Why do leftwingers scream gun control after the VT tragedy?

Question

The gun didn't get up and walk over to that hall by itself. Some nutjob that evidently was molested USED the gun to carry out his sick twisted fantasy. He bought the guns legally. The fact is, is that there are some really sick people out there, and they will hurt people any way they can. You don't take guns away from law abiding citizens because of a few nuts.

Answer 1

ask yourself how many people he could have killed without the gun. If he had a knife the students would have had a fighting chance, maybe one or two dead before he was taken down, but the students would have had a chacne to subdue him. A gun gave them no chance. Anyone can have the urge to kil someone. Without a gun they need to be aggressive and they can't murder that many before they are subdued. When all you need to do is pull a trigger, a child could kill 30 people.

Answer 2

Wrong, wrong, wrong. You must take guns away from ALL people. Otherwise, some of them will get into the hands of nuts. Besides, law-abiding people often kill members of their own family in violent rages.
Look at any country in the world that doesn't allow guns, and you see that it has a pittance of the murders that the bloodthirsty U.S.A. has.
I am a conservative Republican and I recognize that my fellow citizens are too immature and violent by nature to have guns in their possession.
Unfortunately, some Republicans own the factories where they make the guns, and they don't mind how many students get murdered as long as they make a profit.

Answer 3

Allowing guns to everyone, can lead to all unknown or ignored nutcracks to own or to have easy access to a gun.
I prefer as less people as possible to have a gun, the less accidents and abuse can happen.
The gun violence and death rates in the US are much higher than in any other western country where guns are banned.
If you look at the statistics, there is no argument for the right to own a gun, but many the other way around.
Many pro gun people say that if one wants to kill another, he's gonna do it anyway. But this is not true. It seems that is psychologically, but also physically, much harder to kill someone with a knife, bat, strangulation or any other close-by-killing method than with a gun, when it is much easier to literally and psychologically keep your distance.

Read some statistics in this document (the most important things start from page 41.)
http://www.csgv.org/docUploads/2003%20Briefing%20Book%2Epdf
----
An excerpt (p.42): Guns in the Home and the Myth of Self-Defense.

Guns are rarely useful for self-defense. They only
increase the risk of death and injury and create a
false sense of security. A gun kept in the home is 4
times more likely to be involved in an unintentional
shooting, 7 times more likely to be used in a criminal
assault or homicide, and 11 times more likely
to be used to commit or attempt suicide, than to
be used in self-defense.
Even police officers, who are trained in handling
weapons, are at risk of having their gun used against
them. A study published in the American Journal of
Public Health found that twenty percent of police
officers shot and killed in the last 15 years were killed
with their own firearms. Research also shows that
the use of a firearm to resist a violent assault actually
increases the victim’s risk of injury and death.
----

You should try to get out of this vicious circle of gun ownership and violence, more guns only make it worse.

Answer 4

WE do have motor vehicle administration with the aid of the licensing and insurance device. with the aid of site visitors rules. That aside. The deeper subject concerns is why does those issues ensue, that's of course uncomplicated in charge the gun. An attack rifle in ordinary terms has one purpose, optimal result, optimal dying. that's precise and effective. And particular each physique could be screaming if it replaced right into a selfmade bomb, cyanide or yet another weapon, as that's an outrageous crime, and a tragedy. that's solid that we are discussing, the reality of the problem is that incidents such because of the fact the VA taking pictures remind us that we are a society this is in lots of respects in difficulty, and we do ought to make adjustments. We do ought to observe of what we are starting to be. we are living in a society this is a extensive gun subculture, some thing very unique to america of a, a united states with coincidental the utmost violent crime fee no longer in ordinary terms between the g8 international locations, yet in addition between, the final public of industrialized united states. we ought to constantly be analyzing the problem of why this is.

Answer 5

This guy was sick. He was psychotic.

And those who want gun control are seeking just that: to keep guns out of the hands of psychotic people. The operative word is control - and that doesn't mean ban or deny.

Answer 6

I like the way everyone nowadays uses the term redneck to define pro gun or right wing American citizens.

As soon as I heard about this whole ordeal I knew people would be whining about the gun control BS.

Answer 7

"He bought the guns legally".

You are missing the whole point, eh? A person with that many known mental problems that had been seen at a mental hospital bought those guns, didn't he??!?? Our gun control laws are NOT working.

Answer 8

You said:
"The gun didn't get up and walk over to that hall by itself"

Arsenic doesn't walk over and creep into peoples food,
Missiles don't press their own buttons to launch themselves,
Nuclear weapons don't become sentient and say "hmm, I'll microwave this city today",

Now, do you think the weapons/poison I mentioned should be owned by private citizens????

Answer 9

I couldn't disagree more.

Saying "you don't take guns away from law abiding citizens because of a few nuts" is like saying "you don't take tasteful nude pictures of children away from law abiding citizens because of a few paedophiles".

Answer 10

And how many more people in US are going to get killed before the redneck banjo pickers realise control is needed..
Obviously a gun by itself won't kill anyone,but if I can't be gotten hold of in the first place.then the scenario wouldn't arise.