12 Dead, 50 Injured in Shooting at "Dark Knight Rises" Premire in Colorado

[Gregness]

Originally Posted by Sifright

If you didn't understand fenris i'm saying hes trying to troll.

Not trying to troll, but perhaps less clear in my points than I'd like.

Originally Posted by Sifright

The part where you think a person with a sword is any where near as dangerous as person with a gun might be why it is not as heavily regulated. Same with bows. Do you honestly think the average person could kill or injure 60+ people with a sword at the same time the same goes for the bow.

Your arguments aren't based in sound rational logic. You are reaching for anything you can rationalize the idea that guns should be legal and comparing them to things that are in no way like them but could be used to hurt others. To become proficient enough to kill some one with your bare hands is not that simple or easy any scrub with a gun can shoot you from 15 yards away in the chest that is whole reason armies moved away from bows and arrows to guns.

Guns are easy to use and VERY accurate.

A guns inherent function isn't just dangerous it's designed ONLY TO KILL.

You keep fixating on the tool idea, whilst a gun may fit the technical definition calling it a tool removes all of the context of it's function and is specious. A gun is meant only to kill. Guns aren't used for any other reason.

A hammer could be used to kill, but that isn't its intended function. You keep trying to obfuscate that point.

Double edit:

What the fuck I just read your blurb like about pesticides, You are seriously trying to compare pesticides to guns now? For a start pesticides aren't used to kill humans. Why the fuck am I even having to explain something so basic and obvious?

My point is that I don't care what its intended function is because anything that exists can be used for something that wasn't its intended purpose. In this discussion, that means that if a thing exists, someone can find a way to kill you with it. The guns are simply a means to an end and what I'm saying is that going after the means through which people commit these atrocities doesn't affect the ends of a lot of people being dead.

See, I think this next part is where you and I may have a fundamental disagreement Sif. I don't think it's guns that are the problem, it's the people using them and I would much rather spend time discussing what we can do about that.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

The first and foremost concern should be helping people to not be crazy, but that means detecting them and that's basically impossible until they start doing
odd things.

But, again, yeah. It's the people and not the guns themselves that are the problem. But why does that mean we have to make it incredibly easy for those people to get their hands on ludicrously powerful weapons? And (Fairly sure I'm repeating something someone has said) one thing, one thing that we can do about the bad people IS MAKE IT HARDER FOR THEM TO KILL OTHER HUMAN BEINGS.

It's not the only thing, you might even be able to swing that it's not the best thing. But what I keep seeing from you is that because it's not what you want to focus on it shouldn't be done at all which seems like a silly argument against the regulation itself.
Correct me if I'm wrong there, but that is what I keep seeing you as saying.

[Sifright]

Originally Posted by Gregness

Not trying to troll, but perhaps less clear in my points than I'd like.



My point is that I don't care what its intended function is because anything that exists can be used for something that wasn't its intended purpose. In this discussion, that means that if a thing exists, someone can find a way to kill you with it. The guns are simply a means to an end and what I'm saying is that going after the means through which people commit these atrocities doesn't affect the ends of a lot of people being dead.

See, I think this next part is where you and I may have a fundamental disagreement Sif. I don't think it's guns that are the problem, it's the people using them and I would much rather spend time discussing what we can do about that.

Guns let you kill easily.

The rest of those things don't.

The massacre that happened if he only had access to those things you listed no where near as many people would have been hurt.

Yes we should work towards trying to stop people going crazy and implement reforms to work towards that.

That doesn't mean you ignore the other side of the situation. You work both angles remove the ease of access to weapons that allow you to easily kill others.

Guns let you EASILY kill people why because they are designed for that, You don't need any training to be able to shoot a person.

Using a sword isn't that simple.

Bows require you to place shots carefully a group of people could easily disarm you.

Martial arts is basically useless against groups of people.

Pesticides... kill insects?

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by K-Resh

The first and foremost concern should be helping people to not be crazy, but that means detecting them and that's basically impossible until they start doing
odd things.

maybe if we removed the social stigmas against mental health they'd be more willing to seek out help themselves. How many deaths could we avoid if people felt free to discuss their anger and frustration at their work place, their feelings of betrayal from getting their useless degrees, or just get someone to give them a cat scan to see why they keep hearing those voices.

[Sifright]

Originally Posted by Aerozord

maybe if we removed the social stigmas against mental health they'd be more willing to seek out help themselves. How many deaths could we avoid if people felt free to discuss their anger and frustration at their work place, their feelings of betrayal from getting their useless degrees, or just get someone to give them a cat scan to see why they keep hearing those voices.

And we totally should do that, it shouldn't be our only method of dealing with the issue though, because people will ALWAYS slip through the cracks, and allowing guns to be freely available makes this occurrence all to likely.

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by Sifright

And we totally should do that, it shouldn't be our only method of dealing with the issue though, because people will ALWAYS slip through the cracks, and allowing guns to be freely available makes this occurrence all to likely.

but we'd still have pipe-bombs, fertilizer bombs, mustard gas, any number of incendiary devices. All of which are more effective methods of mass murder.

Actually this makes me wonder. If you are for tighter gun control are you also for government monitoring people accessing sites to obtain illegal fire arms or containing information to create homemade weapons like those I mentioned?

[edit]and I am legitimately curious. cause I dont get why you'd be for only restricting one particular aspect of this incident but not others such as body armor or homemade explosives

[Osterbaum]

Hey would you look at that, North American culture glorifies guns!? Whaaaaaat!

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by Osterbaum

Hey would you look at that, North American culture glorifies guns!? Whaaaaaat!

about as surprising as someone from another nation making judgmental comments of american cultural

[Osterbaum]

You guys just need to be less terrible.

e: also stop spreading it, it's like it's contagious
e2: that was kind of a good retort though, gotta say

[Aerozord]

look I'm a laid back guy, and trust me I get the annoyance of seeing what you consider an easy to solve issue being unresolved. But this whole, being the worlds punching bag thing is getting old. America is vastly different than any other nation politically, socially, culturally and even geographically. We have different values. Stop assuming your culture is superior or that your governing systems and laws would even work here. Our physical size alone renders most systems a logistical impossibility.