B-Large Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) Does tighter control on weapons in the US change the outcome of that situation? Could it have changed the scale in which this young man was able to shoot almost 70 people? I am not an advocate of gun control, but I think when these things happen, it is a time to revisit the types of weaponry we (as a scoiety) want accessible for people who might very well consider this kind of action. He walks in the back door with dynamite strapped to him perhaps he kills a hundred and nobody has a chance..... I in no way intend this thread to suggest that laws regarding guns eliminates crazy people..... Thoughts? Edited July 20, 2012 by B-Large Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 My initial reaction to your question is, no it probably would not have changed the circumstances much. I would caution our legislators and media from trying to "solve" too much here, less than 24 hours in. Unfortunately blame will be apportioned to those many times removed, and the shooter will be partially absolved of blame by those who prefer to see fault in video games or talk radio or political rhetoric or anything else that can be conscripted to explain why terrible things happen to good people. Our discussion should be about the shooter, the victims, and their families — and very little else — and we would do well to avoid breathlessly proposing radical changes to our constitutional order because a man abused his liberty. Those with evil in their hearts are prone to do evil things, and those willing to violate strict prohibitions against murder do not care much about regulation of firearms or much else. Stay safe out there B-Large. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) I need to read up on the details. From what I heard on the radio he was basically ready for war. Shotgun, semi-auto, multiple hand guns, plus armor and tear gas? Why the hell is tear gas a consumer product? I don't know about regulation and what to do...I personally am not a gun guy and would regulate significantly more than most but I understand the other argument. These things happen fairly routinely...thank God it's not that often but you know they've happened and you know they'll happen again. There's just a lot of crazy people who snap or whatever .... there's a lot of media they can consume that fuel their crazyness .... one crazy person can kill a lot of people. To answer the question, IMO significantly tighter gun control on a wide scale level changes the result. Less able to massacre people in that way. But we will never have that. Could he still be a human bomb? Yes. But I would rather him have to be a bomb for some reason than get his jollies off locking people in, tear gassing them, and opening fire. Edited July 20, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted July 20, 2012 Author Share Posted July 20, 2012 My initial reaction to your question is, no it probably would not have changed the circumstances much. I would caution our legislators and media from trying to "solve" too much here, less than 24 hours in. Unfortunately blame will be apportioned to those many times removed, and the shooter will be partially absolved of blame by those who prefer to see fault in video games or talk radio or political rhetoric or anything else that can be conscripted to explain why terrible things happen to good people. Our discussion should be about the shooter, the victims, and their families — and very little else — and we would do well to avoid breathlessly proposing radical changes to our constitutional order because a man abused his liberty. Those with evil in their hearts are prone to do evil things, and those willing to violate strict prohibitions against murder do not care much about regulation of firearms or much else. Stay safe out there B-Large. thanks for the thoughtful response here, B. I tend to agree with what you said. Staying safe, B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I need to read up on the details. From what I heard on the radio he was basically ready for war. Shotgun, semi-auto, multiple hand guns, plus armor and tear gas? Why the hell is tear gas a consumer product? I don't know about regulation and what to do...I personally am not a gun guy and would regulate significantly more than most but I understand the other argument. These things happen fairly routinely...thank God it's not that often but you know they've happened and you know they'll happen again. There's just a lot of crazy people who snap or whatever .... there's a lot of media they can consume that fuel their crazyness .... one crazy person can kill a lot of people. To answer the question, IMO significantly tighter gun control on a wide scale level changes the result. Less able to massacre people in that way. But we will never have that. Could he still be a human bomb? Yes. But I would rather him have to be a bomb for some reason than get his jollies off locking people in, tear gassing them, and opening fire. This country's gun laws are significantly more stringent than most of our gun laws: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Norway Just in case you'e forgotten: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57415035/norway-mass-killer-anders-behring-breivik-defends-massacre-i-would-have-done-it-again/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted July 20, 2012 Author Share Posted July 20, 2012 I need to read up on the details. From what I heard on the radio he was basically ready for war. Shotgun, semi-auto, multiple hand guns, plus armor and tear gas? Why the hell is tear gas a consumer product? I don't know about regulation and what to do...I personally am not a gun guy and would regulate significantly more than most but I understand the other argument. These things happen fairly routinely...thank God it's not that often but you know they've happened and you know they'll happen again. There's just a lot of crazy people who snap or whatever .... there's a lot of media they can consume that fuel their crazyness .... one crazy person can kill a lot of people. To answer the question, IMO significantly tighter gun control on a wide scale level changes the result. Less able to massacre people in that way. But we will never have that. Could he still be a human bomb? Yes. But I would rather him have to be a bomb for some reason than get his jollies off locking people in, tear gassing them, and opening fire. One of my staff members is married to a Gun Enthusiast, and is Ex-Miltary. She said he mentioned that you can buy the protective gear that SWAT guys wear at this place not to far from where this happened, not questions asked. It has been reported that he had a protective helmet, neck shield, vest, groin sheild and protecting leggings when he walked into that theatre.... what reason would a person having in owning that kind of stuff? Collecting? !@#$ing A... I have been going over and over in my mind how easy it really is to reload the glock and continue to discharge... one the accounts form a witness who was being hit with shell casings remarked that the she was most scared when the shooting stopped and you could hear the gun reloading.... christ that is scary to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 This country's gun laws are significantly more stringent than most of our gun laws: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Norway Just in case you'e forgotten: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57415035/norway-mass-killer-anders-behring-breivik-defends-massacre-i-would-have-done-it-again/ I get it. I get all the points. All the endless examples. I'm just giving my opinion. I don't think it could never happen. I think it would happen less, be harder to do, and lesser scale gun violence could drop as well. But I'm not trying push the issue. One of my staff members is married to a Gun Enthusiast, and is Ex-Miltary. She said he mentioned that you can buy the protective gear that SWAT guys wear at this place not to far from where this happened, not questions asked. It has been reported that he had a protective helmet, neck shield, vest, groin sheild and protecting leggings when he walked into that theatre.... what reason would a person having in owning that kind of stuff? Collecting? !@#$ing A... I have been going over and over in my mind how easy it really is to reload the glock and continue to discharge... one the accounts form a witness who was being hit with shell casings remarked that the she was most scared when the shooting stopped and you could hear the gun reloading.... christ that is scary to think about. Ya that kind of thing...I mean you can red flag someone pretty easily. Who the hell is selling this stuff? Tear gas and heavy armor? What do they think is going to come of that? I get that people collect and have a general fascination with the military and stuff but...bleh...just seems absolutely retarded tear gas is for sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 This country's gun laws are significantly more stringent than most of our gun laws: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Norway Just in case you'e forgotten: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57415035/norway-mass-killer-anders-behring-breivik-defends-massacre-i-would-have-done-it-again/ Norway homicide rate per 100,000: 0.68 United states: 4.8 US rate > 7x greater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Norway homicide rate per 100,000: 0.68 United states: 4.8 US rate > 7x greater So, would you prefer that crazy uses an ax or a chainsaw on his victims, because he can't buy a gun? Yeah, you solved crazy by taking away a tool. Great job! The guy has wired up his apartment with chemicals and tripwires....should we ban chemicals and wire now? He was quite educated, especially in chemistry. Should we ban the teaching of chemistry now? This guy was trying to be like the bad guy in Batman(I saw a preview and the bad guy has tactical gear...and a gas mask on...sooner or later somebody will get this)...should we ban all bad guys in Batman? Should we ban all Batman movies? Should we just get it over with, and ban the Bat? (Yeah you are the joker....but not the way you think) The fact is that there's a hell of a lot more to gain in the US, than in Norway, in general. Even crime can pay, and therefore, so can murder. There's no reason to kill anybody if they don't have any more than you do, we are all half-assing at jobs that don't pay much, and our economy relies solely on selling our natural resources = Norway That's why Norway's murder rate is what it is. It has NOTHING to do with guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Norway homicide rate per 100,000: 0.68 United states: 4.8 US rate > 7x greater Do you relate that to the difference in gun laws or demographics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Do you relate that to the difference in gun laws or demographics? Oh no you didn't lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I like the VA tech approach. They banned all guns on campus after that shooting massacre a few years back. Too bad they didn't have that policy before. They could have saved a lot of lives if the shooter wasn't allowed to bring his gun that day. Norway homicide rate per 100,000: 0.68 United states: 4.8 US rate > 7x greater How much gang violence do they have in Norway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Oh no you didn't lol Yep. I did it fully knowing the consequences. I did check the statistics first and feel confident that if people want a serious discussion, instead of getting their PC panties all in a wad, my point will prevail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Good job ABC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Good job ABC Covered in another thread.... But worthy of a reposting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 How much gang violence do they have in Norway? Or, what is the illegal drug market valuation in Norway/Population vs the illegal drug market valuation in the US/Population? We could do this all day. It's always the same old thing with these guys....hold up a single stat from some turdball European country, and tell us that this single stat is why we should be more like them. It's usually Sweden or Germany....but then, when you remind them that Russia could take either country in a day's fighting, and would if the US wasn't around to keep Russia honest, they cry. Boo hoo. How about this single stat, that is actually meaningful? Immigration vs Emigration between Norway and the US? Sweden. Germany. You name it. Show me one country where more US citizens are moving to it, than coming from it. All these people that choose coming here and giving up the safety from gun violence in their countries. They must be crazy. (There are a few, but none of them are in Europe, or are even remotely socialist countries). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 It's a terrible thing that has happened but I hope I don't have to be padded down or walk through a metal detector to watch a movie and while I'm a progressive and not a huge gun advocate I realize more and more that our government is corrupt from the top all the way down and that maybe an armed population is the only thing that keeps them in check even a little bit so I can't get behind this terrible tragedy as a cause for gun control- Our absolute safety is something that has never existed and never will exist, at least not in a society that has a modicum of freedom- what we have to do in my opinion is stop looking for quick solutions and start doing the hard slow work of changing our culture of violence - first we have to realize what is violence - war yes, terrorist acts yes, torture yes, but also fraud, exploitation, verbal abuse, deprivation, sanctions, spanking- in fact any time we violate the most basic rule of civilized behavior "do on to others as you'd have others do on to you" the golden rule, which almost all civilizations have a version of- we are doing violence and in that violation we are inviting violence back to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I need to read up on the details. From what I heard on the radio he was basically ready for war. Shotgun, semi-auto, multiple hand guns, plus armor and tear gas? Why the hell is tear gas a consumer product? I don't know about regulation and what to do...I personally am not a gun guy and would regulate significantly more than most but I understand the other argument. These things happen fairly routinely...thank God it's not that often but you know they've happened and you know they'll happen again. There's just a lot of crazy people who snap or whatever .... there's a lot of media they can consume that fuel their crazyness .... one crazy person can kill a lot of people. To answer the question, IMO significantly tighter gun control on a wide scale level changes the result. Less able to massacre people in that way. But we will never have that. Could he still be a human bomb? Yes. But I would rather him have to be a bomb for some reason than get his jollies off locking people in, tear gassing them, and opening fire. For some reason, I was under the impression that the tear gas/pepper gas/smoke/whatever (I've heard different reports) was home-brewed. The problem I have with the reflexive discussion about gun control in these situations is it almost invariably amounts to "making something even more illegal that was already illegal." (Unless the shooter had a permit for his weapons - I haven't heard.) Maybe if the laws on the books were enforced properly to begin with, new gun laws wouldn't even be an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 No, it wouldn't have. When discussing criminal acts it's important to remember that we are talking about criminals and a sliding scale of the criminality of their acts. A criminal who is willing to commit mass murder will not be detered by making ownership of his guns a criminal act as that act is far less heinous. All gun control serves to do is disarm otherwise law abiding citizens, making them more vulnerable to armed criminals. Like it or not, you can't uninvent the gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) No, it wouldn't have. When discussing criminal acts it's important to remember that we are talking about criminals and a sliding scale of the criminality of their acts. A criminal who is willing to commit mass murder will not be detered by making ownership of his guns a criminal act as that act is far less heinous. All gun control serves to do is disarm otherwise law abiding citizens, making them more vulnerable to armed criminals. Like it or not, you can't uninvent the gun. The typical response to this is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo Edited July 20, 2012 by meazza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts