Gun control - murderer control?

[Walsingham]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away <sic>.

 

 

[Woldan]

Blaming and banning the tools that were used in a crime is a rather narrow minded and pointless approach usually used by those who are either too lazy, afraid or incompetent to get to the bottom of the real problem. Be it guns, knives or what have you. 
I'm just waiting for politicians banning pointy and sharp objects now.

 

And RIP to those who died during this completely unnecessary and despicable attack. 

Edited March 1, 2014 by Woldan

[Mor]

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away <sic>.

I think that prisons show us that even most controlled environment any tool can be used to cause harm in a premeditated attack. That doesn't mean that we should control toothbrush sale, or make weapons easily available accessible or uncontrolled.

 

Generally speaking the bottom line is that guns are far more effective/lethal then knifes. Anyone can squeeze the trigger, not everyone can stab a person to death, let alone to build up the courage to get close enough, especially if he is big.

 

Also most crimes are attacks of opportunity.

[Woldan]

Generally speaking the bottom line is that guns are far more effective/lethal then knifes.

This is not true at all, the effectiveness of a tool depends on the situation, the circumstances and the environment. Weapons are no different.

Things like concealability, remote control of a weapon and those kind of things have to be considered. This happened at an airport so maybe there is a reason why knives were used.

 

About the ease of use of guns, knives are FAR easier to use. Also its always hard to spot the attackers when knives are used in a crowd, the ensuing chaos and the small size of the weapon gives them a certain amount of concealment so they can do a  LOT of damage before they can be identified and stopped. 

Edited March 2, 2014 by Woldan

[Wrath of Dagon]

Walsingham, on 01 Mar 2014 - 5:11 PM, said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away <sic>.

Actually although I'm against gun control, it doesn't. These were multiple well prepared attackers, as opposed to a lone nut that's usually the problem in US.

[licketysplit]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away <sic>.

 

Hardly. How many more would have died if those guys would have used guns? And this type of incident is an anomaly. When's the last time you read about a terrorist attack using knives? I'm still for gun control, and will always be for gun control because they are weapons designed to kill things as quickly and efficiently as possible. Knives don't fall under that heading.

[mkreku]

Nonono, steroid-head said knives are at least as lethal as guns so it must be true!

 

Jesus Christ, I could almost feel my IQ dropping from reading that post.

[Guard Dog]

Gun control is not, and has never been about crime. Crime is just a convenient pretext that politicians use to distract people from the fact that they are trying to take away your freedom. Not all of it, and not all at once. But this one is the ultimate safeguard of all the others. Speaking only to my fellow Americans who are in favor of total gun control; are you willing to fight a civil war to get it?  

[Gorgon]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away .

 

How so ?

 

I mean if everyone had guns, at least they would have been able to shoot back, but that presumes everyone being armed all the time. Doesn't seem very plausible.

[Guard Dog]

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away <s

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away <sic>.

 

How so ?

 

I mean if everyone had guns, at least they would have been able to shoot back, but that presumes everyone being armed all the time. Doesn't seem very plausible.

 

I have a permit and carry almost everywhere I go.

[Orogun01]

Somehow I got really hung up on the Muslim bit, it is seriously becoming harder to take a moderate stance on the subject when it seems that the majority are zealots.

On the subject; anyone can look up violent crime statistics on countries with a ban on guns and on those without and draw their own conclusions as to whether guns contribute to crime or prevent it.

[Valsuelm]

Here we go again...

 

I'll sum it up quicklike. The truth is, anyone who is for gun control is either naive or downright evil. Most fall into the former category, and just really haven't thought things through all that well.

 

In this particular situation, how great would it have been if out of the hundreds there at least a few citizens had been carrying a gun? Of course China can't have that, as an armed populace would mean revolt in many a Chinese place. And that is why nations are disarmed, and that is the true purpose of 'gun control', to prevent and/or minimize the effectiveness of citizen uprisings.

 

And Woldan, some places have already outlawed pointy sharp things. Australia and the U.K. comes to mind.

 

With most things, where there's a will there is a way, and this is something the naive just don't want to come to terms with.

 

What's interesting about this case is that apparently ~10 armed men attacked joe average, so this was definitely well thought out in advance. I would like to know what their motive was.

[Volourn]

Anyone who blames guns (or any other weapon) for a crime being commited are braindead. Theya re also missing the big picture or worse they do see the big picture. Gun control is about power and control. It's even in the name. Gun CONTROL. C.O.N.T.R.O.L. Case closed.

 

As for this attack. It's sick, disgusting, and evil. PERIOD. And, banning knifes wouldn't have stopped.

 

Also, ask any of the pro gun control freaks if they would also approve of the gov't/law not having guns. I guarantee at leats ahlf of them would have no problem if the gov't kept their guns.

 

C

O

N

T

R

O

L

[licketysplit]

Somehow I got really hung up on the Muslim bit, it is seriously becoming harder to take a moderate stance on the subject when it seems that the majority are zealots.

 

On the subject; anyone can look up violent crime statistics on countries with a ban on guns and on those without and draw their own conclusions as to whether guns contribute to crime or prevent it.

 

They facilitate it, make it easier, and that's reason enough for strict gun regulation in any country. As to the perps, I have not read who they are or what their motivation is, but if they wanted to inflict maximum causalities, guns or bombs would have been used. 

[Gorgon]

 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away .

 

How so ?

 

I mean if everyone had guns, at least they would have been able to shoot back, but that presumes everyone being armed all the time. Doesn't seem very plausible.

 

I have a permit and carry almost everywhere I go.

 

Well  you aren't representative of the average Chinese commuter. 

[Valsuelm]

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away <s

 

How so ?

 

I mean if everyone had guns, at least they would have been able to shoot back, but that presumes everyone being armed all the time. Doesn't seem very plausible.

 

 

I went to visit a a buddy of mine who happens to be an attorney in Tennessee recently. As I'm interested in legal things we often talk about what cases he's working on and so it happened that while I was there I watched a surveillance video recording of an armed man attempting to rob a convenience store late at night at gun point. There were three other patrons in the store when this occurred. You can see the would be robber wave his gun and tell people to get down. As he turned his attention to the cashier after issuing his warning two of the three patrons pulled legally owned guns out (one a man and one a woman), aimed them at the would be robber and over the course of about 5 seconds convinced him to lay his weapon down. Police came, the man was arrested, and no one was hurt.

 

While it definitely depends on where you live, in many places in the U.S. at least you would be surprised how many people are carrying a gun on them at any given time.

Edited March 2, 2014 by Valsuelm

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

This thread is going to end well.

[licketysplit]

Anyone who blames guns (or any other weapon) for a crime being commited are braindead. Theya re also missing the big picture or worse they do see the big picture. Gun control is about power and control. It's even in the name. Gun CONTROL. C.O.N.T.R.O.L. Case closed.

 

As for this attack. It's sick, disgusting, and evil. PERIOD. And, banning knifes wouldn't have stopped.

 

Also, ask any of the pro gun control freaks if they would also approve of the gov't/law not having guns. I guarantee at leats ahlf of them would have no problem if the gov't kept their guns.

 

C

O

N

T

R

O

L

 

Don't use that NRA malarkey logic. No one is saying guns kill people. It's a matter of regulating public safety. If Adam Lanza's mom would never have owned a military weapons cache, or if she'd at least kept it properly locked away, that would have been another obstacle or two between him and committing mass murder.  

[Orogun01]

 

Anyone who blames guns (or any other weapon) for a crime being commited are braindead. Theya re also missing the big picture or worse they do see the big picture. Gun control is about power and control. It's even in the name. Gun CONTROL. C.O.N.T.R.O.L. Case closed.

 

As for this attack. It's sick, disgusting, and evil. PERIOD. And, banning knifes wouldn't have stopped.

 

Also, ask any of the pro gun control freaks if they would also approve of the gov't/law not having guns. I guarantee at leats ahlf of them would have no problem if the gov't kept their guns.

 

C

O

N

T

R

O

L

 

Don't use that NRA malarkey logic. No one is saying guns kill people. It's a matter of regulating public safety. If Adam Lanza's mom would never have owned a military weapons cache, or if she'd at least kept it properly locked away, that would have been another obstacle or two between him and committing mass murder.  

 

So because some citizens may be insane you need to ban guns; the same argument could be made of police forces and I can actually put the example of the cop who wanted to cook and eat children (may have been women I don't recall) as supporting evidence.

[Valsuelm]

 

Don't use that NRA malarkey logic. No one is saying guns kill people. It's a matter of regulating public safety. If Adam Lanza's mom would never have owned a military weapons cache, or if she'd at least kept it properly locked away, that would have been another obstacle or two between him and committing mass murder.  

 

 

 

There can always be what ifs.

 

This is probably the best video on what ifs you'll ever see:

 

Note that Suzanne obviously made no impression upon Chuck Shumer, as he's still leading the charge to take your rights away today. He is not naive though, he is an evil mofo.

 

On the subject of Adam Lanza. Two things.

 

1. Most any resourceful teenager is going to be able to get their hands on the weapons he used, locked up or not. Where there is a will there is a way.

 

2. If the school where Adam allegedly murdered all of the folks he did wasn't a 'gun free' zone then perhaps at least one of the teachers would have had a weapon to stop Adam and prevent at least some of the carnage that occurred there that day. The fact is that most 'mass shootings' in recent times occur in 'gun free' zones. 'Gun free' zones are possibly the most asinine 'regulation of public safety' there is, and have no doubt caused far more harm than good.

Edited March 2, 2014 by Valsuelm

[Nonek]

Anybody remember the lone Gurkha who fought off and routed a group of forty men who were intent on abusing a young lady on a train a few years ago? In that case i'm glad the gentleman was carrying a weapon, and glad that he knew how to use it.

[Mor]

 

Generally speaking the bottom line is that guns are far more effective/lethal then knifes.

This is not true at all, the effectiveness of a tool depends on the situation, the circumstances and the environment. Weapons are no different.

Things like concealability, remote control of a weapon and those kind of things have to be considered. This happened at an airport so maybe there is a reason why knives were used.

 

About the ease of use of guns, knives are FAR easier to use. Also its always hard to spot the attackers when knives are used in a crowd, the ensuing chaos and the small size of the weapon gives them a certain amount of concealment so they can do a  LOT of damage before they can be identified and stopped.

 

Airport?! The key word was "Generally" i.e. most attacks are not premeditated nor happening in Airports, but perpetrated by regular joes in their homes/hoods/..

 

Same goes for the ease of use, generally speaking perpetrators are your regular joe. If you think that that for most it easier to stab someone then pull the trigger, we will have to strongly disagree. There is a reason why most will opt for a gun and most suicides happen by gun and not Knife, or why a cop would prefer dealing with knife wielding drunk than one with a gun.

 

Anybody remember the lone Gurkha who fought off and routed a group of forty men who were intent on abusing a young lady on a train a few years ago? In that case i'm glad the gentleman was carrying a weapon, and glad that he knew how to use it.

Life isn't action movie, and guns far more commonly used by criminal elements then some regular joe who saves the day. So this is the exception that prove the rule.

 

It reminds me an old statistic that showed that people who trained in martial arts are far more likely to be involved in fight and require medical attention.

[Nonek]

Never said it was Mr Mor, however it's a nice counterpoint to all of the doom and gloom we commonly hear. Indeed the fear of violence seems to be far more prevalant than its actual occurence if statistics (at least in the west) are to be believed.

[ManifestedISO]

Chinese Muslim terrorists, are you f***ing kidding me.

 

Why you gotta draw lines and break up everybody into rancorous factions with threads like this. It's the inevitable conclusion, you know it is. Severely frowning face.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away <s

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-26402367

 

Just thought, having argued in favour of gun control, this incident pretty much blows my argument away <sic>.

 

How so ?

 

I mean if everyone had guns, at least they would have been able to shoot back, but that presumes everyone being armed all the time. Doesn't seem very plausible.

 

I have a permit and carry almost everywhere I go.

 

Well  you aren't representative of the average Chinese commuter. 

 

Well, you didn't say "plausible in China". It's quite plausible in Texas, which is the point. Btw, I've read that crime rate committed by concealed license holders is actually lower than that of police!

 

Our constitution has been gutted, all we got left is the first and second amendments. If we lose those, it's all over.