look, over 20 dead in a university campus shooting. This kinda thing has heppened before, yet why dont the US government wake up and realise what guns are doing? yeah, there are advantages to having a gun, in terms of self protection, but the risks and disadvantages far far outweigh the advantages. it sent a chill up my spine reading the article on yahoo news, because of knowing how bad people can be affected by gun crime. over 20 dead. as many as 32. whats going on? how many more fatalities does it take for someone to wake up and go "hey, something bad is happening here. guns are legal, and thats where the problem lies". yeah, there will still be gun crime, but not in such huge proportions.
2007-04-16 08:00:13 · 33 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
I am with you on this....the average American does NOT need automatic weapons of ANY kind.
2007-04-16 08:07:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 6⤋
The risks out weigh the advantages? Where do you get your info? In America, every state with strict gun laws has higher violent crime than those with looser laws. Every country that has had a major gun ban had a major spike in violent crime that remained high. 200,000 Americans defend themselves with a gun every year. Do you really think stricter gun laws would have stopped this guy? Methamphetamines are completely illegal in the entire United States, yet I arrest people every day who use them or sell them. How is this? Isn't Meth illegal? I point my finger at people like you when tragedies like this happen. Why the hell didn't somebody shoot back? Does nobody in America feel like it is ok to carry a gun anymore? Hello, there are people out there that are nuts, and some of them have guns, yet people think it will never happen to them. I wonder if that campus had a no gun policy?
2007-04-16 22:34:16 · answer #2 · answered by Lancaid 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If all the guns went then who would protect Americans against the King? I'm not talking about Elvis here...
I just wanted to get that daft argument in before anyone else.
As for those who will no doubt claim that guns are the only way to defend the republic against tyranny: what happened to the much trumpeted system of checks and balances...
Or did Bush do away with that too? What a great Patriot...
2007-04-16 08:09:32 · answer #3 · answered by idler22 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
From what i heard from my friends at VT it could have stop at 10 people dead, beacuse the shooting started at 7:30 and classes start at 8. All they did was send out an e-mail saying "be cautious and report 'anything funny' to the police." Then the next shooting started 2 hours later. That scares the hell out of me, because i may be on another campus in the next state over, but it could have been any campus. Here we already had several rapes, armed robberies, and assults. The messed up part, none of the people involved in the crime have been found.
Guns is not the problem. Its crazy a** people in this world.
2007-04-16 08:09:57 · answer #4 · answered by Miss Keys 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Supposedly the people in the red states want to have their guns so they can go hunting and so they want everyone to have guns, even maniacs. The gun supporters are ridiculous when they get upset that us anti-gun people are using VT shooting as an example of why guns shouldn't be legal -- wake up folks, guns kill people!!! We are not using the tradegy to make a point -- it makes a point on it's own. The gun lovers are just in denial and don't want to see reality. We don't need to have guns! We need to encourage our policitians to stop catering to the red states and wake up and save some lives!
2007-04-18 05:33:02 · answer #5 · answered by GirlfromUncle 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That would do no good whatsoever. People who intend harm with guns are likely not going to go about obtaining them legally. They will use whatever means necessary to get a hold of a gun and if not that then some other deadily weapon. Or perhaps he could have constructed a bomb all on his own using common household ingredients using instructions found easily on the internet. Killing a lot more people.
I don't believe the gun control debate is appropriate in this or similar situations. And I really don't think it's appropriate so soon after the tragedy. Give the police time to do their jobs, the families time to mourn. Debating it now is not going to change the outcome of this morning's events.
2007-04-16 08:06:38 · answer #6 · answered by Sunidaze 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
If there were several armed persons there, the tragedy wouldn't got to such scale, or even wouldn't happen.
I am Russian and it's frustrating, that firearms are not allowed in our country. I think Americans should use their rights to possess and carry firearms to protect self.
Possessing arms makes the owner stronger, prouder, makes people respect each other. This results in many advantages in various fields for all the nation.
2007-04-20 02:15:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sorry but this is just Bullsh*t. Oh and nobody re-thinks their position. Newsflash the majority of the population is damn happy with gun control because if not we (i´m german) would not have it because last time checked germany was a democracy. Same for the UK you moron. They LIKE their gun laws. But ok never let reality get in your way.
2016-04-01 04:29:26 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is used in almost every crime, can be used as a deadly weapon, carries explosive compounds, can be bought with no questions asked and can be transported across state lines and international boundaries with little concern?
Answer: A car
I would not be surprised if the killer today, drove a car to the university.
2007-04-16 17:35:01 · answer #9 · answered by Eldude 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I am Canadian and guns in Canada need licenses but guess what we still have shootings and murders here people buy illegal guns from the states or on the black market or didn't register their gun. We do have less crime per population then the states but the last few years its been increasing. So if you are going to have gun laws to make them illegal you are also going to have to put laws in to follow up on it which they did not do here. You are going to have to melt them down and have strict pelenties and you are going to have to change your amendment and with all that you will still have a black market and still have crime because if someone wants to do it they will but why not make it as hard as possible for them to do it. Might convince tons of people its not worth it.
2007-04-16 08:10:24 · answer #10 · answered by wendy l 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
And how do you propose to make mass murderers obey the law and lay down their arms? Law-abiding people have already been forced to do so. Especially in schools.
In high-crime areas, where some of the students do carry guns, these school massacres don't happen. If anybody tried, they would be stopped.
In Japan, where guns are practically impossible to get, massacres have been carried out with knives and poison gas.
Guns didn't cause this.
2007-04-16 08:08:14 · answer #11 · answered by The First Dragon 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋