Loughner declined from the army, but passed a background check to buy a gun?

[Trimm]

Originally Posted by purist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In Arizona, you can carry a concealed weapon without a permit. Two years ago, our dumbfuck Governor also signed a law permitting guns to be carried into bars and restaurants that sell alcohol.

Carrying a gun in public here is legally sanctioned in every which way you could possibly think of. At least 20 percent of households here own a gun.

In no conceivable way, were any "honest citizens" being deterred from bringing a concealed gun to Gabrielle Giffords event to "protect themselves."

And it looks like it didn't fucking matter, now did it?

I don't disagree. I more was talking about citizens in states such as Illinois or New York where it takes an act of congress to carry a gun legally. To follow the rules and do things right, you have to jump through hoops and wait month after month to be considered. Whereas criminals will skip the process and always find ways to obtain weapons if that is what they want to do.

I don't think "Get rid of all guns" is an answer. I think steps need to be made to ensure that mentally sound and responsive individuals are allowed to own guns, and the penalty for abusing that right should be harsh. If A husband and father of four wants to buy a shotgun to keep for home protection, he should be able to do so.

[Kassel]

A chicken in every pot and a cap in every ass

[Kassel]

I think we can all agree that white castle and similar establishments cause more deaths then guns. I am interested in your theory that white castle increase the number of gun deaths. I did watch that Harold and Kumar go to White Castle movie and did feel the urge to kill so perhaps your theory has merit.

[Henini]

BAN_White_Castle

[Henini]

Originally Posted by Henini [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

BAN_White_Castle

ohh yay I'm so mart!

[Lazortag]

Trimm, it's true that crazies will always go through illegal channels to acquire guns. Hell, even where guns are legal, criminals buy guns off the black market because they're harder to trace back to them and be used as evidence against them in a trial. However, it's also true that where guns are legal, normal people who would ostensibly want guns for security reasons might have lapses in judgment and use their guns stupidly (like if someone walks in on their significant other cheating on them with someone else, and has a gun, etc.) While I think it's a bit silly to attribute the ease with which someone can get a gun in the U.S. to its high violent crime rate (as some people in this thread are doing), I'm sure you'll find that more gun ownership trends towards slightly more violent crime (which means that some places where guns are illegal might still have higher rates of violent crime than places where it's legal, but in general the places where it's legal to own a gun will have higher incidences of crime).

I think that guns are very different from SUV's (or baseball bats, knives, and other examples of objects that *could* also be used to hurt people) because they're very efficient at killing people, and they serve no purpose other than that. The utility of being able to own a car outweighs the fact that some people are able/willing to do unconscionable things with one, and even if it didn't, a car is less of a threat to the state's monopoly on violence than gun ownership is (since taking out the tires of an SUV is probably way easier than pinpointing a shooter in a huge crowd of people). Also, banning cars, or knives, or lighters, or whatever, just because they *can* be dangerous is unfair for those who use them innocently, whereas there's no "innocent" way to use a gun.

So in short, you can defend yourself with a baseball bat, or a knife, or whatever, because it's not conventionally recognized as a weapon and less likely to be used in a malicious way, while also having many non-malicious uses. Guns, on the other hand, are normally perceived as weapons and are more likely to be used spontaneously, making criminals out of innocent people who just happened to not be thinking rationally at the time.

[Henini]

I live in Canada, I'm happy I don't carry, otherwise I would have killed people by now. and be in jail for life getting rapped because in jail guns aren't allowed and the guy with the physical advantage wins.

[Ihealyou]

Why not just start with banning dumb shit like 33 round clips for handguns? No one is going to need 33 bullets to defend themselves against a robber, and I don't think people hunt elephants with handguns. Obviously banning them wouldn't have stopped this from happening, but I can't think of a legitimate reason to need a clip that large. Why make it easier for the crazy people?

[Trimm]

Also, there's going to be nuts like this regardless if guns are legal or not. Whats stopping this guy from plowing through the crowd of media and onlookers in a SUV doing 120 mph? Do we then ban all vehicles because they hurt people? I know its an old argument, but it holds some validity.

[DetroitVelvetSmooth]

quote - "lets say you are a robber, you are walking down the street and find a nice juicy victim, as it is right now, the odds are a solid 99% chance they do not have a gun, you will rob them and get away no problem.

now lets say half of all people had guns - not just the bad guys but half of all people own a gun and carry it.

again you are a robber and your walking down the street and see a guy leaving the ATM, you still going to rob him knowing there is a 50% chance if you do, you are going to get shot in the face?"

Yeah, the criminals will just give up and find other professions. Lol. Um, maybe they will simply no longer be so polite as to ask for the money before they shoot, stab, tazer, etc...