a gun is a tool. people abuse tools. from waving a stick around at brother Abel just because Cain was angry with him, to whole super powers (technically, but not really including north Korea..) threatening each other with nukes. it is strange, all this has happened before, and will happen again. but i have yet to see people be grossly irresponsible and plainly stupid with portable microwave generators.... (i mean Lasers.)
I agree Jolly Jack It is a poor argument. Even though I defend The Bill of Rights, constitution, and Civil Liberty to my dying breath, the single phrase argument "Guns don't kill people, people do" is ineffective in the manner it's normally used.
The statement should be used as a reminder that it's the person behind the gun that's the killer not the tool that they use. Most of the Anti-Firearms lobbyist and public speakers all to often try to divorce the killer from his tool and present the tool as the sole means of the tragedy.
I agree, people kill people, thatīs why guns should be allowed to own guns, but people shoudnīt be allowed to have them, because they would use them to kill people.
If there was a sure way to distinguish between the killers and the "gun enthusiasts who wouldn NEVER, EVER kill somebody" I would be in favor of giving guns to them... but sadly there is no way, and I donīt very much care for taking that risk, thank you!
This remains the largest shooting spree to date, in a country with anti-gun laws as strong as GBs. [link] Second Largest shooting spree: another nation with strong anti-gun laws: [link] This is the third largest spree, in another country with strong anti-gun laws: [link]
So tell me, how're those anti-gun laws doing for you?
Both countries allow civilian gun ownership under strict regulation. To the best of my knowledge neither has any sort of public carry laws regarding private owners - so leave home at your own risk. Many countries allow gun ownership under some sort of regulation. According to the research I had done both countries have stricter regulations than most other countries. It didn't help. Australia HAD very strict gun control laws BEFORE the incident - they chose to believe that stricter laws would improve the situation. Time will tell.
The Norwegian shooter said he'd made arrangements to go to Prague to get weapons because he believed it would be too hard in Norway, then ended up having to settle for what he could get at home. [link]
The South Korean shooter was a POLICE OFFICER, not a civilian gun owner. He was supposed to be the first line of defense against such a crime, yet even his fellow officers failed to take the situation seriously and several of them including the provincial head were fired for dereliction of duty. [link]
If removing guns from the world would remove violence, I'd be all for it, but stories like this - [link] - help to prove that guns don't make people violent. Violent people are violent irregardless of the weapons they have access to. There are very good reasons why every major shooting spree takes place in "gun-free zones" and similar places where civilians aren't allowed carry permits - the shooters don't want anyone shooting back.
[link] - your own country isn't even safe from this sort of violence. What are your countries gun laws like?
I shall make my apologies to you, you HAD done your research. I merely misunderstood that your point was that those laws where on carrying those guns in public.
But as you allready pointed out, A. Beivik (from the Norway shootings) had obtained his weaponry legally. I don't know the Norwegeon laws on gun control by heart, so I don't know if he was allowed to carry those guns in public, but as long as he was allowed to get his hands on them, he was able to use them. Guns CAN be hidden from the prying eyes of the law. And even if not, as long as one can own a gun, one can start the killing spree on their own porch.
The south korean shooter is a sad one indeed, being a police officer. But as I've said to many Americans claiming they don't trust the police to be the only ones carrying guns; it's essential to screen every person properly. In my country, there are high standards for becomming a police officer, both physicly and mentally. But as allready said about Woo Bum-kon [link] , he had an inferiority complex. The very reason for a person to start a killing spree like that, is mental health. The most suicidal sprees (and that's not only with guns) come from countries where both freedom and mental health care are low. This does mean that America does indeed not hold the top when it comes to killing sprees. But America gets close because they have 2 of the 3 golden ingredients; low gun control and low mental health care. It's a good thing you people still have freedom.
And no, as JollyJack's argument will tell you, banning guns will not stop voilence. I only highly reduces the amount of damage it can do. People will always be voilent and will always find a way to kill each other. But as the most ideal ways are taken away, the more people will survive murder attempts. A knife can still be ran away from. Also, I would not put much faith in political writers of stories. Best to stick to the facts, not other people's opinions. Especially seeing as Daniel Greenfield, the writer of [link] , has not sticked to the facts on the result of the UK's gun control; [link]
And then finally the bit about Alphen aan de Rijn. I remember that one very clearly, especially since it was unheard of in my country. We do have decent gun control laws here, and that was the biggest killing spree we ever had. 6 people. Want to know the result? The board that allowed van der Vlis to get the guns he used (he had them "legally"), where fired, and by many people held partically responsible. It turns out they had ignored a bad result from a psychological exam. I hope the newly appointed board will take their job more seriously.
In any case, anyone in my country holding a gun licence is psychologically screened each time they have to renew their licence. A bad result means losing your licence.
(I don't own a gun licence though, so I could very well be legally insane I don't get screened every now and then)
is a pixel art
process used to
blend blocks of
colour together or
help apply a texture
to a pixelled
emoticons it is most
commonly used when
it can be used in a
number of other
areas, e.g. massive
Welcome CSS can be
you're unfamiliar to
it. So that's why
we're writing these
articles! If you
have any suggestions
or would like to
write a section in
future CSS Did You
are like Ogres by
Magepresented by the
--- dear friends and
ly I'm not longer
able to make my
large news in
deviant art... the
shows the numbers of
the thumbs but not
the pics...so I'm
just going on here
with my little
hope you enjoy it
`anmari has been spreading her infectious positivity throughout our community for over 6 years. Throughout this time Ana has been at the core of all things devious, passionately developing an eclectic gallery, helping organise devmeets, participating in chat events and also recently completed dedicating her time as a Community Volunteer. We are absolutely delighted to bestow the Deviousness Award for May 2013 to `anmari, congratulations! Read More