This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I assume there's a paper out there by someone much smarter than me looking at the United States' military spending and role as world's policeman and the mentality among its citizens that individuals need to have the most guns and be the savior with the biggest gun when stuff goes down. I would think maybe a link there?
Jesus. Let’s say 5 which is high since “criminal” doesn’t mean “murderer.”. Does that make it better?
Now combine that mentality with the undercurrent of sexism, racism, and other things we seem to like to pretend aren't there...
Not really. You can't just make up statistics.
And yet nothing stopped him from committing the massacre. So essentially, you are saying that even in the state where the gun per person rate is likely higher than anywhere else, that those guns accomplished nothing. Other than being used to commit mass murder that is.[icon] said:You've apparently never been to Texas if you doubt the idea that someone was armed and intervened when wrong was being done.Texas, as a generality, is a different animal... tremendous amount of civic/state pride, a strong sense of community, and incredibly abundant firearms ownership and experience.
This is true, however, the ultimate price you may pay for taking the wrong gamble with that is your life.
Mental problems + family problems + hatred of Christians + assault rifles....recipe for disaster
The motive here doesnt appear to be religious related. He was hunting family members that were supposed to be all in one place. Only a few were.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
Scroll up, GB
I think it’s absurd to think that didn’t play a part. The spark may have been family problems but when he opens the door to the church and mows down everyone inside, you can’t tell me his views on religion didn’t play a part. That obviously wasn’t a group of people he had any respect for.
Heck, if just half of the cold dead hands crowd got up actually told their reps to support proper enforcement of existing laws and enactment of new common sense gun control laws (as the polls show they agree with) then it would already be in place.
I don't think he cared... about anything. He would have done a movie theater or a elementary school. He picked perhaps the largest target in a tiny town.
So he hated religion, thought religious people were stupid, went to a church, killed 26 religious people, including kids...and you don’t think that was a factor? There are many factors here most notably that he somehow got access to a gun he shouldn’t have been able to buy.
He hated it?
Why would we let the public buy new guns when they are using the ones they've already got?
Pull your car on to any public street and you'll see people failing to follow the law every single second of the day, 24/7/365. This is why any laws, old, existing or even new, will not even make a dent in this problem.
Those are not mutually exclusive goals.
• Look outside and nobody is following the laws so laws won't make a dent in this problem
I wasn't equating the two. The problem isn't laws not being used. The problem is guns being used.
No.
Thanks for being so obtuse.• Look outside and nobody is following the laws so laws won't make a dent in this problem
• Let's make it illegal to fix the problem
Sound logic here.
The US government has already grown so big that it can squash any military anywhere in the world. A battle with an armed populace would be a joke to them. While I agree that was the intent of the 2nd amendment, it's worthless now that the 2nd amendment can't even protect us from that happening. We need to get rid of a now worthless amendment so we can save future victims of this violence.
Our military can't squash ISIS and a battle on US soil against its own citizens wouldn't be any easier.
That's an apples to oranges comparison.
It's a closer comparison than some foreign country we would just steam roll.
This is probably true and also very sad. How many innocent people have to die before it outweighs the cost of hypothetically needing to fight a losing battle against your own countries military? It's so stupid.
If that is what you think then you don't understand the issue at all. The entire US Constitution is built around keeping the government in check. How many decisions that are made or not made based on that is immeasurable. It's not about some hypothetical standoff war, but about a billion little decisions over the centuries of our country's existence.
