ElectricBlanketFire
Member
You just listed 3 things after saying we can't tackle more than one thing at a time.
Your posts in this thread are bad.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Mass shooting at Orlando gay nightclub [50 dead, 53 injured]
- Thread starter dc89
- Start date
- Status
You just listed 3 things after saying we can't tackle more than one thing at a time.
Your posts in this thread are bad.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Understand, just stating how obnoxious it is.
HAHA, funnily enough they JUST corrected that report as you posted that. Again though it seems like semantics to argue if he was supported by ISIS or not. He was obviously associated in some way and had shown support for them so what does it matter. If he says he supports ISIS and ISIS is a collective group of people LIKE him then whats the difference? I'd be more afraid of people like this guy that can pop out of nowhere than a coordinated strike that is more likely to be caught and stopped. I'm more afraid of the copycat's that may pop up at this point. It's obvious the FBI and Homeland is not prepared for such things.
A Link to the Past
Banned
So essentially, banning guns is only something we should consider if it results in zero illegal shootings for time immemorial
Bornstellar
Member
Holy crap, almost Paris all over again. 
Yeah that's the really sad/scary part about this type of thing, short of banning all guns which is never going to happen not much could have stopped him.
gutter_trash
Banned
Australia says hi
SparkleMotion
Member
I don't get the argument "stricter background check for guns won't stop all these incidents so don't do it". If it can stop some of them, why scrap the idea entirely because it's not an all encompassing stop?
echoshifting
Banned
Are you running down a checklist of logical fallacies?
edit: oh, well that's over with.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
I don't know, the legislation that was moving last year could have potentially stopped this.
Dreams-Visions
Member
this is NOT the order of focus in this country, but it may be in your household. Where are you from?
NHarmonic.
Member
The government can take care of multiple topics at the time, didn't the first lady had a program about healthier habits? among other things. Besides from that, you can't really compare diet and excercise to gun ownership and mass shootings, it's stupid beyond words.
Lone Wolf situations like this are not at all comparable to terrorist cell attacks like Paris.
They're much harder to stop completey, but much easier to mitigate the worst outcome if approached right.
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
Are you kidding me, there are hurdles against the federal government to even do research on shootings.
OriginofHysteria
Banned
Apparently he was being investigated by the FBI.
Would it make sense to have a clause where if you are being investigated by any sort of law enforcement, you should have your weapons confiscated?
j0hnnix
Member
Ban weapons. Fine . Others will find ways to commit mass killings. I'm sure the argument will be but it will reduce it, sure it will reduce "gun" related violence. If people want to hurt someone, or groups they will find a way. We can keep the belief that banning guns is the solution.. Just like stop violent movies, video games, and the bad swim in the pool...
A Link to the Past
Banned
Also, "my feelings"? We're dealing with a situation where lax gun control laws are one of the most important factors in why more than 100 people are dead or injured. It is not "my feelings", it is "we need to do something to stop this from happening again and to stop putting the safety of innocent people on a lower rung of importance compared to the right to own guns." But then again, maybe it is "our feelings" - our feeling of sadness for the loss of life, and our feeling of contempt for the people who trivialize them.
You don't get more out of touch than saying that gun violence is not a pervasive issue in America.
They closed the investigation on him a couple years ago though so unless they just leave people on the list forever (which is a scary thought) it wouldn't have.
Edit: Not to mention the whole constitutional implications of taking people's rights away by putting them on a secret list with no oversight and no appeals which would probably get struck down (at least when Scalia was alive)
Here's what it takes to buy a car
1) You need a driver's license. To get a driver's license, you have to take a driver's test to show that you're capable of driving a car. You're also required to take retests every few years to ensure that you're still capable of driving.
2) Have proof of insurance. You legally cannot drive a car without it.
3) Register your car with the state.
Here's what it takes to buy a firearm (it varies by state, to be fair, but this is the easiest)
1) Purchase said firearm
2) Wait the required time for the background check
3) Take said firearm
There's not license to ensure that you're qualified. The govt doesn't keep tabs on what happens to the gun after the purchase.
Milly Osworth
Member
Lets not give isis credit, too much honor.
SparkleMotion
Member
Why do people interpret a stricter background check for guns as "banning all guns"?
Yeah, video games thrown at people kill instantly.
DragonGirl
Banned
Perhaps because whether it's a Christian Terrorist shooting people, an Islamic Terrorist shooting people, a Racist shooting people, a Homophobic shooting people, a Political Extremist shooting people, an Abusive Spouse shooting people, or a Misogynist shooting people, the intersection of all these deaths is access to guns. Maybe we shouldn't have guns so readily available until we as a species become a little more stable and a little less violent?
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
So just because it makes it rarer, harder, and less efficient it isn't worth it? Not to miss the point that nearly no one is talking about a full ban.
Gotdatmoney
Member
Out of touch? With what? America is the only place in the world where shootings like this and gun violence general occur on this scale. Only America refuses to have any gun control implemented. Hmmm
I wonder how these two facts relate to the current climate of gun violence. I wish I could link it together. Maybe someone, a government agency maybe, should research it further?
. . . .Oh wait
DragonSworne
Banned
Better yet, you have no control if someone is going to shoot you.
It's not like I can kill you by forcing you to eat Doritos.
AnathemicOne
Banned
Christina Grimmie dies by gunshot on Friday night and now a mass shooting. All within the city of Orlando.
Can we like ban guns now and join the rest of the modern world?
Can we like ban guns now and join the rest of the modern world?
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
I live in Texas too. And you can only purchase a weapon without a background check through direct purchase sell from another gun owner. Not from a retail gun store. And that's the case for several states. Not just exclusive to Texas.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
No one had a problem with it when it comes to the PATRIOT act, indefinite detention, waterboarding, wire tapping, etc. So I don't know why Scalia would have cared, oh wait, guns. Right.
Fully understand that, and lets not act like it is hard to find a private seller. Go to any gun show that happens every weekend and you'll see people walking around with AR-15's selling. Should have to play by the exact same rules as stores.
Because groups like the NRA and conservatives have drilled it into their heads.
A Link to the Past
Banned
To be clear, you're asking why we're talking about guns in a situation where a man purchased a gun legally and used it to commit the greatest loss of life from a mass shooting ever?
It's easier to buy and use a gun than it is to assemble a bomb or hijack a plane or go on a stabbing spree.
Gun restrictions, or an outright ban, wouldn't stop every single of act of violence in this country. But it would go a long way in curtailing many of them. The harder you make it for people to kill, the fewer murders you have.
bootsthecat
Banned
Guilty by suspicion? That wouldn't set any particularly good precedents. He had not been charged with anything.
The rest of the modern world still allows private ownership of firearms, in fact there's almost 80 million privately owned firearms in Europe.
mercenar1e
Member
The United States has over 350 million + guns already on the street. It's impossible to ban and nobody on the right will ever pass anything remotely close to what you're proposing.
I'd like to see more federal funding of mental health institutions, outright ban gun sales to the people on the terrorist watch list.
SquashMatch
Member
No, There are a ton of us who are right politically but every time we speak up we are told to fuck ourselves or many of us have gotten banned. I will stand with any peaceful Muslim as would any other sane American.
Gun control in the United States is a pipe dream, most citizens who are told to give up their weapons would kindly tell the government to fuck off. If you want gun control than by all means call a convention of the states and change the constitution. That is the protocol but it is very hard to do and for good reason.
Gun control will not curtail hate, I grew up in a state where a man killed almost 200 people with a uhaul and some fertilizer. I will not give up my right to protect myself and my family for control measures that will not work.
Because we all know how great Gun control has been for Detroit and Chicago.
Gotdatmoney
Member
People refuse to come down to reality.
I mean, I can't even grasp the idea of "you'll never fix it so the only solution is to block the ability to do anything".
Because the NRA has been conflating the two for years.
If you're a conspiracy nut afraid of the government, it's not hard to see any new gun control law as the beginning of what would ultimately lead to the feds breaking down your door and taking your firearms.
Puppet Shadow
Member
Great post.
Dreams-Visions
Member
sure. So let's make it as difficult for them as possible.
Harder to create 103 casualties in 3 hours with butter knives and nunchucks than it is to buy 200 rounds of NATO rounds, aim and squeeze your index finger, don't you think?
Reducing the amount of life lost is the entire fucking point. So acknowledging that "it will reduce gun related violence" could have and should have been the conclusion of your statement. You're right. It will reduce gun-related violence. The only thing left now is for the adults in the room to get some legislation done.
It seems there are lots of scared people in this thread which is heartbreaking. Perhaps more than death, fear and terror is what the perpetrators want to cause. Please do not let this act stop you from being yourself or doing what you want to do. For perspective, around 90 people die in fatal car accidents in the US every day, but as citizens, we cannot let that statistic rule our lives.
This was a despicable act and we should continue to spend our time mourning the victims and praying for their families. But we should be level headed; we cannot let the perpetrators of such acts take charge of us.
This was a despicable act and we should continue to spend our time mourning the victims and praying for their families. But we should be level headed; we cannot let the perpetrators of such acts take charge of us.
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Just like the 1st amendment isn't absolute neither is the 2nd. No one is saying it is gone.
- Status