Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: Should we alter our gun control policy?

Voters
145. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, we need more strict gun laws

    77 53.10%
  • Yes, we need to ban guns entirely

    24 16.55%
  • Yes, we need deeper screenings of purchasers

    69 47.59%
  • Yes, we need to abide further by the Constitution

    11 7.59%
  • No, we need to eliminate gun control practices

    5 3.45%
  • No, the current policy is what the Constitution intends

    10 6.90%
  • No, the current policy as-is is fine

    17 11.72%
  • Other - explain

    4 2.76%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 53 of 58 FirstFirst ... 3435152535455 ... LastLast
Results 781 to 795 of 860
  1. #781
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    6,767
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by MagicHero3 View Post
    I dont understand what this has to do with my post about increasing the amt of cops at schools?

    Guns dont keep us safe? U tell that to the people in the San Antonio Movie theatre who were about to get shot up by a whacko, but an off duty OFFICER with a GUN shot him down and saved those people. Or the mother who protected her children from the guy in her house coming after them by shooting him with her gun as references in the other thread. U tell them that guns are a "misguided fantasy" of keeping them safer. They will tell u otherwise.
    People who keep guns in their house are a lot more likely to die from guns than those who don't. I realize that's an inconvenient truth for you, but it's true none the less.

    Its the people who are abusing the guns that are the problem. Dont preach that guns should be banned bc that will never happen in the USA. U should look at a logical solution like stricter gun policies or increasing the amount of armed police officers, who are trained to protect us. I understand you feel entitled and u dont want to contribute any of ur money to keeper the community safer, but dont say completely incorrect things like guns wont protect us. If a guy comes at u with a gun, whats the only way to protect yourself? ummm A GUN.
    Abusing guns? Assault weapons are designed to kill large number of other human beings. Using them to do so is not abusing them, it's using them for their intended purpose. As for "keeping our community safer" I am all for it. How about let's start by not equipping criminally violently insane people with powerful weapons? Guns will not protect us, they will only kill more people. It is what they are designed to do, and it's the only thing they can do.

    I have yet to get any answer from extreme gun proponents like you to the question I keep asking. If everyone having guns makes us safer, does everyone having RPGs or C4 or artillery make us all safer, too? If not, what is the relevant difference?
    I'm going to list ALEC in credits as associate producer of creating horrifying things for us to talk about -John Oliver

    People who think the least powerful members of society are responsible for most of its problems are deluded, at best.

  2. #782
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    America
    Posts
    24,834
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Twitchy View Post
    Actually, no, that's not the case. And it's been shown several times within this thread that this argument is incorrect, so I'd prefer not to go over it again.
    actually yes, it is the case. there are other factors, but statistically even as gun sales go up, even accidental shootings are going down. you say that more guns = more crime/murder, then it should be going up.



    Which is, you know, all that people are suggesting is to be done with gun laws. To make it stricter so that the number of deaths or the murder rates decrease significantly over time. That hasn't been the case in recent years.
    I've been saying we need to do more to get guns out of the hand of criminals. I suppose you over looked that.

    Those silly gun free zones as you call them aren't part of the problem.
    yes they are because they are easy targets. putting a silly "gun free zone" sign on a school isn't going to stop a shooter. schools are gun free zones, and obviously it's not working.


    No, I'm not. The status quo is eliminating gun free zones and doing nothing about gun laws or asking to increase the number of guns people have. That's what we've been doing, and it hasn't worked.
    yes you are. I never said the law is fine the way it is now. and it's not what we are doing. we haven't lifted and gun free zones. instead, all the Biden is doing is talking about banning assault rifles and high capacity clips, which will do nothing. we tried it before, and it did nothing.

    It might reduce some of them, but having more guns and less gun free zones on the whole will lead to more shootings and more deaths and more injuries. Tougher gun laws, not the silly Assault Rifle ban law that doesn't do anything, will make a bigger impact.
    what? say there are more restrictions, the only people who will follow them is law abiding citizens. you fail to understand this. criminals will not follow these "tougher restrictions" they will still have easy access to them, and they will continue to use them for bad intentions.

    and it won't lead to more shootings because you are eliminating gun free zones, which are easy targets. you allow more people to legally protect themselves.


    The difference is we can actually see that restrictions do make an impact. The states that have tougher gun laws tend to have lower murders per 100K.
    you look at the state with the lowest gun violence rate, and they are all state that have a lot of farmland, low populations, and probably better education systems. you look at state who have higher gun violence, and there is a lot of gangs there. remember, that 3/4 of all gun related homicides are gang related. as a matter of fact, California has very strict gun laws, and they are the 4th rated state. Louisiana is 1st, and they have a lot of gang problems.

    Did we forget about the Fort Hood shooting so quickly? That happened on a military base. Killed 13, wounded 29.
    actually, Fort Hood basically is a gun free zone. soldiers are prohibited from carrying personal firearms. the soldiers that charged at the shooter were all unarmed.



    Doesn't this contradict your earlier point?
    No? because if someone in the school has a gun it can deter potential shooters, because they know they aren't easy targets. these schools shooters always kill themselves once a cop shows up. imagine if a teacher with a gun approached them after a 30 seconds of them shooting. yes, they can still kill many people, but a lot less than the 10 minutes they have now.

    Wonderful. And these people would still be a danger, because they're not trained like cops or the military.
    It actually is wonderful. allowing law abiding citizens to protect themselves and those around them is a great thing.


    You're assuming the problem is just with being concealed. That's not the case.
    I've already said to carry a gun in a school, they should be specially trained and have guidelines to follow. one for example, keeping the gun concealed on them. it's just going to be a gun lying out on the desk.


    You're forgetting about the human factor and emotion. If this were true, we wouldn't have cases where people shoot their own kids in their home thinking they are trespassers.
    In Ohio, you can shoot to kill someone if they are in your house, but you have give a warning shot.
    **********

  3. #783
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,136
    vCash
    1500
    Are Americans not scared even on the streets
    I would petrified to live in America where an argument could lead to some maniac pulling out a gun. Wasn't there a recent incident on a man being shot because of an argument over a basbetkall match. Wtf.
    After the sandy hook shootings, something needs to be Changed, same way John major changed gun laws in the uk after the dunblane massacre.
    Last edited by sammyvine; 01-14-2013 at 07:34 AM. Reason: More info

  4. #784
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    7,760
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by sammyvine View Post
    Are Americans not scared even on the streets
    I would petrified to live in America where an argument could lead to some maniac pulling out a gun. Wasn't there a recent incident on a man being shot because of an argument over a basbetkall match. Wtf.
    After the sandy hook shootings, something needs to be Changed, same way John major changed gun laws in the uk after the dunblane massacre.
    No as an American I am not scared to walk down my street. Is it safe to say wherever you live that you have good areas and bad areas? I choose not to walk down streets in areas that I consider bad areas. Common sense tells me that I should not be in those areas as I have no business their in the first place.

    There will never be changes to gun laws like there was seen in England. Our 2nd Amendment and the NRA as a major lobbying force will just not allow it. There wasn't near the gun culture in the UK that there is here in the United States. With that said I imagine something will possibly be changed though it won't be sweeping change as those types of changes would never make it through Congress. And even if they did would probably not stand up in court. Unless they go after the 2nd Amendment there is no chance of sweeping gun control reform even after Sandy Hook.
    French writer Alexis de Tocqueville warned about when visiting this fledgling democracy in the early 19th century that this "American republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."

  5. #785
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Orlando, Fl
    Posts
    7,535
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Labgrownmangoat View Post
    People who keep guns in their house are a lot more likely to die from guns than those who don't. I realize that's an inconvenient truth for you, but it's true none the less.



    Abusing guns? Assault weapons are designed to kill large number of other human beings. Using them to do so is not abusing them, it's using them for their intended purpose. As for "keeping our community safer" I am all for it. How about let's start by not equipping criminally violently insane people with powerful weapons? Guns will not protect us, they will only kill more people. It is what they are designed to do, and it's the only thing they can do.

    I have yet to get any answer from extreme gun proponents like you to the question I keep asking. If everyone having guns makes us safer, does everyone having RPGs or C4 or artillery make us all safer, too? If not, what is the relevant difference?
    Wow! I can't believe you honestly think that. If I'm a criminal, do I break in to the house that I know has zero guns or the house where the crazy old man cleans his guns in front of his garage every sunday? Guns aren't the problem, stupid people are the problem

    First the gov't will make us register our guns and then they will confiscate them. It's be done time and time again all over the world. That is why the constitution was made and in it, the 1st and 2nd amendment. We have to keep the tyrant gov't from taking complete control of us and if you can't see that you should live in another country where guns are illegal.

    Why not live in the UK, guns are illegal there and they have the HIGHEST violence in all of the world! Or how about Mexico, where they have very strick guns laws. Feel safe there? No, because only criminals and the gov't have the weapons that are really needed. The honest residents are denied that right

  6. #786
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Orlando, Fl
    Posts
    7,535
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by sammyvine View Post
    Are Americans not scared even on the streets
    I would petrified to live in America where an argument could lead to some maniac pulling out a gun. Wasn't there a recent incident on a man being shot because of an argument over a basbetkall match. Wtf.
    After the sandy hook shootings, something needs to be Changed, same way John major changed gun laws in the uk after the dunblane massacre.
    How's that ban over there working? You now how the highest violence in any country. Now they want to ban knives because that's what people use now to kill.. Knives and guns don't kill people, people kill people.

    Read this, it's got to wake some of you people up!

    http://www.naturalnews.com/038649_pa...overnment.html

  7. #787
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Orlando
    Posts
    2,874
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Labgrownmangoat View Post
    People who keep guns in their house are a lot more likely to die from guns than those who don't. I realize that's an inconvenient truth for you, but it's true none the less.



    Abusing guns? Assault weapons are designed to kill large number of other human beings. Using them to do so is not abusing them, it's using them for their intended purpose. As for "keeping our community safer" I am all for it. How about let's start by not equipping criminally violently insane people with powerful weapons? Guns will not protect us, they will only kill more people. It is what they are designed to do, and it's the only thing they can do.

    I have yet to get any answer from extreme gun proponents like you to the question I keep asking. If everyone having guns makes us safer, does everyone having RPGs or C4 or artillery make us all safer, too? If not, what is the relevant difference?
    I understand that you only choose parts of my posts to argue with and in result you end up sounding stupid. If you read the whole thing you would have read that I said "Stricter gun screenings" so that makes the bolded statement of yours irrelevant.
    Abusing guns like taking your mentally challenged child to a gun range often. THATS abusing gun ownership.
    Citizens should not have weapons designed to hurt masses amounts of ppl... in example, Assault weapons, RPGs, C4.

    U say guns will not protect us, but thats a straight up lie. Its not our fault that the gov'ts loose gun laws throughout history has practically armed every criminal out there. If someone comes after u and they have a gun, what will protect you? while you ponder an answer to this question, ill just provide it to you w a recent story- A disgruntled man shoots up a restaraunt, walks to a movie theatre with intention to continue shooting up more people... what protected the innocent from this man? An off duty police officer who, with a gun, takes action and shoots the man before he can harm anyone else. a whole theatre of death prevented- by a gun.

    I am in no way an extreme gun proponent. I did not mention once anything about assault rifles and if they should be legal. I think assault weapons SHOULD be banned, and most of them already are. In fact, I was initially for banning guns when these shootings first occurred. I realized that in life, you have to fight fire with fire. If the criminals have guns, we have to meet that level to be able to protect ourselves. If we ban guns, then the law abiding citizens will no longer be armed, but criminals still will be. Thats a recipe for disaster.

  8. #788
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Orlando, Fl
    Posts
    7,535
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by MagicHero3 View Post
    I understand that you only choose parts of my posts to argue with and in result you end up sounding stupid. If you read the whole thing you would have read that I said "Stricter gun screenings" so that makes the bolded statement of yours irrelevant.
    Abusing guns like taking your mentally challenged child to a gun range often. THATS abusing gun ownership.
    Citizens should not have weapons designed to hurt masses amounts of ppl... in example, Assault weapons, RPGs, C4.

    U say guns will not protect us, but thats a straight up lie. Its not our fault that the gov'ts loose gun laws throughout history has practically armed every criminal out there. If someone comes after u and they have a gun, what will protect you? while you ponder an answer to this question, ill just provide it to you w a recent story- A disgruntled man shoots up a restaraunt, walks to a movie theatre with intention to continue shooting up more people... what protected the innocent from this man? An off duty police officer who, with a gun, takes action and shoots the man before he can harm anyone else. a whole theatre of death prevented- by a gun.

    I am in no way an extreme gun proponent. I did not mention once anything about assault rifles and if they should be legal. I think assault weapons SHOULD be banned, and most of them already are. In fact, I was initially for banning guns when these shootings first occurred. I realized that in life, you have to fight fire with fire. If the criminals have guns, we have to meet that level to be able to protect ourselves. If we ban guns, then the law abiding citizens will no longer be armed, but criminals still will be. Thats a recipe for disaster.
    Just mentioned this in another thread but I think you are confused. You are saying assault weapons should be banned, you do realize that these assault guns shoot exactly the same as a hand gun. They are semi-auto's. One round at a time. The are military style because they look like them but do not function like them.
    So first they ban semi auto military style weapons (that function like a hand gun) and then when school shootings still happen, they will take away hand guns. Simple fact.

    It's even said now that the Conn. shooter only used hand guns and his assault gun was left in the car.
    You can kill just as many people with hand guns as you can with an assault gun.
    Unfortunately people can't grasp the idea that if schools weren't gun free, a crazy person would have to find another location to go ape **** ate...like you local buffalo wild wings
    Last edited by Chazm; 01-14-2013 at 11:16 AM.

  9. #789
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Orlando
    Posts
    2,874
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Chazm View Post
    Just mentioned this in another thread but I think you are confused. You are saying assault weapons should be banned, you do realize that these assault guns shoot exactly the same as a hand gun. They are semi-auto's. One round at a time. The are military style because they look like them but do not function like them.
    So first they ban semi auto military style weapons (that function like a hand gun) and then when school shootings still happen, they will take away hand guns. Simple fact.

    It's even said now that the Conn. shooter only used hand guns and his assault gun was left in the car.
    You can kill just as many people with hand guns as you can with an assault gun.
    Unfortunately people can't grasp the idea that if schools weren't gun free, a crazy person would have to find another location to go ape **** ate...like you local buffalo wild wings

    Assault weapons as in magazines that are bigger then 8-9 bullets. Use whatever definition of them you want, they are currently banned anyway.

    again, you have to read the whole post. banning guns will NOT take the guns out of the hands of criminals. There are currently too many guns out there to do so. They will hide their guns, keep them. Why? bc they are friggin criminals, thats what they do is break the law.

    The law-abiding citizens will be cordial and turn their guns in, whatever the govt asks.

    So now you have a nation of armed criminals and un-armed civilians. Tell me, how is that better than it is right now??

  10. #790
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    19,825
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jlohm1 View Post
    actually yes, it is the case. there are other factors, but statistically even as gun sales go up, even accidental shootings are going down. you say that more guns = more crime/murder, then it should be going up.
    By continuing to argue this you're showing that you're not aware that correlation doesn't equal causation. Every article has shown that it's due to a range of factors, but rising gun sales isn't one of them.

    I've been saying we need to do more to get guns out of the hand of criminals. I suppose you over looked that.
    Not all criminals are drug dealers. Criminals start off as law abiding citizens, kill someone, and then become criminals.

    I didn't overlook anything you said.


    yes they are because they are easy targets. putting a silly "gun free zone" sign on a school isn't going to stop a shooter. schools are gun free zones, and obviously it's not working.
    The issue isn't with gun free zones, the issue is that it's simply too easy to get a gun.

    Jon Stewart made a very good point the other day - the US is so childproofed that you can't buy a coffee without knowing the exact temperature of it, or without a warning that the coffee is hot and it might burn you. But when someone even makes the suggestion of putting tougher restrictions on the use of guns, tools that are used to lethally injure or kill someone, all of a sudden we can't bother making restrictions on them despite the fact they are one of the greatest safety hazards we have around us?

    Gun safety zones aren't the problem. Having more guns is a problem, and not having strict enough regulations when it comes to guns is the issue.

    yes you are. I never said the law is fine the way it is now. and it's not what we are doing. we haven't lifted and gun free zones. instead, all the Biden is doing is talking about banning assault rifles and high capacity clips, which will do nothing. we tried it before, and it did nothing.
    To quote a brilliant man - "if it at first you don't succeed, **** it". That's the worst possible attitude you can have in this situation. So the first law that was passed didn't work, so we should never pass a law again to restrict gun usage? That's terrible logic.

    what? say there are more restrictions, the only people who will follow them is law abiding citizens. you fail to understand this.
    And a lot of law abiding citizens become criminals when they purchase the gun and use it to murder someone. So if tougher gun restrictions prevent people who would otherwise commit a murder by making it tougher to purchase a gun, then this isn't a bad thing.

    criminals will not follow these "tougher restrictions" they will still have easy access to them, and they will continue to use them for bad intentions.
    Ah yes, criminals will not follow the restrictions. That's why you make tougher punishments for anybody who is found breaking the restrictions. So that when these criminals do get found with a gun, maybe you give them life without parole as a tougher punishment.

    It's not simply about making the gun restrictions tougher, it's about making the consequences tougher as well.

    Even beyond that, it's another example of poor logic. We don't go "criminals are going to commit murder, so let's just say **** it and get rid of any felony murder charges". You base the laws around what civilized people will do, while ensuring that those who break them are punished based on their actions. Which is why as I stated earlier, there needs to be tougher punishments with regards to anybody who breaks the gun laws, along with tougher gun restrictions.

    and it won't lead to more shootings because you are eliminating gun free zones, which are easy targets. you allow more people to legally protect themselves.
    And more people legally protecting themselves has resulted in a trend of more murders over the past 10 years (as per the article I linked a few posts ago). So no, that strategy hasn't been working.

    you look at the state with the lowest gun violence rate, and they are all state that have a lot of farmland, low populations, and probably better education systems. you look at state who have higher gun violence, and there is a lot of gangs there. remember, that 3/4 of all gun related homicides are gang related. as a matter of fact, California has very strict gun laws, and they are the 4th rated state. Louisiana is 1st, and they have a lot of gang problems.
    Where exactly are you getting this data from?

    actually, Fort Hood basically is a gun free zone. soldiers are prohibited from carrying personal firearms. the soldiers that charged at the shooter were all unarmed.
    Fair enough. I Googled it and one response said these were all done outside of gun free zones:

    April 2012: Tulsa, OK - Jake England shot and killed 5 black men on the street.
    September 2011: Carson City, NV - 12 people shot at an IHOP including 3 National Guardsmen. 5 dead.
    December 2007: Omaha, NE - 9 dead and 4 wounded at Department Store by a 19 year old who took his stepfather's assault rifle.
    October 2011: Orange County, CA - 8 shot and killed in a Hair Salon.
    I'm low on time so I can't verify them myself.

    No? because if someone in the school has a gun it can deter potential shooters, because they know they aren't easy targets. these schools shooters always kill themselves once a cop shows up. imagine if a teacher with a gun approached them after a 30 seconds of them shooting. yes, they can still kill many people, but a lot less than the 10 minutes they have now.
    Adding guns to school simply is a terrible idea that is suggested by people who don't spend much time in elementary schools.

    It actually is wonderful. allowing law abiding citizens to protect themselves and those around them is a great thing.
    What exactly do they need to protect themselves again? It's this paranoia that perpetuates the idea that they're in danger at all times. It's not the case, and this paranoia is part of the problem and it's what leads to all of the accidental shootings.

    I've already said to carry a gun in a school, they should be specially trained and have guidelines to follow. one for example, keeping the gun concealed on them. it's just going to be a gun lying out on the desk.
    Asking people who have never shot a gun before to conceal a weapon and use it when the time is right isn't a strategy for success. People aren't trained for situations like this and aren't going to remember their training or guidelines when someone else walks in with a gun.

    This is why police and military are effective in situations like this - they train for it constantly, and do simulations and are prepared for that. Teachers don't do this.

    Even beyond that - there have been 31 school shootings since 1999 in the US. So we're looking at 1-2 shootings a year since 1999. And because of the possibility of there being one or two shootings in a given year, you want to add significantly more firearms to a school when the possibility of a shooting is extremely remote?

    It's just not an effective solution to add a significant number of firearms to every school in the country when it's so unlikely to be a school shooting in the first place.


    In Ohio, you can shoot to kill someone if they are in your house, but you have give a warning shot.
    That has absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote. Although it's a pretty meaningless rule because you simply shoot to kill and then shoot somewhere beside them after they're on the ground and say "See, I gave a warning shot".
    Last edited by Twitchy; 01-14-2013 at 11:49 AM.


    Vic Mackey: You better figure out how much you hate me. And how you're going to deal with that. 'Cause I'm not going anywhere.

    This sums up every sports interview, ever.

  11. #791
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Orlando, Fl
    Posts
    7,535
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by MagicHero3 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chazm View Post
    Just mentioned this in another thread but I think you are confused. You are saying assault weapons should be banned, you do realize that these assault guns shoot exactly the same as a hand gun. They are semi-auto's. One round at a time. The are military style because they look like them but do not function like them.
    So first they ban semi auto military style weapons (that function like a hand gun) and then when school shootings still happen, they will take away hand guns. Simple fact.

    It's even said now that the Conn. shooter only used hand guns and his assault gun was left in the car.
    You can kill just as many people with hand guns as you can with an assault gun.
    Unfortunately people can't grasp the idea that if schools weren't gun free, a crazy person would have to find another location to go ape **** ate...like you local buffalo wild wings

    Assault weapons as in magazines that are bigger then 8-9 bullets. Use whatever definition of them you want, they are currently banned anyway.

    again, you have to read the whole post. banning guns will NOT take the guns out of the hands of criminals. There are currently too many guns out there to do so. They will hide their guns, keep them. Why? bc they are friggin criminals, thats what they do is break the law.

    The law-abiding citizens will be cordial and turn their guns in, whatever the govt asks.

    So now you have a nation of armed criminals and un-armed civilians. Tell me, how is that better than it is right now??
    Guns with 8-9 rounds are assault weapons and they are banned? I have a 14 round hand gun that is not banned . Not sure where you heard that from

  12. #792
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Orlando, Fl
    Posts
    7,535
    vCash
    1500

    Should We Reconsider Our Gun Policy?

    And to the guy who just said we've had 30 school shootings since 1999, I bet you believe in the good ol days, school shootings didn't happen. In the 1950's there were over 20 school shootings.

  13. #793
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Orlando
    Posts
    2,874
    vCash
    1500
    In the end, I dont think guns are the whole issue. Yes, we need to make gun laws and punishments much more strict/harsh. This is something I think we can all agree on. But unfortunately, criminals will always have access to guns.
    So if we cant take the guns away from the criminals, what can we do?

    I have a few ideas that might be able to evolve into actual solutions

    1) Find a way to increase the budget of local police stations so they can hire more cops to patrol areas like schools, malls, etc. The more cops we have out there in public places, the safer we will be. That is undeniable. I know the budget issue is the road block, but there HAS to be a way around it. Unfortunately, im not educated enough in that area to balance the budget for them.

    2) Educate children on human rights from as early as an age as possible. Teach classes Kindergartern thru college and the value of human life and how others' lives are just as precious as ours. If we can put these ideals into childrens heads at an early enough age, they can understand that shooting innocent ppl will not solve their problems.

    3) Make it mandatory for parents to go thru rigorous parenting classes before their child is born- show them the causes of a poorly raised child via today's criminals/murderers and how their childhoods caused them to be how they are.

  14. #794
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Orlando, Fl
    Posts
    7,535
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by MagicHero3 View Post
    In the end, I dont think guns are the whole issue. Yes, we need to make gun laws and punishments much more strict/harsh. This is something I think we can all agree on. But unfortunately, criminals will always have access to guns.
    So if we cant take the guns away from the criminals, what can we do?

    I have a few ideas that might be able to evolve into actual solutions

    1) Find a way to increase the budget of local police stations so they can hire more cops to patrol areas like schools, malls, etc. The more cops we have out there in public places, the safer we will be. That is undeniable. I know the budget issue is the road block, but there HAS to be a way around it. Unfortunately, im not educated enough in that area to balance the budget for them.

    2) Educate children on human rights from as early as an age as possible. Teach classes Kindergartern thru college and the value of human life and how others' lives are just as precious as ours. If we can put these ideals into childrens heads at an early enough age, they can understand that shooting innocent ppl will not solve their problems.

    3) Make it mandatory for parents to go thru rigorous parenting classes before their child is born- show them the causes of a poorly raised child via today's criminals/murderers and how their childhoods caused them to be how they are.
    All I'm reading is more and more govt control over us. You really should read up on how our country was formed and the rights we were given were designed to never be taken away. Unfortunately because of the media, we are all scared and feel like we need protection from the govt and the govt should be bigger to take care of us.

    That is not the answer, and we can't all agree that we should have stricter guns rules. Slowly, more and more gun laws are passed and eventually they will just be banned. Aurora, Col. has some of the stricter gun laws, Chicago Ill does too. How has it worked out there.

  15. #795
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    19,825
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Chazm View Post
    And to the guy who just said we've had 30 school shootings since 1999, I bet you believe in the good ol days, school shootings didn't happen. In the 1950's there were over 20 school shootings.
    I'm not sure why you believed I would even think that based on my post.


    Vic Mackey: You better figure out how much you hate me. And how you're going to deal with that. 'Cause I'm not going anywhere.

    This sums up every sports interview, ever.

Page 53 of 58 FirstFirst ... 3435152535455 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •