Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are saying that every single person in the church should have had a gun. If only one or few did, what if the shooter had got them first? The conservatives and their NRA henchmen are proposing to the nation that one should be armed at all times, even in church, in bathrooms, kids day care, Tea Party gatherings, etc - why be a sitting duck?? At this rate, as soon as a new baby is brought into the world, conservatives should surgically install a mini-glock into that bundle of joys arm.
Crowded church. Crowded political gatherings, as in the Gabby Giffords shooting. There WERE people there who were carrying guns. So why didn't THEY fire at the gunman? They ALL said they could not get a direct hit on him. They were too afraid that they would miss and kill an innocent bystander instead.
Think about what a church service looks like. People stand side by side and in front and back of one another. Multiple churchgoers pull out their guns. Assuming that there are a LOT of them, and the gunman only takes out a few, what are the odds that they won't hit somebody else? This isn't exactly like an Old West gunslinger's meeting one on one at High Noon, and who can outdraw who first.
These mass shootings are CHAOS. Unfortunately, far too many pro gun people think they are back in the Old West at High Noon.
Dead innocent bystanders are just unfortunate collateral damage? We got the "bad guy" and that is all that matters?
Edit: My husband has a carry permit, but does not carry. Why not? He has said he is too afraid that he might have to use it and might accidentally kill an innocent person. "I could not live with myself if that happened".
Crowded church. Crowded political gatherings, as in the Gabby Giffords shooting. There WERE people there who were carrying guns. So why didn't THEY fire at the gunman? They ALL said they could not get a direct hit on him. They were too afraid that they would miss and kill an innocent bystander instead.
Think about what a church service looks like. People stand side by side and in front and back of one another. Multiple churchgoers pull out their guns. Assuming that there are a LOT of them, and the gunman only takes out a few, what are the odds that they won't hit somebody else? This isn't exactly like an Old West gunslinger's meeting one on one at High Noon, and who can outdraw who first.
These mass shootings are CHAOS. Unfortunately, far too many pro gun people think they are back in the Old West at High Noon.
Dead innocent bystanders are just unfortunate collateral damage? We got the "bad guy" and that is all that matters?
Edit: My husband has a carry permit, but does not carry. Why not? He has said he is too afraid that he might have to use it and might accidentally kill an innocent person. "I could not live with myself if that happened".
We have the highest rate of gun ownership per capita of any country in the world.
We have the highest rate of gun deaths of any country in the world.
Yeah like I said the only thing it's good for is to deter an invasion by a foreign army.
The best part about this is the last time there was an opposing army on American soil actively fighting the United States Military it was the Confederate army. I mean this is hilarious.
If more people in that church had a gun then maybe more people would still be alive and the gun man be shot earlier.
If there were more guns my grand parents may have survived and not die in Auswitz and died at the hands of the Nazi's and being taken away as lame ducks but able to at least take some down.
Usually cops are too late for a shooting as they are called after the fact and perhaps can prevent another person from getting shot but they usually are not on the spot when the crazy person starts shooting.
In the Netherlands there is no gun policy and look how many people get shot every year.
What if there were more guns? The sharpest shooters would win. (Children would be at particularly high risk).
Also, one would have to be constantly on the look-out with gun in hand, cocked, and ready to shoot.
Some of us realize that there will always be dangerous people willing to kill other people for their religion, race, politics or many other reasons. These people cannot be deterred from their holy mission by lack of guns or any other weapons. There are far too many ways to kill that do not use guns that suppressing guns is the absolute wrong way to go.
What is really needed is teaching people how to spot the dangerous behavior that precedes one of these attacks. That behavior needs to be reported to same authority that can intervene before the person commits atrocities like the recent murder of nine innocents in a Christian church or the bombing of a crowd in Boston watching a foot race to an Eagle Scout shooting people from a clock tower in Texas. The people doing the crime are the problem not the tools they use.
Someone suggested we should all be armed and ready for trouble. I agree but with the caveat that the situation is important. I base my need to carry a firearm on the expected situation. I probably would not have carried a gun into that church. If I were a black I might have.
Life is not inherently safe so be alert, aware and armed. That is a lot safer than depending on others doing it for you.
Some of us realize that there will always be dangerous people willing to kill other people for their religion, race, politics or many other reasons. These people cannot be deterred from their holy mission by lack of guns or any other weapons. There are far too many ways to kill that do not use guns that suppressing guns is the absolute wrong way to go.
What is really needed is teaching people how to spot the dangerous behavior that precedes one of these attacks. That behavior needs to be reported to same authority that can intervene before the person commits atrocities like the recent murder of nine innocents in a Christian church or the bombing of a crowd in Boston watching a foot race to an Eagle Scout shooting people from a clock tower in Texas. The people doing the crime are the problem not the tools they use.
Someone suggested we should all be armed and ready for trouble. I agree but with the caveat that the situation is important. I base my need to carry a firearm on the expected situation. I probably would not have carried a gun into that church. If I were a black I might have.
Life is not inherently safe so be alert, aware and armed. That is a lot safer than depending on others doing it for you.
Sure, there are many ways to kill people, but most of them don't allow one person to take out many people in short order the way a gun does.
Again, the majority of civilized countries in the world experience much less gun violence and gun murders than we do and the only difference is most other civilized countries in the world have strict restrictions on gun ownership. More guns in more hands isn't the solution to the insane rate of gun carnage in this country. All increasing the number of guns will do is increase the number of killings by guns.
It's not rocket science, and it's not theory. The lack of gun violence in countries with strict gun laws is all the proof that is necessary.
The real myth is that most of the European countries with strict gun control laws are unarmed. The citizens of these countries picked up, found or took away most of the guns dropped by all sides of all the wars since guns were introduced. The people of Europe are very well armed. They just do not advertise that fact.
Sure, there are many ways to kill people, but most of them don't allow one person to take out many people in short order the way a gun does.
Again, the majority of civilized countries in the world experience much less gun violence and gun murders than we do and the only difference is most other civilized countries in the world have strict restrictions on gun ownership. More guns in more hands isn't the solution to the insane rate of gun carnage in this country. All increasing the number of guns will do is increase the number of killings by guns.
It's not rocket science, and it's not theory. The lack of gun violence in countries with strict gun laws is all the proof that is necessary.
No other Government in any civilized country is as armed and violent as ours is-so yes, citizens should have the right to be armed so long as our Government is so violent and war-hungry.
Remember the longest and costliest war in American history-the War on "Drugs" is a war waged on the American people. The War on "Terrorism" is also slowly shifting to include Americans.
Many Cops in England don't even have guns. Meanwhile our Government is feeding our local police military gear they were never trained to use...
No other Government in any civilized country is as armed and violent as ours is-so yes, citizens should have the right to be armed so long as our Government is so violent and war-hungry.
Remember the longest and costliest war in American history-the War on "Drugs" is a war waged on the American people. The War on "Terrorism" is also slowly shifting to include Americans.
Many Cops in England don't even have guns. Meanwhile our Government is feeding our local police military gear they were never trained to use...
That's a good argument for not militarizing our police forces, and I'm all for that. Any way you slice it, more weaponry in more hands will equal more death. There's no getting around that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
