English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

That Gun toting Americans are part of a violent and intimidating society.Is it not time for a zero tolerance for people carrying firearms.The US is hardly setting an example in allowing this state of circumstances to continue.These were just kids for Gods sake.

2007-04-17 04:32:54 · 30 answers · asked by realdolby 5 in Politics & Government Law Enforcement & Police

30 answers

The whole idea of gun violence in America will be swept under the rug because nobody wants to discuss the issue. The President (and most Republicans) are in bed with the NRA and the Democrats are afraid if they take a stand they'll lose elections. You would have thought after Columbine, something would be done, but Columbine wasn't an isolated incident, it has happened more since then. Until we have a President and a Congress who are willing to take a stand against the NRA and stand for the innocent people who are victims of the crimes, nothing will be accomplished. As far as the NRA nutcases who will be attacking me, it's not about taking away your guns, it's about securing this country. This kind of thing doesn't happen anywhere else, but here.

2007-04-17 04:49:52 · answer #1 · answered by jimbo11403 2 · 0 1

This may seem callous but it is truly all that can be done. People should have learned the lessons of 9/11. Regardless of the weapon, charge the threat. When escape is obviously not possible charge the threat. The death toll would have been reduced by half if some had had this in mind. The dead are not cowards but many clearly lack understanding of the problem. A paradigm shift is needed. Consider this; You are close to the gunman and turn and run away successfully, but learn of the death toll later. What is worse,the possibility of dying or living with the fact you chose your life over 32 others. If anything people need a sense of conncetion with each other. If a gunman burst into a family reunion I think he would have to shoot people attacking him vs. people hiding and fleeing. We don't need to all be armed to the teeth, but we do need to be mentally prepared. A 9mm and a 22 cal chould not have produced a body count like this. People survive multiple shots with these guns routinely. Hopefully this will change some minds.

2007-04-17 06:11:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

What happened in Virginia was a tragedy; unfortunately, anyone who really wants a gun is going to get one, no matter what you do. It happened in Germany, and it happened in Australia. One guy in Japan actually attacked a school with a knife and killed three people!

Our gun laws are not to blame for this. What exactly do you call a "violent and intimidating society?" If by standing up for ourselves and telling the criminals, "no, you can't take my car, you can't break into my home, and you can't threaten my family or me" you think we're being intimidating, then you should be a criminal defense attorney.

Look at the crime statistics in LA and DC as compared to the rest of the country. You'll find those stats are far higher than they are anywhere else--because nobody's allowed to carry guns in those areas to defend themselves. The bad guys only kill with guns less than 10% of the time. The rest of those crimes are committed with other weapons.

2007-04-17 04:50:07 · answer #3 · answered by ShaolinDragon 2 · 0 0

First of all let me offer my condolences for this horrible act of devestation.

I am British and pro gun ownership. I believe handguns,shotguns ,rifles and semi automatic rifles should be allowed for sporting purposes. Only with proper training, competency tests, Character, background, police and mental checks on a regular basis. I think its wrong for the pro gun lobbyists to say something like that because it is very stupid and just makes all of us who wish to enjoy the sport of shooting seem like paranoid gun nuts. I feel it also damages my side of things when the sole argument seems to be self defence when i believe it is the sport that counts and self defence is a just a handy by product of gun owner ship. You are correct in saying that it wouldhave just led to people panicing and loosing off rounds in all directions. Although if my idea of proper training and competency tests were allowed this might not be a problem. Americans have the right to bear arms i think this right should be earned.
Us Brits do not have this right even if we have earned it.

Countries like austrailia, New Zealand and Canada have firearms available and dont have the gun crime that america has. In britain most guns are banned but we still have a lot of gun crime comminted by criminals(mostly minorities) using illegally and untracable firearms that have resulted in many deaths including police officers. With the methods i have mentioned mentaly stable, upstanding citizens can enjoy the sport of shooting with legally owned guns while the criminals can still use there smuggled weapons.

2007-04-17 11:20:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No, the shooter was a Korean national here on a visa, so that would completely contradict your post. Maybe it makes a statement about Korean culture.

Having spent time in South Korea, I get the impression that despite their freedoms many things are still repressed, perhaps that culture of repression was a contributing factor?

BTW the shooter was 23 years old still a kid himself to a certain degree.

2007-04-17 04:49:40 · answer #5 · answered by evil_paul 4 · 1 0

The sad answer is that the US is a murderous and violent nation. Canada and Switzerland have just as many guns as the US but 70% less gun crime.
I can only think that the answer is that the US is a nation of bloodthirsty psychos.
I do not like this conclusion but cannot see any other that would explain this phenomenon.

2007-04-17 08:17:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

There are 200 million firearms in this country... and this sort of thing is still rare. At the firearms to people ratio.. we are on par with other countries in terms of incidents. But considering police can't stop 2 million immigrants and thousand of tons of illegal drugs from flowing into this country every year, only a magic wand will solve the problem. If we outlawed firearms, those that wanted to harm the helpless wouldn't have to go to college campuses to do it.

2007-04-17 04:41:27 · answer #7 · answered by claymore 3 · 2 1

The "Right to bear arms" is written into the constitution of the USA. mind, it was written a long time ago! It may not be relevant today, but it would be practically impossible to confiscate all the guns there. In the UK it was relatively easy, as there was a very strict licencing law at the time!

2007-04-17 04:41:08 · answer #8 · answered by Greybeard 7 · 0 0

People see things like this happen and think that it would not if no one had guns. That is entirely unrealistic as they do exist in this world and however much wishing you do, they will always exist. The problem with gun laws is that the reason governments make gun laws is to keep guns from falling into the wrong people's hands, criminals. The problem with this logic is obvious, why would a criminal not get a hold of a gun because of a law? Wouldn't he just break the law and obtain guns anyway? Of course he would. The problem with gun laws is they are meant to keep guns out of the hands of people that do not follow laws. They only effectively keep guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens.

It is actually a proven fact that banning guns in general actually INCREASES crime in a country, Britain and Australia. Banning guns only takes them away from the people we want to actually have. A criminal fears private citizens with guns the most. A cop will not shoot them, but a private citizen will. Taking guns away from people and making them rely on police leads to things like VA TECH. With question of police abuse aside, police cannot always be there and are 10 minutes away even if you do have a cell phone. 21 people can die in 10 minutes, in 10 seconds, to 1 gunman. Had someone in the class been allowed to conceal and carry, no one would have been hurt. The government wants to take away guns, but cannot possibly replace the safety that they provide.

If everyone was required to own and know how to use a gun, things like this would be occurrences of the past. Those that want to say everyone owning guns would result in mass shootouts; I merely have to point to history... or to Texas. Everyone owns guns and somehow society manages to continue without mass shootouts. This is a decent question for everyone to ponder and think about what I have said. Do not just dismiss it as some crazy gun-toting NRA member...

2007-04-17 04:40:38 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

There have been about 20 million questions asked in the last couple of days about this. I'm tired of answering it. Do a search for the other questions, or look at a list of the questions I have answered on this subject. They appear about every 1 or 2 minutes.

2007-04-17 04:44:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers