How many people must die from mass gun homicides before US agrees to reasonable gun control measures?

Question

Like banning assault type weapons? Like renewing the restriction on handgun clip size? Like requiring owner-specific trigger locks?

Each time a mass homicide like the one at VT is committed, US incurs a loss of literally MILLIONS in productivity and other costs. Isn't it time that we stepped up and held those responsible for the easy availability/ownership of assault weapons and handguns for bearing part of this cost, at least via the increased cost of safety restraints on the guns themselves?

1) Reasonable restraints are NOT an outright gun ban.

2) The people overthrow a tyrannical government? LOLOLOL! Are you KIDDING? Yeah right, most average citizens are gonna pick up their handgun and confront tanks and armored vehicles in their streets, not to mention air weaponry. RIIIIIGHT!

Most people would soil themselves if they had to do that, and it wouldn't make any difference even if they did anyway. A bunch of unorganized, untrained citizens stand NO CHANCE against a government with the US military backing.

BWAHAAHAA Hitler didn't invade Switzerland because all the citizens owned guns? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. If Hitler had wanted to invade Switzerland and considered it of strategic military importance he would have, and Switzerland would have fallen as fast as Poland did against Hitler's blitzkrieg of Panzers and Stukas. Btw, I was a history major with a concentration in 20th century history. Your argument is rubbish.

Again, gun CONTROL is not the same as gun PROHIBITION. Prohibition DOESN'T work, I agree, but I'm not advocating prohibition. It would work the same way that illicit drug controls SHOULD work, through REGULATION and REASONABLE RESTRAINTS.

Get it through your heads, people. Reasonable restraints are NOT prohibition.

We regulate automobiles far more stringently than we do guns, despite both their higher obviously higher overall utility via non-lethal use AND the fact that the probability of lethality from negligent use of automobiles is lower.

Answer 1

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...

Answer 2

Ok, lets look at your points.

Banning assault type weapons.......... would have zero effect on the VT shooting.

Handgun clip size restrictions -- would have had minimal effect, clip size would have went from 15 down to 10.

Owner specific trigger locks -- again would have no effect on the VT shooting.

Beyond the fact that the shooter legally bought the weapons used, did the background check and waiting period.

Nothing you have suggested would have limited or prevented the VT shooting or any future shootings from occurring.

.
So since nothing you suggested would have any bearing on the VT shooting,

We now have to question why you are callously trying to use the murder of 33 students to further your political agenda.

Answer 3

Do you know that every Swiss citizen is legally required to have his military equipment at home, including guns (M57 automatic assault rifles) and ammo ? They keep a very small army, but can mobilize the whole country in 2-3 hours !!! That's one of the reasons Switzerland was never invaded, and during WW2, Nazis were at war with the whole world, including US, UK, and Russia, they went 2000 miles east up to the gates of Moscow, but not in Switzerland, and please check where Switzerland is on the map...
Now, how many times have you heard about shootings in Switzerland ??? The gun crime rate is a small fraction of the American rate, and in fact it's so low that statistics are not even kept... The same for Israel, they all have guns, assault rifles, even machine guns at home, but you'll never see a Swiss killing another Swiss or an Israeli killing another Israeli...
I think it's a matter of EDUCATION and CULTURE, which lead to TOLERANCE and RESPECT for others. Forcing people to obey stupid laws and gun control is NOT the answer, that can only lead to rebellion and more chaos. Sane, responsible, educated FREE people do not have any reason to take a gun and shoot another human being ...

Answer 4

More people are killed by automobiles than by guns.
Do you propose tighter controls on automobiles?

There are already gun control laws on the books. If these maniacs get the guns legally and then go nuts, who is to blame?

On the other hand, most of these nut jobs get the guns illegally. Just like they get drugs illegally. Some of them drive cars illegally. If items are already illegal and yet still can be obtained, it is not stronger laws we need but stronger enforcement. The problem is that you take the authority away from our law enforcement personnel by giving the criminals too many rights. The fear of getting caught is not there.

Can you have it both ways?

Answer 5

Drugs are illegal, it really worked to get them off the street, didn't it?

Alcohol was illegal in the 30's (prohibition), that worked great.

How are you going to enforce restrictions on a a mechanical object that people keep in their home? That's like trying to enforce laws against modding your XBox or PS2. Anyone can download instructions on how to do it on the internet, and do it in the privacy of their own home, so nobody would ever know.

Don't try to control tools and inanimate objects. Control people, they are the ones choosing to use the tool in evil ways. Ban evil people.

Answer 6

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. If not a gun, this guy could have strapped on a home made bomb and killed hundreds instead of just 30. He could also have gotten in a car and rammed a crowd like that guy at UNC. Gun control is not the answer. I don't know what the answer is but its not tougher gun control laws.

Answer 7

give it a rest,you libs must pray for this type of horror just to drag out your gun control horseshit.Not gonna happen!If one student in that dorm was armed this sh*t would have ended with a dead south korean student!Laws cannot stop maniacs,guns will.

Answer 8

It's not going to happen because too many red necks enjoy shooting animals for fun. So instead of inconveniencing the hunters, we're just going keep our fingers crossed that another nut doesn't go on a shooting rampage, because god forbid the red necks can't shoot innocent animals for fun.

Answer 9

More people die from prescription drugs than events like this. This is just a natural overreaction!

Answer 10

None of the things you mention would have stopped the VA Tech shooter.