Massive School Shooting at an Elementary School

[DGFone]

Just as we can't force criminals to not use guns when they want to kill.

Look at Germany. Legal gun ownership? Small, as expected? But combined with all the illegal hardware floating around, and Germany is very close in terms of guns per 1000 people to the US. And yet somehow, Germany has a much smaller gun crime rate then us. If it has just about as many guns as we do, but manage to kill a lot less. I really do wonder how can anyone point at a gun and say "without this, all problems will be solved" while knowing that contrary to popular belief, the actual number of guns in other nations can get close to the US levels.

[Carl]

^ No one says "all problems will be solved without guns" unless they're ignorant. If the purchase of guns is restricted, we can force many criminals to do without them, and therefore force them not to use them. No one's saying crime would disappear without guns. All we're saying is that random mooks would be safer if every other random mook did NOT have them.

[Tora]

[quote="Julie Skywalker"]If the purchase of guns is restricted, we can force many criminals to do without them, and therefore force them not to use them.[/quote]Assuming Criminals get them legally.

[Carl]

While a lot of criminals don't get them legally, most still do. Or at least purchase one from someone who bought it legally. Restrictions won't stop all criminals from getting guns, they can't, but they can stop many.

[Regulus]

This is just getting ridiculous.

Every even numbered post is:

I need a gun to protect myself against criminals with guns!

Every odd numbered post is:

Banning guns won't help because criminals don't use them!

---

In reality, the logic is simple. The less killing machines there are, the more difficult it is to kill someone. I like to think that's better for everyone.

[DGFone]

It's very bad logic, because of how rarely these "killing machines" are used to... kill.

[Regulus]

Then it's bad logic to have them to begin with, because they aren't being used then.

Your logic only supports my logic.

Let me guess, the next post is going to be about how you need a gun to protect yourself? I've figured out the pattern here. This thread is now pointless.

[DGFone]

Except that it doesn't at all. All you just continue to prove to me is that you personally don't know what a gun is, and it just might be better off if you never touch one.

There are people who know what guns are used for, and more than just to "kill someone", which I do find it ironic that as soon as someone pointed out hunting, the "someone" turned into "anything".

People kill a lot more people using anything but guns, even here in the US. You want to stop killing? Ban people. Guns are a very small factor in the number killed, just a very vocal minority. There's a reason why politicians love to bring up gun control: It's very politically correct. In practice, it won't change a thing, but in terms of popular support and voting numbers, it's just what the doctor ordered!

[Azdgari]

DG, please stop lecturing about how people don't know what guns are, and how "guns aren't toys" and "none of you understand what guns are." It's disrespectful. You're above it. You're not the only person in the room who's used guns, and even if you were, it wouldn't give you the right to talk down to those who haven't.

You're holding down an unpopular viewpoint against lots of people which is tough. But do it with grace. I believe in you ;3

[Woeler]

[quote="Regulus"]This is just getting ridiculous.

Every even numbered post is:

I need a gun to protect myself against criminals with guns!

Every odd numbered post is:

Banning guns won't help because criminals don't use them!

---

In reality, the logic is simple. The less killing machines there are, the more difficult it is to kill someone. I like to think that's better for everyone.[/quote]
This logic works over here...