Two more school shootings today...?

Question

WHEN IS ENOUGH ENOUGH. This argument came to my mind a few years ago when the keneticute school shooting took place. JUST TAKE THE DAMN GUNS AWAY, IT IS THAT SIMPLE. And all of you redneck conservatives out there, keep away from my question, because it is people like YOU that cause laws to allow this to happen. This makes me so disappointed in the country that landed on the moon, or the country that was the first new world democracy. Why can't we just keep up with Europe and make stricter gun laws. I am sorry if you have your gun taken away, but if that saves hundreds of lives in the process, then I (IN PERSON IF I HAD TO) would take all of your guns away. Stop saying that the constitution supports the right for you to have a gun, it is over 200 years outdated and at the time that it was made was when there were threats of large wild animals, and no police, and they ONLY HAD FREAKING MUSKET. They are planning to revise this amendment in the future but it will defiantly not be FOR you to have an AK-47. The opposing argument for the gun rights laws is "well, if you make guns harder to access then the criminals will just get guns illegally somehow." All of the massive shootings that have happened recently are from BORROWED guns from people with background checks. What about the countries like in Scandinavia, where they have almost completely banned guns, they have one of, if not the, lowest crime rating in the whole world by murder.

Answer 1

You're so misinformed it's hard to know where to start.

Compared to a list of UK and 14 European countries, the rate of mass shootings in the US hits about the middle of the pack. We don't have nearly the rate of deaths per million population as does Denmark, and we don't have the number of deaths per million as does Finland. Sticking us in a list with those other countries, we are seventh in one of the above categories, and eighth in the other That's pretty close to average on a list of 15, if you weren't keeping score.

Moreover, you aren't going to confiscate 300 million firearms, and if you could somehow "magic" them away, we have a long, porous border with Mexico, which is not the most peaceful country on Earth.

Our Founding Fathers, by the way, had more than muskets, and they left "arms" in the Second Amendment open for a reason. To argue as you do, you have no right to post your little rant, because the internet isn't explicitly covered in the First Amendment.

Answer 2

I really think that since our country is having this rash of school shootings, the government should REALLY give us more info on the circumstances around each shooting.

I haven't read or seen ANY eyewitness accounts of ANY if this tragedies, any thing that I HAVE heard or read has been from "ANONYMOUS" eyewitnesses.

We need to hear REAL eyewitness accounts, with REAL names attached to them. Once we start too see and read substantiated eyewitness accounts, from actual survivors, then we MIGHT be able to address this SEVERE issue in our country.

But, until that happens, we can't even begin to ACT like we are actually trying to fix ANYTHING.

It's strange that a shooting can happen in just about any neighborhood in the country , and I can find actual "EYEWITNESS" testimony of that shooting within the hour.

But, for some reason , NONE of this school shootings have any eyewitness interviews?

Not just some random voice, blabbing b.s. out, we need names attached to this eyewitness accounts.

Answer 3

"ONLY HAD FREAKING MUSKET. "

Actually, many owned canons also. It was very common in the 1800's to pass by ten houses and see at least 5 canons, and those canons were fully functional. So, that argument fails.

If you want to stop gun violence, it starts with people, not machines. If you want to take away guns, then also take cars, planes, and every other machine that can be used for murder. Until then, you are a whiny hypocrite who wants everyone to be as afraid of guns as you are.

Answer 4

Will you call for the mandatory institutionalization and forced treatment of ALL mentally ill?

We used to do that before liberals fought for the "right" to be mentally ill. You were crazy, you got put away and treated.

Then libs fought tooth and nail to change the laws, and treatment and confinement became voluntary except in instance of egregious criminal behavior.

The state hospitals emptied right out.

When you sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind....

And the storm that's still brewing will be much worse before it gets any better.

Answer 5

Come and take them, then. You can have all 57 of my guns when I'm dead. You want my bow, too? What about my crossbow? What about my hunting knives, pocket knives, and collectible swords? You can have those when I'm dead, too. But just remember, it's not the guns that are doing the killing. None of My guns, onr any of my weapons for that matter, have been involved in taking a human life. Only deer, bears, squirrels, rabbits, and ducks.

Answer 6

Outdated? Not a fan of free speech or illegal search and seizure?



Cars, alcohol and drugs kill more people a year than guns. Do you want to take away people's cars? The cold, hard truth is guns, cars, alcohol, drugs etc. aren't the cause - it is the person using them. Should we ban people?

Answer 7

I do agree with you, guns are made for killing. What is sad is that stupid people believes that the solution of people killing childs and students....is more guns. They prefer guns that human lives. They say that it won't matter, crazy peole would get guns anyway, so why crazy people in other countries don't get guns too and shoot in schools like they do in the US? Easy, because is not like that! You see, when you are able to purchase guns so easily, and you get them, nothing stops you, you feel invincible, you feel so eager to use your gun, so you will probably search any escuse to use them, like someone pissed you off in school...there's my excuse. But if you cannot have a gun, you will probably search other way to reflect your frustration, but not killing people. Many of these people wouldn't even try to have a gun if they couldn't do it by the legal way, to dangerous and risky. Is sad to see the actitude of cons towards human life. But while they keep thinking like that, they would be more and more massacres in schools and public places, and still would be defending their rights to have a gun, maybe until one of their own children be a victim..,and probably will be still defending guns. They say people will still find a way to have guns, but the truth, is that doesn't happen in other countries, schools massacres are in US:

Answer 8

I think to make thing fair for conservatives and liberals, we should ban things like ak47s and m16s from public use and perhaps some pistols, only allow peashooter and small grade tasers for public use, and make them more expensive (plus its hard to go school shooting with **** guns) and raise the charges for possession of illegal guns, charging both the kid shooter and the parents with felonies, disallow any immigrants or people whose parents and/or grandparents who were not birthright american citizens, (anchor babies from illegal immigrants shouldn't count as citizens) but allow minor guns (not ak47s and things like that, smaller) to 100% citizens so people dont start something worse then missouri because everything was banned.and for a time since things wont be stablized like europe, guns would be like drugs and considered "cool" by many people, simaller to drugs, so crime would increase for a while, but as long as the police are on there best behavior and go up a notch to catch them, felonize them (and execute those that murdered someone with a gun to give the people a message) it would die down eventually and since it would be more dangerous legal wise for criminals and they would more likely robb a law abiding citizen house with a knife or rock instead of a shot gun, and the families could protect themselves with a peashooter or taser since it would still stop a guy with a knife and they are less likely to kill, and also doing so would dumb down the drug cartel and the murders they commited since they get 3/4 of there guns from america.

Answer 9

So sorry to be to be you, FA**OT!

If you can use a hateful and derogatory term againsts me, back at you.

BTW,

If I lived in New York, or Los Angeles or Las Vegas

what would stop me from driving my car on sidewalks or busy streets, and killing hundreds of pedestrians, if I chose to?

"REDNECK", and Proud to be!

Answer 10

Ok. But you're going to need your mom's permission before you leave the house, sonny

Answer 11

Ah yes. The constitution is outdated. At least you are an honest progressive. Totalitarian socialism as a replacement?

Answer 12

The 2nd Amendment will never be revised the people would never allow it

Your proposal would lead to a civil war, is that what you want?

Answer 13

Sorry.... all I read was "squawk, squawk"... as usual. Go fight crime and cry over victims in all your democrat run enclaves you people even called "systemically racist" all with... SURPRISE!... Democrat mayors.

Answer 14

You can't spell "definitely".

Answer 15

People of ALL political parties own guns.

ALL political parties at least CLAIM to support the Second Amendment.

You clearly state you want to TAKE AWAY the guns...

Where in the WORLD do you get off blaming the conservatives?

Answer 16

there is no justification for the lack or good background checks, or banning semi/fully automatic weapons. we don't allow RPGs or tanks.

Answer 17

These paranoid gun-worshippers think they need guns in order to protect themselves and their families! Didn't it ever occur to them that if criminals didn't have guns, nobody would need a gun to protect themselves???

Answer 18

Come and take them.

Answer 19

loser loser double loser

show me ur size z boobs