bounty44
Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
quote:
ORIGINAL: tamaka
Virginia Tech does not allow guns on campus (sucks huh?... well it sure did that day).
And our whole country is a gun free zone. Your point is??
Your murderer either couldn't read, or didn't care.
They still went in and shot the place up.
If he didn't have a gun, he couldn't have done that.
Was there nobody to stop him OUTSIDE the campus - before he got in?
The same with all the other shocking killings in the US - completely avoidable in most cases.
quote:
ORIGINAL: tamaka
And your opinion is probably formed by the culture in which you live in... over here in America we tend to think differently.
We noticed - in the gun deaths in the US compared to every other OECD country.
Maybe you just like killing each other.
To us, that doesn't make any sense.
her point being that strict gun laws don't prevent crimes like this from occasionally occurring.
your statement of "why didn't someone stop him before he got in?"---im sorry, was he off campus shooting people first??
but to approach that question more broadly, the guy in this case was under psychiatric care but because of the laws at the time, was nevertheless able to get the weapons he used. i suspect you'd find the pro-second amendment people very open to talking about ways to navigate that problem area.
given that there are millions of guns already here, and that can be obtained illegally, and as someone pointed out above, can actually be made----this: "If he didn't have a gun, he couldn't have done that" is a mostly irrelevant statement.
youre suggesting what? that millions of gun owners willfully give up their right to defend themselves as they see fit, or to use an implement in a manner of their own choosing, because a few criminals make use of that same tool for evil?
interestingly---that's one of cooke's points---that liberals don't like guns because when they are misused the way they sometimes are, they are reminders of mankind's fallen nature and imperfections---which runs contrary to their premise that man is essentially good and life would be great if we could just have the right overlords, or political system to manage them.
the hugely overwhelming majority of gun owners are law abiding, non-violent citizens, many of whom make use of their weapons for purposes that are up to them, not you, to decide.
your statement of "perhaps you like killing each other"---is infantile.
as ive said a number of times on the forums, liberals and conservatives value different things. in this case, the latter see guns as a component of their personal liberty, which is at least one reason why i suspect the former do not like them.
to that last point, some months ago phydeaux posted some information that Charles cooke has made good use of in the book that im reading. its worth absorbing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_foundations_theory
here's cooke's point: "the upshot of this difference...is that conservatives are generally good at empathizing with the political opinions of their adversaries, where progressives, on average, are not...if [like conservatives] you believe that the priorities of progressives are valuable in and of themselves but that they do not represent the whole story, then you will likely consider [their] worldview to be well intentioned but far too narrow. but if [like the progressives] you consider three out of the five variables that conservatives hold dear to be morally worthless, you will consider your opponents to be charlatans who spurn what really matters in favor of useless ideals such as tradition and upright behavior (the second amendment)" p92
< Message edited by bounty44 -- 10/24/2016 5:57:14 AM >
|
RE: How long after a ban will criminals still have fire... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread