Mass Shooting at Connecticut Elementary School

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
We have the right to own fire arms of all sorts for multiple reasons.

One: self-defense. I would like a semi-automatic rifle/pistol with its designed magazine in case I miss, or there are multiple intruders.
Militaristic features ? Give me a break. The gun was made by the military for the military; anything on it could earn this label. In some places, police do not have a good response time, and if you have a family I think you would like to have EVERY advantage you could have to protect yourself and your loved ones.

It's not the weapons, it's our society. Violence is a more common thing with the media giving it a "normal" feeling. Also the destruction of families has put people under more stress and problems than ever.

How to fix the problem of people stealing or misusing a fire arm is surprising. It's not to create laws, but to talk to your neighbors, family, and friends. Know how everyone is doing and be involved. Also i think implementing background checks and making it harder to own a firearm are fine things to do, but don't outlaw them.
 
But a semi handgun and a semi rifle are two completely different guns when it comes to range, hence the war reference. .
The Virginia Tech massacre was the most deadly shooting of its kind. The shooter used two semi-automatic pistols.
It's illegal to hunt in the dark in most parts of the U.S., at least any animal you would use a rifle for, and if you need a flask suppressor to hunt for coyote then you need to be a better hunter.
Is it illegal to defend yourself in the dark? If your house is broken into, and you're defending your family in the dark, it seems helpful to avoid being blinded by the your gun flash
How was the last assault weapons ban viewed as a failure?
It is widely held opinion that the '94 assault weapons ban did nearly nothing to curb gun violence; hence, it was not renewed in 2004.
 
Video games, music, movies --- it's blatantly obvious that these mediums are, by and large, much more violent than they were 20 years ago.
 
The Sandy Hook elementary children's chorus will be singing "America The Beautiful" at the Super Bowl on Sunday.
 
The results of this study revealed that early childhood exposure to TV violence predicted aggressive behavior for both males and females in adulthood. Additionally, identification with same sex aggressive TV characters, as well as participants’ ratings of perceived realism of TV violence, also predicted adult aggression in both males and females. Furthermore, while a positive relationship was found between early aggression and subsequent TV violence viewing, the effect was not significant. These findings suggest that, while aggressive children may choose to watch more violent TV programming, it is more plausible that early childhood exposure to TV violence stimulates increases in aggression later in adulthood.

Early Exposure to TV Violence Predicts Aggression in Adulthood
 
I could find you a study that says the exact opposite. When you look at the overall picture, if we agree that violence in movies and videogames has increased, violent crime has decreased in the same time period, so that correlation holds little water.
 
Well, I would agree to this point. It's ridiculous. You an add sexuality to that list too

yeah defiantly, young women and men are ridiculous sexually that is. anyways it does translate in a way. Violent media does do something though. It introduces a thought into ones mind, gives one ideas, and makes it seem easy.
 
yeah defiantly, young women and men are ridiculous sexually that is. anyways it does translate in a way. Violent media does do something though. It introduces a thought into ones mind, gives one ideas, and makes it seem easy.

I don't think you're giving people enough credit. The violent crime stats are there. Society is less violent than it was 30 years ago.
People don't watch too many movies and go out to kill people. If there's already a predisposition to violence, it will be expressed one way or another
 
I think movies and TV shows are more violent and sexually explicit these days not because it is a reflection of our society, but because Hollywood wants to push the envelope and shock the audiences.
 
Now back to firearms, doesn't this only back Caleb and I's point of view ? granted I did some minor editing :D

But I would also argue that America is a more violent society in general than others. If it's not the video games and movies, what is it?

Honestly, I'm not sure where in the massive grey area I stand. But I've yet to hear a compelling argument against stricter gun laws
 
Unfortunately, when crises like this happen, people flee to the safety nets of their ideological corners: conservatives go further right, and refuse to see the logic of common sense proposals like background checks and lower capacity magazines, some will only be happy if there're no restrictions at all; liberals retreat to the left, and refuse to believe that assault weapons aren't the birthplace of all evil, some will only be happy if semi-automatics are banned completely.

I would agree with you, and say that I fall into that massive grey area as well. Right now, I think I'd be happy with extensive background check requirements, and magazine/ammo restrictions.
 
I say a good background check system and laws in place where a gun owner is accountable for their registered firearm. For example if your fire arm was used in a crime you would be fined for failure to be responsible and keep it safe. All pro-gun people love to preach responsibility, so it should be an agreeable law. I wouldn't mind if you had to take a course to own a semi-automatic, a smarter society is always better off.
 
The Virginia Tech massacre was the most deadly shooting of its kind. The shooter used two semi-automatic pistols.
Yeah, handguns on a college campus is a big problem.
Is it illegal to defend yourself in the dark? If your house is broken into, and you're defending your family in the dark, it seems helpful to avoid being blinded by the your gun flash
You really aren't a gun guy are you? Ok, first of all using an assault rifle as your mainline of self defense is pretty dumb, there are much better options. Secondly flash suppressors are used to diffuse the flash when you have the gun up to your shoulder at eye level and using a scope. If you are scoping your target, then guess what, it's probably not self defense.
It is widely held opinion that the '94 assault weapons ban did nearly nothing to curb gun violence; hence, it was not renewed in 2004.
Um, no it wasn't renewed because we had politicians who's lips were sewn to the NRA's collective ass.
 
Unfortunately, when crises like this happen, people flee to the safety nets of their ideological corners: conservatives go further right, and refuse to see the logic of common sense proposals like background checks and lower capacity magazines, some will only be happy if there're no restrictions at all; liberals retreat to the left, and refuse to believe that assault weapons aren't the birthplace of all evil, some will only be happy if semi-automatics are banned completely.

I would agree with you, and say that I fall into that massive grey area as well. Right now, I think I'd be happy with extensive background check requirements, and magazine/ammo restrictions.

I say a good background check system and laws in place where a gun owner is accountable for their registered firearm. For example if your fire arm was used in a crime you would be fined for failure to be responsible and keep it safe. All pro-gun people love to preach responsibility, so it should be an agreeable law. I wouldn't mind if you had to take a course to own a semi-automatic, a smarter society is always better off.

Big :up: to both of you.

I don't think(and I don't think many do) that assault rifles are the birthplace of all evil. I think they have a specific reason, and no one has ever given me one legitimate reason why civilians should have them. We don't allow Indy cars on our highways, why? Because they have a specific reason, one that doesn't belong on our streets.
 
I think they have a specific reason, and no one has ever given me one legitimate reason why civilians should have them. We don't allow Indy cars on our highways, why? Because they have a specific reason, one that doesn't belong on our streets.
Then why is almost every car made to break the top speed limits in our country ? should we outlaw mustangs, and other sports cars because they "have no place" ? Who are you or the government to say what I can and cannot have ? What extent will it lead to ? It all depends, maybe they like to do sport shooting, shooting at targets, maybe they own large amounts of property in which they need what an Ar-15 provides. Also someone has posted earlier a good argument on why militarily speaking a good reason why we should have them. It's not completely insane to think that a government can turn, look at history, look at the current news.
 
It's not though. The only real difference is that America had guns.

It is the guns. They are a public health and safety issue.

Explain Switzerland then... one of the lowest crime rates in the world and nearly every person owns a gun and most are "assault" rifles. They also have a very good militia system in replacement of large armies.
 
Then why is almost every car made to break the top speed limits in our country ? should we outlaw mustangs, and other sports cars because they "have no place" ?
Indy cars are not illegal on streets because of their speed, I'm pretty sure you could drive an Indy car at 70mph if you wanted to.

Who are you or the government to say what I can and cannot have ? What extent will it lead to ?
You're right, why not allow tanks, grenades, F-16s. Who's the government to say we can't own any of that shit. I want an F-16 damnitt!

It all depends, maybe they like to do sport shooting, shooting at targets,
Sport shooting was never given as a reason in the constitution.
maybe they own large amounts of property in which they need what an Ar-15 provides.
This is not a real answer. Tell me specifically what an assault rifle would give you on "large amounts of property" that a 270 hunting rifle wouldn't?
Also someone has posted earlier a good argument on why militarily speaking a good reason why we should have them. It's not completely insane to think that a government can turn, look at history, look at the current news.
And that person also failed to explained how that rifle is going to hold up against tanks, drones, missiles, machine guns, gas weapons, or anything else the government has access to.
 
Explain Switzerland then... one of the lowest crime rates in the world and nearly every person owns a gun and most are "assault" rifles. They also have a very good militia system in replacement of large armies.


This is the sole exception in the Western world, and every male is conscripted. Huge, huge difference.

The comparison does not hold up.
 
Explain Switzerland then... one of the lowest crime rates in the world and nearly every person owns a gun and most are "assault" rifles. They also have a very good militia system in replacement of large armies.

Switzerland requires that almost every male go through military training, the government actually issues the weapons. Switzerland doesn't have the poverty issues we have, they have extensive checks, they offer mental healthcare; you're comparing apples to oranges.
 
Indy cars are not illegal on streets because of their speed, I'm pretty sure you could drive an Indy car at 70mph if you wanted to.


You're right, why not allow tanks, grenades, F-16s. Who's the government to say we can't own any of that shit. I want an F-16 damnitt!

Sport shooting was never given as a reason in the constitution.

This is not a real answer. Tell me specifically what an assault rifle would give you on "large amounts of property" that a 270 hunting rifle wouldn't?

And that person also failed to explained how that rifle is going to hold up against tanks, drones, missiles, machine guns, gas weapons, or anything else the government has access to.

1. It's more so, the extent of them robbing us what we already have and how much more will they take ?

2. That's what people use a gun for sometimes, does everything we do have to be in the constitution to be protected ?

3. The ability to recover from a missed shot more effectively

4. Look at the Vietnam war, we lost to guys with AK-47's and no air power of any sort. Look at the current war we are in now ! we can hardly kill people in an OPEN desert. We have forest, hills, and the populous itself to hide in.. imagine that headache. Look at the news, the Syrians started out with Ak-47. Do some research on guerrilla warfare. The flag of Mozambique has an AK-47 on it because of the important role it played in their revolution.
 
Switzerland requires that almost every male go through military training, the government actually issues the weapons. Switzerland doesn't have the poverty issues we have, they have extensive checks, they offer mental healthcare; you're comparing apples to oranges.
I'll rather jump through a thousand hoops to get my semi-automatic rifle then it to be illegal and impossible to obtain.
 
Back
Top Bottom