In light of the Charleston Church shooting (a terrible tragedy), president has taken no time in pointing the finger at the tool used to kill rather than the mass murdering prick who used it.
The question is simple here: why was the shooter able to get a gun? Because the gun laws aren't strict enough, or because the shooter was a criminal with criminal intentions?
Some of you are asking how he got the gun, the answer is it was a gift from his father. Make of that what you will.
-
1 RespuestaGun laws got really strict in Finland. If you post a picture of yourself with a firearm to Facebook etc. it is possible all your guns will be taken away. Still, if a criminal wants a gun, mark my words a criminal will somehow get one.
-
come to Australia all your dream will come true [spoiler]if they have kangaroos in them[/spoiler]
-
185 RespuestasEditado por The Stranger: 6/25/2015 8:34:56 AMThis is absolutely retarded. You Americans are so obsessed with "mah freedoms!" you seriously can't see that guns kill people? No! "Hur dur guns can't kill people, they're not alive! People kill people. Deep derp derp". Yes, congratulations on applying retarded logic. Correct logic, but retarded logic. I'm not saying that millions of Americans [i]don't[/i] live peacefully with guns, far from it. Having been to America several times and met gun owners I [i]know[/i] that the vast majority of you don't, and won't use your guns to kill people. But for that small amount of people, the crazies, the insecure, the fanatics, the social outcasts who [i]do[/i] decide to take a rifle and go on a killing spree [i]guns are dangerous and help raise the death toll.[/i] Seriously, do you think the death toll at the church, sandy hook or columbine would have been the same if the shooter didn't have a gun? No! For -blam!- sake. If all they could get hold of was knives or swords they probably wouldn't have bothered, or if they had, managed to kill one or two people before being tackled to the ground and having their weapon taken off of them. Or the people who have been mortally wounded in bank heists, liquor store robberies and so on, do you think the same number would have died if the criminals only had a kitchen knife? But you people are so obsessed with your personal freedoms, you can't see it. Guess what? A lot of countries have outlawed guns and... Here it comes... Massive surprise... Are you ready?.... WE'RE STILL FREE! And guess what? We also have less violent crime! But no, you guys consider your personal right to own a shiny piece of metal higher than 20 children's right to life, and that's appalling. No, not just appalling, it's despicable and absolutely downright -blam!-ing insanely retarded. Then you argue that criminals will still get hold of guns, black market and the like. Yes, yes they will. But it will be a damn slight harder without being able to get them next to the baked beans in Walmart. Funnily enough the people who have access to the black market are the people who work on the black market, not your everyday lowlife who decides to rob a house or shoot up a public building. So, instead of asking yourself "what are the chances of criminals getting hold of guns when I can't?", because that's far too generalised a question, ask "what are the actual chances of coming in contact with organised crime?" The answer is pretty -blam!-ing low. Guns have been illegal for decades in England and I've not once seen a live fire weapon in civilian hands. And it's not like I've not had the opportunity. I've know countless drug dealers and petty thieves. Even a few career criminals [i]and not one of them had a gun.[/i] Not only that, none of them have ever killed anyone. You know what happens to them when they get cornered? They give up and go to jail. No suicides, no shoot outs. It just ends. I really hope you all see sense one day, the sooner the better. Guns [i]do[/i] kill people, no matter how much you try and rationalise it away. Not only that, but your over the counter gun culture is supplying criminals in other countries. It's not just America that's suffering from your myopic stubbornness. And if you still think that your right to defend yourself from, what would become, unarmed criminals is more important than innocent lives, please, just kill yourselves. The world would be a better place for it. Edit: Sorry people, I can't reply. Opening the comment chain crashes my phone. Scroll right the way down to the first 30 replies and I've probably proven your counter argument wrong with the glorious power of facts. Thanks for making this my most successful reply ever.
-
1 RespuestaThe state law probably allowed the transaction. If he is a criminal , he wouldn't have pass a background check. Thats is if the state had a law that made people do a background check before gifting the gun. Nevada has changed the law making everyone do a background check before gifting or selling a firearm. In addition, there was added mental health information added to the background check. I don't have a problems with that.
-
has any of the major media outlets called him a terrorist? just wondering, because shit like this is a hell of a lot more likely than some ISIS attack and way harder to predict.
-
Because his father gave it to him
-
Gun bans only hurt those that obey the law. It would be impossible to remove all the firearms within the US or even control the types. There's so many out there that they'll be showing up in criminal hands for years. Even so a criminal is still going to pull shit off gun or no gun
-
28 RespuestasI'll just leave this here.
-
I agree about having gun restrictions and laws but if you ban guns criminals will still find a way to get a hold of them remember its not the gun that kills a person its a person killing someone else so if guns were banned and murders are happening with knives will they ban knives next you can kill a human with alot of things but banning guns just might make it worse
-
The gun laws we have just need to be enforced.
-
1 RespuestaEditado por BeyondReasonn: 6/24/2015 3:12:23 PMMain issue: People who want to commit acts of violence will commit then. Banning guns won't stop them.These people are going to commit murder, and/or homicide, why would they care about a gun law?
-
15 RespuestasGun laws only affect the "good people" Criminals who want to kill someone can buy them off the streets Gun laws are just a waste of time
-
17 Respuestaswhy is "because he got it legally" not one of the options?
-
Actually his grandfather gave him money to buy the gun.
-
He was 21. Passed the background check. NSA didn't do their job. Gun Dealer didn't use his common sense/sixth sense. He was able to buy a gun because he wasn't a criminal and wasn't diagnosed with any mental issues. Nothing would have prevented this incident. He was determined to kill people that day, that being said no regulation or restriction would have prevented him from doing this horrible act.
-
Well one thing we need is a better spread of history and civics textbooks. An aversion to controversy causes many to tread far too lightly around the history and long-term effects of racially-targeted violence in America. Our civics courses don't seem to result in people who can identify the mechanisms of society in their lives, and as a result you have large swathes of the voting age population who want the government to keep its hands off their Medicare but think they hate welfare. People are treating politics like religion, as though a given political ideology is deeply personal and permanent. As though an agenda is worth promoting regardless of the impact it has on your world. And worse, people won't acknowledge or consider how their political priorities affect others, partly because they are being taught to justify making public decisions with a 'me-only' focus. That murderer's roommate better land in prison for failing to at least mention his fantasy of starting a race war to anyone.
-
Cant spell freedom without guns
-
It was a gift from his dad.
-
6 RespuestasHow can you idiots say it was because he was a criminal? He acquired the gun legally. This is why we need mandatory background checks.
-
10 Respuestas64% are dumb or trolling.
-
3 RespuestasEditado por Spartan Ken 15: 6/24/2015 2:48:09 PMPeople have been killing each other for thousands of years long before the first firearms existed. I am sure if he had no access to guns he would find a way to hurt people, seeing how he obviously had some issues. I don't think it is morally or constitutionally right to restrict citizens access to firearms, let alone ban certain guns for having "assault weapon" features which resemble some military select fire rifles and are rarely used in any criminal activity (also not even involved in any way to this tragedy at all). The fact of the matter is most gun owners will never commit any crime with their guns and frankly I don't think guns are what causes these people to kill, I think it is an easy way out to blame an object as a source for people's hate and insanity.
-
6 RespuestasEditado por Tinfoil Fedora: 6/23/2015 5:19:54 PMI live in canada but I could go out and shoot someone regardless of gun laws, the only way to truly prevent a shooting like that is to ban guns completely.
-
Because he got the gun illegally via a Straw Purchase. He got the firearm illegally, no restriction would have stopped that
-
2 RespuestasEditado por jDee: 6/21/2015 1:48:43 PMI watched a show and it shows a 12 year old buying a gun from a private seller. Thats just -blam!-ing stupid.[spoiler] ヘ(^_^ヘ) [/spoiler]
-
11 RespuestasAnd the father should be charged as an accessory to murder for supplying a gun to someone under disability. Once your convicted of a felony you cannot own a weapon. That idiot should never have had a weapon and his dad is just as much to blame
-
I heard it was magic.