Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: School Shootings and Guns: Chinese and American ,"Take Away Ou...
  • Subject: School Shootings and Guns: Chinese and American ,"Take Away Ou...
Subject: School Shootings and Guns: Chinese and American ,"Take Away Ou...


Posted by: MeltingBrainbob
Only major gangs have guns, and that's because they have international connections.

Except that's false.

All of these were done not only in a land where guns are highly restricted, but none of these guys had significant involvement in any international gang. Yet, one of them managed to commit their crime with a fully automatic Chinese assault rifle.

In a place already saturated with weapons and the place with one of the highest number of illegal gun dealings, I highly doubt that taking away guns from anyone else will take them away from these people.

  • 12.15.2012 7:14 PM PDT


Posted by: What Is This1

Posted by: Rayzor1995
You are either a bad troll or a -blam!-ing idiot...

Honestly I have been going with the latter because most trolls don't write out as much as the OP has.

An idiot with a point that you gentlemen refuse to accept.

Rather than refuting my point, you guys all call me an idiot, which makes me even happier. It shows you guys can't formulate a sensible argument, and only fall back to the classic 2nd grade insult "you are an idiot" to act like you are winning.

Job well done gents.

  • 12.15.2012 7:14 PM PDT


Posted by: MeltingBrainbob

Posted by: bergXX09
Does the OP not realize that China is a Communist dictatorship almost entirely because no one can have a gun? There's no way for a revolution to happen. We have the guns mainly for self-defense and hunting.

OP, do you then think that video games are the cause of murders?


Yes sir. The only reason China is communist is because the Chinese can't have guns.

-___________________________________________-

It works. Less casualties. They just have to work on their corrupt government officials, over-powered police, the poverty, and the pollution, and it'll be perfect! A Utopian society!

Do you know why they have really corrupt government officials? Do you know why the police are overpowered? Do you know why there isn't any change? Because the people have no power to revolt or threaten the government in any way. The police and government can do anything they want because the people don't have guns. Look at Syria, they have guns and can rebel and overcome their corrupt government. Look at us, we are a democracy that has worked for over 200 years without a single self appointed dictator.

If there weren't guns, then these same people would just find other ways to kill. If you think guns cause people to kill then you must think video games do as well.

[Edited on 12.15.2012 7:16 PM PST]

  • 12.15.2012 7:16 PM PDT

Just remember that no matter how terrible you feel, or how much you want to let go, there are people who care about you and love you.


Posted by: MeltingBrainbob

Posted by: What Is This1

Posted by: Rayzor1995
You are either a bad troll or a -blam!-ing idiot...

Honestly I have been going with the latter because most trolls don't write out as much as the OP has.

An idiot with a point that you gentlemen refuse to accept.

Rather than refuting my point, you guys all call me an idiot, which makes me even happier. It shows you guys can't formulate a sensible argument, and only fall back to the classic 2nd grade insult "you are an idiot" to act like you are winning.

Job well done gents.
That's great, why don't you share your vast intellect with someone else, OK? Obviously you're too smart for a forum full of 12 year olds.

  • 12.15.2012 7:17 PM PDT


Posted by: bergXX09
Do you know why they have really corrupt government officials? Do you know why the police are overpowered? Do you know why there isn't any change? Because the people have no power to revolt or threaten the government in any way. The police and government can do anything they want because the people don't have guns. Look at Syria, they have guns and can rebel and overcome their corrupt government. Look at us, we are a democracy that has worked for over 200 years without a single self appointed dictator.

If there weren't guns, then these same people would just find other ways to kill. If you think guns cause people to kill then you must think video games do as well.


Yes yes, because they can't over throw the government with their Aks, and that pistols are good against tanks, I've heard it all before!!!

But hey, you seem like a sensible person willing to have a decent argument.

In China, the first revolt by students resulted terrible. People were mowed down

Second revolt, bhuddist monks were killed.

Third revolt, a city of revolters was put down.

But now. People in China petitioned against a factory built on a river where people drank from. The government finally agreed, and canceled the building. China is getting places. The corruption will only last now because technically, they are in their own industrial revoltuion. THe liberalism will come later.

  • 12.15.2012 7:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: MeltingBrainbob

Posted by: What Is This1

Posted by: Rayzor1995
You are either a bad troll or a -blam!-ing idiot...

Honestly I have been going with the latter because most trolls don't write out as much as the OP has.

An idiot with a point that you gentlemen refuse to accept.

Rather than refuting my point, you guys all call me an idiot, which makes me even happier. It shows you guys can't formulate a sensible argument, and only fall back to the classic 2nd grade insult "you are an idiot" to act like you are winning.

Job well done gents.
Most gun nuts are like that they get really sensitive when you try and take away there right to shoot targets and hunt animals

  • 12.15.2012 7:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: A Land Pirate
Australia pulls host over USA fyi

Treat the symptoms all you like.


The festering wound remains.

  • 12.15.2012 7:19 PM PDT


Posted by: Rayzor1995
That's great, why don't you share your vast intellect with someone else, OK? Obviously you're too smart for a forum full of 12 year olds.


12 year olds are in 2nd grade? What has America come to?!!?

  • 12.15.2012 7:20 PM PDT


Posted by: Scoopicus

Posted by: MeltingBrainbob
Only major gangs have guns, and that's because they have international connections.

Except that's false.

All of these were done not only in a land where guns are highly restricted, but none of these guys had significant involvement in any international gang. Yet, one of them managed to commit their crime with a fully automatic Chinese assault rifle.

In a place already saturated with weapons and the place with one of the highest number of illegal gun dealings, I highly doubt that taking away guns from anyone else will take them away from these people.


That link you posted.


Public debate subsequent to these events centred on gun-control laws, including media-driven public petitions calling for a ban on private ownership of handguns and an official enquiry, the Cullen Report. In response to this debate, the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 and the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997 were enacted, which effectively made private ownership of handguns illegal in the United Kingdom.


This act terrified the UK so much, they prohibited guns. Your example happened before guns were not allowed. UK solved it the smart way by banned private ownership.

  • 12.15.2012 7:22 PM PDT

International Army for the Liberation of Hotdogs.
" The Grunt " - Death Served on A Screaming Platter!
You lack the majestic curves of a ripe banana! YOU SIR ARE A PINEAPPLE
win
Justin Bieber sounds like two high-pitched walruses engaging in sex.


Posted by: MeltingBrainbob

Posted by: What Is This1

Posted by: MeltingBrainbob
I'm so glad you finally agree with me. Killing animals with guns requires a different standard. Hunting guns, I believe, are bolt-shot, and require a little bit to load. I don't remember hunters wielding glocks and hand guns shooting deer or wolves. If there ever is a gator or bear that attacks you in either Texas or Alaska, a hunting rifle will suffice. That is ok.

Try bringing a hunting rifle to school. See how many people that takes out. 1? 2? Maybe 3? I don't recall a fully auto-matic hunting rifle, but then again, times are different.

Ever heard of a shotgun? I am pretty damn sure that is going to kill more than 2-3 people. If anything hunting weapons are more deadly than standard weapons due to how it takes a lot more to kill an animal than it does to kill a human.


SO get rid of the shot gun too! Leave only the basic hunting rifles capable of taking out a deer or wolf. A hunting rifle can shoot one very fast bullet, and then they have to reload the gun. Unless 20 school children are lined up in a row, I doubt the casualties will be as numerous as a handheld semi pistol


Shotgunning is an olympic sport. That should speak for itself.

And do you know how guns work? Ever heard of semi-automatics? Because the last time I check, and M1 Garand can put a much bigger hole in someone than a 9mm. And people use M1 Garands for hunting all the time. And various other semi automatics.

  • 12.15.2012 7:22 PM PDT


Posted by: MeltingBrainbob
An idiot with a point that you gentlemen refuse to accept.

Rather than refuting my point, you guys all call me an idiot, which makes me even happier. It shows you guys can't formulate a sensible argument, and only fall back to the classic 2nd grade insult "you are an idiot" to act like you are winning.

Job well done gents.

I have asked numerous times for proof backing up your argument along with solutions to what would happen if there were no guns allowed. You have failed to provide anything in that regard. As someone already stated very little people die each year as a result of guns. Your percentage of people which you say is 1 in 10 that own a gun doesn't fit the amount of deaths. Then you solution for people that need guns to hunt is at best inadequate. Simply put I am calling you an idiot for your lack of understanding and knowledge on the topic with your lack of proof that guns are not needed and most people that use them do so for killing/looks.

  • 12.15.2012 7:23 PM PDT

the second amendment was put in place, so citizens could fight back against tyrants. As you may see, the Chinese would've loved the second amendment when Mao came to power.

  • 12.15.2012 7:23 PM PDT


Posted by: Soul drinker108

Shotgunning is an olympic sport. That should speak for itself.

And do you know how guns work? Ever heard of semi-automatics? Because the last time I check, and M1 Garand can put a much bigger hole in someone than a 9mm. And people use M1 Garands for hunting all the time. And various other semi automatics.


Killing elementary school children is not an olympic sport.

Yes. I know how guns work. They kill people.

Various other semi-automatics

Ban semi-automatics. Along with the rest of my propositions that go unheard by the government. Semi's, full automatics, all need to go.

IF you're a hunter, you only need one shot, if you miss the first time, and keep missing, then you're bad, and should feel bad. -_- Just kidding, but they really should just have bolt action.

Bolt action may take down 4 or 5 children before school security does something. A semi might take down a lot more, as seen in the recent shootings.

  • 12.15.2012 7:25 PM PDT

I don't always ban people but when I do I laugh uncontrollably...that's if I was a Forum Ninja.

Truth is a matter of perception.

The Button

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. A gun is just a tool used by a person. If I wanted to kill someone, I would find a way to do it. If you want to ban guns then you have to ban everything that can kill someone.

  • 12.15.2012 7:26 PM PDT


Posted by: MeltingBrainbob

Posted by: Scoopicus

Posted by: MeltingBrainbob
Only major gangs have guns, and that's because they have international connections.

Except that's false.

All of these were done not only in a land where guns are highly restricted, but none of these guys had significant involvement in any international gang. Yet, one of them managed to commit their crime with a fully automatic Chinese assault rifle.

In a place already saturated with weapons and the place with one of the highest number of illegal gun dealings, I highly doubt that taking away guns from anyone else will take them away from these people.


That link you posted.


Public debate subsequent to these events centred on gun-control laws, including media-driven public petitions calling for a ban on private ownership of handguns and an official enquiry, the Cullen Report. In response to this debate, the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 and the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997 were enacted, which effectively made private ownership of handguns illegal in the United Kingdom.


This act terrified the UK so much, they prohibited guns. Your example happened before guns were not allowed. UK solved it the smart way by banned private ownership.


Handguns.

They banned private ownership of handguns. The assault rifles the Hungerford shooter used had always been completely illegal.

Still, even after the Act was passed the Dunblade shooter used handguns exclusively.

Taking away gun ownership from the sensible population won't take them away from everyone else.

  • 12.15.2012 7:26 PM PDT


Posted by: Fat Man 3000
You can't end gun possession in America. To do so would be to go to individual houses and take their guns off them.

How would you do that? Two ways?

A) Look at registered Gun owners, go to their address and take it away from them. What about those who obtained theirs illegally?

B) Conduct a very thorough search of every single house in America. A blatant invasion of privacy.

And it would be incredibly expensive and time consuming.


^This. It's not that the idea of banning guns is wrong, it's just impossible to implement without becoming a massive hypocrisy (invading people's privacy) or creating a backlash on the black market and not taking the guns that are illegally acquired.

  • 12.15.2012 7:29 PM PDT


Posted by: What Is This1
I have asked numerous times for proof backing up your argument along with solutions to what would happen if there were no guns allowed. You have failed to provide anything in that regard. As someone already stated very little people die each year as a result of guns. Your percentage of people which you say is 1 in 10 that own a gun doesn't fit the amount of deaths. Then you solution for people that need guns to hunt is at best inadequate. Simply put I am calling you an idiot for your lack of understanding and knowledge on the topic with your lack of proof that guns are not needed and most people that use them do so for killing/looks.


WEll said sir. Repeating what I accused you of doing. Nicely done.

ALrighty. ....

I'm not going to lie, those stats were pretty bad. It was just from what I had seen in the news. People in my ghetto as- school always say how their friend got shot or something, so I went ahead and guessed the a portion of people with guns use them just because they can.

No guns means less crimes. Hunting rifles, bolt action, can be allowed as they are only highly effective against animals.

That's just my proposition, and I feel as if I'm missing something, but I can add later. IT's just my own suggestion. IF you think that is all wrong, and that these murders and massacres should continue, go ahead. Let our prosperity die before they even had a chance in this world.

I try to persuade you guys to find a solution to end these unnecesary shootings.

You guys call me idiotic.

Where is your morale? Do you WANT children to die? What if that was YOUR child out in that school? Huh? How do you end these gun shootings? Try to answer that, please, and come back to me if you still absolutely try to refute my argument to save lives.

  • 12.15.2012 7:30 PM PDT


Posted by: magicmagininja

Posted by: HundredJono
Because everyone that owns a gun has the intention to kill someone.
"I have a gun to shoot rocks" no one ever


I'm guessing FPSRussia kills people off camera. /sarcasm

  • 12.15.2012 7:31 PM PDT

International Army for the Liberation of Hotdogs.
" The Grunt " - Death Served on A Screaming Platter!
You lack the majestic curves of a ripe banana! YOU SIR ARE A PINEAPPLE
win
Justin Bieber sounds like two high-pitched walruses engaging in sex.


Posted by: MeltingBrainbob

Posted by: Soul drinker108

Shotgunning is an olympic sport. That should speak for itself.

And do you know how guns work? Ever heard of semi-automatics? Because the last time I check, and M1 Garand can put a much bigger hole in someone than a 9mm. And people use M1 Garands for hunting all the time. And various other semi automatics.


Killing elementary school children is not an olympic sport.

Yes. I know how guns work. They kill people.

Various other semi-automatics

Ban semi-automatics. Along with the rest of my propositions that go unheard by the government. Semi's, full automatics, all need to go.

IF you're a hunter, you only need one shot, if you miss the first time, and keep missing, then you're bad, and should feel bad. -_- Just kidding, but they really should just have bolt action.

Bolt action may take down 4 or 5 children before school security does something. A semi might take down a lot more, as seen in the recent shootings.


I can't tell if you took me seriously about shotgunning, or if your kidding. I really hope your kidding, even though you shouldn't joke about that. The sport of trap and skeet has been around for a long ass time. Its an olympic sport. I shoot competitively.

And its a common practice to hunt small game (coyotes and smaller) to use semi automatics. Theyre smaller, faster, harder to hit.

And its not always so much about the effectiveness of the gun as it is the effectiveness of fear. Thats why one person with one gun can hold 10 people hostage. Most people usually arent so willing to jump up and throw their life away.

  • 12.15.2012 7:32 PM PDT


Posted by: MeltingBrainbob

Posted by: bergXX09
Do you know why they have really corrupt government officials? Do you know why the police are overpowered? Do you know why there isn't any change? Because the people have no power to revolt or threaten the government in any way. The police and government can do anything they want because the people don't have guns. Look at Syria, they have guns and can rebel and overcome their corrupt government. Look at us, we are a democracy that has worked for over 200 years without a single self appointed dictator.

If there weren't guns, then these same people would just find other ways to kill. If you think guns cause people to kill then you must think video games do as well.


Yes yes, because they can't over throw the government with their Aks, and that pistols are good against tanks, I've heard it all before!!!

But hey, you seem like a sensible person willing to have a decent argument.

In China, the first revolt by students resulted terrible. People were mowed down

Second revolt, bhuddist monks were killed.

Third revolt, a city of revolters was put down.

But now. People in China petitioned against a factory built on a river where people drank from. The government finally agreed, and canceled the building. China is getting places. The corruption will only last now because technically, they are in their own industrial revoltuion. THe liberalism will come later.

The population of China far surpasses the number of chinese soldiers and supplly of bullets.

  • 12.15.2012 7:33 PM PDT

Also, OP, it'd be nice if you could stop forcing your own bias and sensationalism into your arguments, and if you could stop changing the argument every time someone brings up a point.

[Edited on 12.15.2012 7:34 PM PST]

  • 12.15.2012 7:33 PM PDT

Name's Pixel.
There's a 87.7% chance that I'm better than you.
At everything.
Also.
Please message me if you have any objections.
ლ(ಠ益ಠლ)

Blame the people, not the weapons.

  • 12.15.2012 7:34 PM PDT


Posted by: Scoopicus
Handguns.

They banned private ownership of handguns. The assault rifles the Hungerford shooter used had always been completely illegal.

Still, even after the Act was passed the Dunblade shooter used handguns exclusively.

Taking away gun ownership from the sensible population won't take them away from everyone else.


My bad home skillet, I just realized you had 3 links. I only clicked one.

I saw the Dunblane shooter had 4 handguns. And then they banned hand guns. THat's all I read. ANything else I can't argue for or agains.t

  • 12.15.2012 7:34 PM PDT


Posted by: Scoopicus
Also, OP, it'd be nice if you could stop forcing your own bias and sensationalism into your arguments, and if you could stop changing the argument every time someone brings up a point.


My fault. IT's a free for all in here, and I get lost in whom I'm talking with.

  • 12.15.2012 7:35 PM PDT

Circle Jerkin' I got my wiener workin'

OP thinks the Government can wave a magic wand and make all guns disappear.

  • 12.15.2012 7:35 PM PDT