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.
No, you are trying to whitewash the problem because acknowledging that it is indeed a problem would mean examining your desire for free and easy gun ownership. What's really funny is that people like you constantly tell us how common "mass shootings" in the ghettos are, but when it comes to debating it in a thread about gun rights and ownership, all of a sudden they're a rare occurrence!
No whitewashing at all. One side opines on gun control and evil black rifles every time some individual that has a ton of red flags goes on a rampage, yet on a nightly basis these atrocities happen using handguns in our inner cities. Could it be that the majority of these crimes are committed by a certain demographic could be a touchy subject ?
Don't forget about the suicides....which make up close to half of the gun deaths.
Why bother , right ? Lets just focus on guns, and the evil black ones that are no different from ones that have been around the last 100 years, and were once available out of the Sears catalog , delivered to ones home.
Even suburban areas involve people living in close proximity to one another. There are plenty of suburban areas which are just as crowded as Japan, not to mention central cities.
Furthermore there are 3 states (NJ, MA and RI) plus DC which are as densely populated as Japan. Why can't those states have gun laws like Japan?
Much of the US is fairly rural and much of the urban/suburbs is much less dense than you are showing - I live in an area with acre plus lots - yet I am in a City of over 1.3M. How do you propose to control Urban/Suburbs different from Rural - this has been tried in locations like Chicago, NY and even NJ with little success. The issue is that you can't target just one little area because, you know who does not follow those rules, those that commit crimes. NY and NJ already have laws similar to Japan in a lot of ways. You know what is fundamentally different, that pesky (to gun control advocates) US Constitution.
Quote:
The Japanese have a system that is more geared toward living in a developed, urbanized, civilized society. The US system was designed to be more geared toward a frontier, rural society.
The US has long ceased to be a frontier, rural society. It is time we change our laws to reflect the fact we are a developed, urbanized society which wants and needs to be more civilized.
I guess you have not been to much of the US - there are many places in the US with wide open spaces. Drive between LA and Las Vegas (kind of big cities), there is a stretch of almost 150 miles with only a town of less than 800 people on the route. Or drive between Reno and Las Vegas, for over 400 miles of the trip, there is no town over about 3000 pop.
The Japanese laws are geared towards the Japanese culture, we cannot just wish that the US culture was the same and impose the same laws here.
Canada, Japan, most of Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand ... pretty much most OECD country is more civilized than the US. I even started a thread recently about one such city in one of those countries.
Because we are very welcoming to immigrants, and despite our many problems, we have an economy which is strong enough to absorb those immigrants.
Ah yes, the predictable right wing tactic. Anybody who says the US has some problem and isn't perfect "hates" America.
Show me where I said only the elite can own guns?
Wow...I sense a bit of racism there. You named all countries that are MUCH more homogenously WHITE than the USA. Coincidence?
You wish to make it harder for average citizens to own guns. You said the guns that the vegas shooter bought would be harder if not impossible to get if we had 50 years of crackdowns on guns. You compared the USA to Japan (where mostly only the elite have guns).
"Gun grabbers" dramatize ghetto violence as evidence of a need for gun control all the time. If you've never noticed that they do, then you've never noticed anything.
How about a couple DOZEN out of 333 million people per year?
Right, so you want to re-write the 2nd amendment to "save" 100 lives per year. Sounds logical.
Much of the US is fairly rural and much of the urban/suburbs is much less dense than you are showing - I live in an area with acre plus lots - yet I am in a City of over 1.3M. How do you propose to control Urban/Suburbs different from Rural - this has been tried in locations like Chicago, NY and even NJ with little success. The issue is that you can't target just one little area because, you know who does not follow those rules, those that commit crimes. NY and NJ already have laws similar to Japan in a lot of ways. You know what is fundamentally different, that pesky (to gun control advocates) US Constitution.
I guess you have not been to much of the US - there are many places in the US with wide open spaces. Drive between LA and Las Vegas (kind of big cities), there is a stretch of almost 150 miles with only a town of less than 800 people on the route. Or drive between Reno and Las Vegas, for over 400 miles of the trip, there is no town over about 3000 pop....
In those wide open spaces you referred to, few people live there! That was the point. If most of the US population lived in stretches like that drive between Reno and Las Vegas, this discussion would probably not be taking place. But since most people in the US live in crowded urban/suburban areas, we are having this discussion.
????? -----How do you get all of that from this case?
More likely this guy had long term mental health issues from multiple concussions but probably was still to 'legally' purchase a gun.
In short the guy was a wack job that was likely protected by doctor patient confidentiality. In most these cases people come out of the wood work claiming that they knew something was wrong but never thought the wack job would go so far.
There was guy where I worked. He ended up shooting a woman in the parking lot. Everyone on his team later claimed to feel uncomfortable with him that he was always talking about going postal. None said a word. He shot the woman because his son didnt get hired and he felt that she took his son's job. He left a note in his car.
I'm interested in continuing to live. But that is not a valid or worthy consideration, is it? A gun has more rights in this country than its citizens do.
You can't legislate euality, morality, or security; and there is no absolute security on this side of the cemetery.
The outlaws and thugs you hope to see disarmed will just get illegal weapons by other means, and law-abiding citizens will be caught in the crossfire. If you want much of the nation to live by the same rules as the worst sectons of Chicago and Detroit, just continue with your delusions; prattle on!
BTW, your fantasies are no more enforceble in most of Rural America than they are in the "hoods". Any attempt at confiscation would leave plenty of undiscovered weapons in the hands of responsible people in communities like mine. Don't ask us for protection once the dragon's teeth are sown and take root.
And also BTW, I've never fired anything bigger than a .22 caliber rifle, and that in a Phys Ed setting in college. That course also reinforced the point that scoliosis in childhood left my body "out of plumb" -- so I'll never be a good shot. But I'm thankful that several honorably-discharged veterans on my block are.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 04-08-2021 at 06:41 PM..
Wow...I sense a bit of racism there. You named all countries that are MUCH more homogenously WHITE than the USA. Coincidence?
I see you are trying to change the subject to race. Coincidence? I think not, because you are running out of things to attack me with. My thread about Paris even noted how multicultural the city is, but I guess you didn't bother noticing.
Quote:
You wish to make it harder for average citizens to own guns.
I wish it to be harder for any citizen to own a gun. You are doing your own editorializing by inserting the word "average" in describing my views, which I never said.
But frankly, if stricter gun laws ended up that certain categories of people disproportionately owned guns, then so be it. As long as it reduced the # of people being killed, it would be worth it.
No, you are trying to whitewash the problem because acknowledging that it is indeed a problem would mean examining your desire for free and easy gun ownership. What's really funny is that people like you constantly tell us how common "mass shootings" in the ghettos are, but when it comes to debating it in a thread about gun rights and ownership, all of a sudden they're a rare occurrence!
I think you are whitewashing by saying free and easy gun ownership - every place in the US requires background checks for gun purchase from a federally licensed dealer - that is not free. Many places have restrictions, require tests, permits, wait periods, transfer limitations and other restrictions, etc - that is not free or easy. No one is trying to give guns to those that are
What is really funny is that you think that someone tells you how common "mass shootings" in the ghettos are, ever talks like that. You are attempting to confuse legal and illegal gun possession, lets not mix law abiding gun owners with illegal gun owners that are committing crimes.
In those wide open spaces you referred to, few people live there! That was the point. If most of the US population lived in stretches like that drive between Reno and Las Vegas, this discussion would probably not be taking place. But since most people in the US live in crowded urban/suburban areas, we are having this discussion.
But they are STILL citizens that have rights under the constitution. You also can't have practical gun ownership laws to limit ownership to ONLY those that are rural. Most also don't abuse guns or are involved in mass shootings - That was the point.
you were acting like most of the US was fairly dense population - that is NOT reality in most of the US. Even those in the urban/suburban areas also need to protect themselves from the bad guys that may be armed - that is the discussion. Even in the suburbs, many are more remote than you may think - there are many hills in San Diego area and police can not get to some houses in less than about 10-15 minutes.
Also when I travel through remote areas, I guess I am supposed to just wait for the police if attacked that may be an hour away.
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.
That was the point. 
Even in the suburbs, many are more remote than you may think - there are many hills in San Diego area and police can not get to some houses in less than about 10-15 minutes. 
