment, nice try but that doesn't wash. The Second Amendment is timeless (hence it cannot be removed) as the Founding Fathers knew that in the time of any nation there's always a risk of tyanny arising. No government, whether it has a powerful military or not, cannot survive an armed uprising of even quite a small percentage of the population. It's believed revolutions can occur even with under 10% of the population fighting against the government and government forces.



The numbers killed by guns are tiny compared with other things such as car deaths, tobacco deaths and so on. In addition to this, of those killed by guns a large number will be gang related violence (good riddance) and criminals breaking in and threatening people's property/lives.



Guns and people can still overthrow the most sophisicated military equipment.

The Saudi Government has the most sophisticated weapons yet that still doesn't make the House of Saud immune to being overthrown tomorrow. As we have seen before with the Iranian Revolution in 1979 with the overthrow of the Shah, the French revolution and the overthrow of the Bourbons, the American revolution and the overthrow of the most powerful world power by a few colonies: the British Empire. Other examples would include the Fall of South Vietnam in the 1970s, the overthrow of the Mubarak government in Egypt, the overthrow of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe in the 1990s and so on and so on and so on.



You seen to be under the illusion that I am a supporter of the GOP.

---

I like how you casually glazed over my cannabis point.

What do you mean you cant change the second amendment ....its called an amendment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

And again, so-called "lax gun laws" (they're not actually lax by the way as anyone who knows the background checks etc you have to endure can tell you) aren't the cause as Switzerland to cite one example has lax laws yet doesn't have this problem. So you're targeting the wrong thing.

---

Setting aside the fact that Switzerland does in fact have a huge gun homicide rate (as I showed you before, but you decided to completely ignore my post because it proved you wrong on all points and you don't respond well to facts) it's still an entirely logical response to want to remove the methods of violence while the underlying problems are worked on. If a child throws stones at your window you don't tell them no and then give them a bag of pebbles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

As for the Second Amendment, nice try but that doesn't wash. The Second Amendment is timeless (hence it cannot be removed) as the Founding Fathers knew that in the time of any nation there's always a risk of tyanny arising. No government, whether it has a powerful military or not, cannot survive an armed uprising of even quite a small percentage of the population. It's believed revolutions can occur even with under 10% of the population fighting against the government and government forces.

---

I thought you were in favour of flexible constitutions that aren't entrenched in the ideals of people who've never known a population's current situation? That's pretty much your entire argument for getting Britain out of Europe, and yet you seem to worship the way the US operates here. Either your views are all over the place (surely not) or you agree that "different strokes for different folks" works out, in which case you have to concede that bringing up Switzerland is a completely moot point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

The numbers killed by guns are tiny compared with other things such as car deaths, tobacco deaths and so on. In addition to this, of those killed by guns a large number will be gang related violence (good riddance) and criminals breaking in and threatening people's property/lives.

---

It is SHOCKINGLY possible to care about more than one issue at a time. As you were showed before, no matter how vehemently you deny it by putting your fingers in your ears and closing your eyes, there is a mass shooting in the United States at a rate of nearly one a day. Pointing to other causes of death does nothing to this figure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Guns and people can still overthrow the most sophisicated military equipment.

The Saudi Government has the most sophisticated weapons yet that still doesn't make the House of Saud immune to being overthrown tomorrow. As we have seen before with the Iranian Revolution in 1979 with the overthrow of the Shah, the French revolution and the overthrow of the Bourbons, the American revolution and the overthrow of the most powerful world power by a few colonies: the British Empire. Other examples would include the Fall of South Vietnam in the 1970s, the overthrow of the Mubarak government in Egypt, the overthrow of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe in the 1990s and so on and so on and so on.

---

Congratulations, you've just listed a bunch of military coups headed by people within the system at high levels :P

Another shooting, although not mass.. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34450841

Late posting here but would like to point out that while we have gun crimes in the UK it seems School shootings are very common in the US. I'm not saying fully ban them, but the easier it is to get them the more people at risk. I read earlier about a kid shooting another kid of very young age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peteyt

Late posting here but would like to point out that while we have gun crimes in the UK it seems School shootings are very common in the US. I'm not saying fully ban them, but the easier it is to get them the more people at risk. I read earlier about a kid shooting another kid of very young age.

---

Post above

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scottish

Post above

---

Yeah just seen it. It show's that gun crime is a problem in the US. If a child that age can get hold of a gun you know it's a problem.