[QUOTE="LOXO7"]A criminal doesn't need to make a gun, if they are a smart criminal. They would know the law as would everyone else and figure there are millions of potential clients out there to victimize, because they all follow the law. All they would have to do is over power them with something else.br0kenrabbit

The only smart criminals are those who hold executive positions in various corporations and regulatory boards.

Your average street thug is dumb as $hit. That's why he's a street thug.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

[QUOTE="bnarmz"] I worry more about what will happen to us if the police and military were the only ones allowed to carry guns. That day will never come, fortunately. Tighter gun laws is more likely the answer. Hell, why not modify all guns and make the bullets extremely expensive and hard to make...maybe that will deter some gun toters and have them thinking twice (maybe even 3 times or more) before firing and wasting their ammo. just a thought. bnarmz

Tighter gun laws is less freedom. Right, involve more government to take care of the people that can and cannot be able to have their own responsibilities of taking care of themselves. :roll: This thought is in the direction of total military and police power in the country. How can you say this day will never come and then give an example of more government control is the answer? Do you know that police and military is the government? Just making sure.

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]This is an idea that I had as well, if you look at the states with the most strict gun control policies (like California, New York, Illinois ect...) they also have the most gun related crimes. Conversely if you look at states with the most laxed gun laws (like Texas, Nebraska, Alaska, Oklahoma, ect...) you see much less gun crimes.worlock77

Illinois, California and New York are also the states with the three largest cities in the US. Of course they're going to have more gun related crimes. Meanwhile how many people live in Alaska, Oklahoma or Nebraska?

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

This is an idea that I had as well, if you look at the states with the most strict gun control policies (like California, New York, Illinois ect...) they also have the most gun related crimes. Conversely if you look at states with the most laxed gun laws (like Texas, Nebraska, Alaska, Oklahoma, ect...) you see much less gun crimes.

If more people in a civilian population are armed, you will see less crime. I think the solution is to let people own and carry concealed as long as they pass a criminal background and mental health check, as well as have knowledge of fire arm safety and how to handle them in a responisble manner.

Socijalisticka

Crime is less common in much of the Midwest and New England simply due to thesocio-economic conditions of the population.

Arming the population isn't going to eradicate cultural, and ultimately socio-economic tensions. Arming civilians in Chicago will not stop criminals from killing each other (which constitute the marjority of murders), nor from attempting criminal activities (of which they feel they have little choice over).

Heroin is illegal in the US. Yet people are killed by heroin. Explain that one? Noscope is right. The solution is less government. More people have to carry firearms in public.LOXO7

Legalising or decriminalising heroin is going to ease the abuse of hard drugs?

[QUOTE="champion837"]Who knows, but what we do know is that he was able to kill a bunch of people with that gun. And think about the other situations where people wouldnt use a bomb, and only a gun.br0kenrabbit

I can make you a functional gun with $10 and a trip to Home Depot.

Ban guns and people who want them (criminals) will still acquire them, even if they have to make them.

It's not nuclear science, even making your own gunpowder is easy and the most difficult to find component of gunpowder can be made by pissing on a bale of straw.

What you gonna do, ban pissing and straw?

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"][QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

Or we could just ban all guns and not have to worry about arming everyone?

BTW:

This was just tweeted to me from a news site:

Murders in which guns were involved in 2011:

35 in Australia

39 in England and Wales

194 in Germany

200 in Canada

9,484 in the United States

Guess which country has least amount of public gun restrictions in this list?

Netherscourge

The USA has the highest murder rate per-Capita in the world.

The murder:population ratio is worse in the USA than any other civilized country in the world.

The numbers relfected above DO represent the big picture, I'm afriad.

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

Dude was a Medical Student working on a PhD for Neuroscience. He just recently withdrew from his University.

Based on that fact, and that he was 24 years old, there is no reason he would be denied access to guns.

Just more proof that the 2nd Amendment is obsolete and should be removed from the Constitution.

Background screenings would not have red-flagged this guy.

Nobody should have access to guns excecpt the police and military. You simply can't trust the general public to handle guns. You never know which person is going to lose their minds.

And we sure as hell don't need armed militas to protect us form the government... I mean seriously. Not even Fox News or Rush Limbaugh can convince you of that LOL (unless you really are a moron)

bnarmz

Tighter gun laws is less freedom. Right, involve more government to take care of the people that can and cannot be able to have their own responsibilities of taking care of themselves. :roll: This thought is in the direction of total military and police power in the country. How can you say this day will never come and then give an example of more government control is the answer? Do you know that police and military is the government? Just making sure.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"][QUOTE="mattisgod01"]

American Gun policy = America? Yea no.

i don't agree with the availability of guns in America, Doesn't mean i hate America because of it.

You have more pressing things to do? Who are you kidding? You are always posting on GS. You have nothing else going on but the refresh button.

I took up your challenge and proved you wrong on a dozen accounts, Rather then own up to it you scurry away like a cockraoch and pretend like it's irrelevent. You made a claim that i'm an American Basher, I put evidence forward proving otherwise. Stop being a little Bltch and back up you BS.

Also, How does me pushing for stircter Gun laws in the US in order to save lives make me an American Basher? You still fail to see how far up your own ass you head is. If anyone differs from your opinion they are absolutley wrong. Regardless of what they are arguing for. I'm arguing my case with the Intent to save lives, Feel free to disagree with the effectiveness of such a idea but don't assume it's American bashing just because i don't like certain things or agree with your views.

mattisgod01

I'd have no idea in the short term. I just don't see how tighter gun controls can be a bad thing.

You don't have to ban the 100%, Just put restrictions on weapons capable of causing mass casualties. Limit it to single shot 9mm pistols of certain types, and single shot hunting Rifles. Sure you could do damage with them but you would go on a shooting spree like the one seen here.

Or we could just ban all guns and not have to worry about arming everyone?

BTW:

This was just tweeted to me from a news site:

Murders in which guns were involved in 2011:

35 in Australia

39 in England and Wales

194 in Germany

200 in Canada

9,484 in the United States

Guess which country has least amount of public gun restrictions in this list?

Netherscourge

[QUOTE="LOXO7"][QUOTE="mattisgod01"]

It is such a cynical view to have, It would take far too many people to be in on it. We are not going to get into a 9/11 debate are we?

mattisgod01

It's kind of a big stretch between trusting government and media, to believing the government Murdered thousands of their own people, Is it not?