Silkroad Online Forums

Stricter gun control as far as i can tell would only solve impulsive murders nothing more, In this case this person had a plan and his plan was to kill as many poeple as he could this wasn't a impulsive action.

If this person wouldn't have a gun he would have showed up with a can of gas and a chainsaw and killed just as many or more/less poeple. Take any major killing in the last 10 years and you think any of them were on a impuls or the person woke up that day and decided to kill 10+ poeple ? no that person was planning it for weeks perhaps even months or years in the case of breivik.

Althoug it is true guns do make a mass killing easier since these poeple are planning they could use any other tool they could go on the internet and simply learn to make napalm or bombs and achieve the same goal.

I'm just gonna add a little. As someone that carries concealed(not everywhere I go) and someone that hunts(to fill my freezer, not to collect a trophy. Haven't bought steak or hamburger meat in over 6 years), I also target shoot with my AR and other guns. The thing is, I've spent my life around guns, so they don't scare me, but I still have a respect for their power.

I'm a responsible gun owner. I have a little girl, and I don't leave any firearms or ammunition out. It's always locked up in a safe. On the flip side........ We have mentally 'retarded' people that don't have any business using a gun, able to go to Academy(A sporting goods box store) and buy one, and do what ever the hell they want... I strongly disagree with this... I know they do background checks, but still, it's pretty stupid.

My brother-in-law for example, this kid(He's 26, but can't be over 14 in the head), I just know is going to go on a shooting spree, not a matter of "if", but "when"... and they continue to let him build up his little arsenal... The kid doesn't even have a job, failed the test to make it into the military, pretty sure they tried to diagnosis him with Asperger syndrome, and lives with his mom, who pays for everything... Yeah this kinda stuff is just bullshit... I honestly do believe a few regulations would keep him from building up his arsenal(because he's not smart enough to figure out a way to get them illegally), but I still think he'd still be able to get his hands on at least one to do his bidding.

... really its never gonna be perfect, and things like these shootings aren't really a gun problem as much as a people problem. Once all the guns are gun(kinda like china)there will be mass stabbing/slashings, and so on.

Important to note that none of the victims in the China knife attacks were killed - only wounded

And thats the difference between a gun and a knife/pencil/tomato, which some dont seem to understand

As long as someone knows basic human anatomy regarding vital spots, killing someone with a knife or anything with a point that can pierce isn't difficult whatsoever; even then, some areas that would receive a puncture wound would not result in a quick death, but would result in death nonetheless.

Yes, using guns even amateurs can do. But with a little bit of research/training you can get the same results (death) from a variety of different methods.

Personally, if it were just one person doing the assaulting against me, and it's as you say some "social reject" then best bet would be the knife, but that's only because of the range requirements. If it were a surprise assault and I never saw it coming, I'd much rather be shot then savagely stabbed to death. Even in an amateur's hands at least it could only take one attempt to kill me (and in an instant if their aim and specific target knowledge isn't horrid), than repeated attempts it would take with a knife.

As I was saying, you don't necessarily need a firearm to kill masses of people. You can accomplish the goal of killing masses through other means. Explosives, vehicles, gases, poison, etc., etc. You still need some effort and training/knowledge to use any weapon to kill another person, regardless if it's rudimentary or professional.

Yes but these cases aren't being done by trained people..they are mostly done by depressed/mentally ill. And really with the same amount of training in handling a knife, you can probably cause 20x more deaths with a gun.
I mean seriously, is it that hard to see the difference between a gun and a knife? You could kill people with your arms too if you "had the training and knew basic human anatomy", but its so much more easier and efficient with a gun, and you dont need any training or to know what anatomy even means
These gun advocate freaks like to compare guns and knives as essentially the same tools, but why do they go hunting with a rifle instead of a knife? or a potato?

edit; yes you could be killed by someone holding knife that sneaks up on you...but guess the difference between 1 person dying (and the killer being quickly captured/other people in the area running away) to 20 people dying (where the best bet for people around is to run away and still have a chance of getting shot?)

I know a lot of these instances aren't done by "trained" people. It was just an example that without a firearm, you can still kill targets. I know the differences between knives and guns. I know how efficient, inefficient they can be. The fact is if there is a will there is a way. Can't get a gun, buy some fertilizer (ammonium nitrate-based) and some gasoline, throw in a detonator and you've got a simple explosive with completely legal and obtainable materials by anyone and produces something that is even more efficient and effective than a firearm can be.

Also, basic anatomy is known by all who commit these crimes. Why shoot someone in the leg/arm when you're trying to kill them when you know the better target is the chest, or head?

Guns and knives are just tools. It's how the individual uses them. Will some people use them in questionable ways, of course. Should there be better walls/obstacles to stop these people from obtaining some of these "easier" tools to do their bidding, of course. However, outright banning them will not solve the problem whatsoever.

^Ok that is a really common argument by gun proponents but its an unjustifiable argument. Less guns do mean less deaths. Like someone said, it is much easier to kill a lot of people with a gun in hand. Homemade explosives or physical weapons are a lot less potent or harder to get and is frustrating for a would-be killer who wants to kill as many people possible in a short amount of time.

The US has 10,000 gun-related deaths per year. Other industrialized countries have them in the hundreds. The US also has the biggest gun culture and most number of guns per person. There is definitely a relation between the two. The correlation/causation argument is a really convenient one-liner to this, but to deny everything and say that this is purely coincidental is a denial of reality. The US has way too many school shootings and way too many mass shootings each year. For gun supporters to continue to deny that something is wrong is the reason why people will continue suffer from the excess of guns.

The 2007 VT shooter and the elementary school shooter both had mental problems and were still able to get guns, when they shouldn't have been allowed to. If that doesn't show something is wrong with the system, I don't know what is.


EDIT: Why are gun supporters so absolute in their reasoning? Every time theres a gun debate, someone always complains why gun control advocates want a total ban on guns. What the fuck? No. When people ask for gun control, they usually aren't asking for a complete ban on every gun. Having reasonable regulation doesn't mean the government or anybody is trying to encroach your 2nd amendment right, which gun supporters often clutch like it's their whole world..

So they could tolerate this before.

That's a damn good point!

An entire thread about how you would rather be killed by knife or by gun. How about we work on stopping people from going apeshit crazy before we worry about what weapons kill the fastest or easiest.

+1

there will always be crazy people wanting to kill other people. A guy posed as a policemen on an island to shoot people because he thought the country was becoming more islamic so he decides to aim at people who go to a political camp? He wasnt seen as a threat yet he still went apeshit crazy.

but for those people why not make it as hard as possible to be able to do such aweful things? this may give the police enough time to realise something is about to happen or it does happen but not to the extent that we have seen recently. anything that can help stop the killing of just one extra person is worth doing. If the killer has to think about how to obtain a gun and bullets it may stop him from going through with it.

On the news a gun store owner said that monday was the best day in business he had in 20 years. So after a mass shooting on friday people in america go out and STILL buy guns regardless of this tragedy. This cannot be the response americans are looking for.

Because they know the second they step into that Primary School, that they're going to receive praise (nonetheless it's negative, but it's still his face and story plastered everywhere) all over Media, whether it be radio, TV or internet, it's going to be everywhere, and they're not giving identity to the victims, only to the person who committed the crimes.

Exactly this. All the media and society is doing by blowing this up more than it needs to is perpetuating the next mass killing psycho to go even bigger and even more catastrophic. People are unintentionally glorifying this guy and setting the bar for the next guy.

But when one does.

Code: Select all
any case for owning a gun is just asking for it to be used to kill someone or something. if you have a gun then you are just promoting these sorts of killings in my opinion.

We own multiple rifles in my family, they are all kept in a gun safe that only my dad knows the combination to. Those guns are for hunting. Try and tell me that they are promoting senseless violence. Moron.

one day dad wakes up very depressed and crazy like, removes rifles and shoots up your family.

not likely... but possible.

Hunting is also violence.

anyone making an excuse for owning a gun is just making an excuse for people to go out and commit murder. im sorry but if you are so big on hunting there should be a hunters license AS WELL! still you shouldnt be able to stock ur gun at home, you go down to a place where you have to sign the gun out of a storage facility stating the amount of time you tend to hunt for. they tag the gun with gps and if you break the time limit it gets traced. police come and tell you to take the gun back 1st warning. 2nd warning is a $500 fine and 3rd warning your gun is revoked.

there is seriously a lot easier ways to give people the right to own a gun but also make it harder to do so. you may own a gun if you want to... but it must only be a hand gun with a full magazine capacity (i dno.... glock with 10 round magazine as an example... actually bad example as that is a semi auto pistol.... bt you get the point)

the right to bare arms doesnt have to mean the right to own firepower capable of murdering 30 people in quick succession.

lol penfold1992... I take it your experience with guns begins and ends with video games, and a side of media headlines.

Also, everything you need to make a bomb that could level that entire school is perfectly legal. And yes someone has already killed many children using such materials... so should we ban these materials too?

I stated something similar about a page ago Fiction, but he insists on spouting his ignorant views over and over.
By the way penfold, you do have to have a license to hunt, every time you say something you show more of your ignorance.