Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    How long until the gun enthusiasts tell us that the problem was that everyone in the airport and on the aircraft didn't have guns?

    That seems to be the usual response to mass homocide caused by a gun.
    It is another mass public shooting in a gun free zone
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Not necessarily a person there are plenty of different types of targets
    You cannot seriously compare buying a gun to buying a car.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    It is another mass public shooting in a gun free zone
    No one can be this stupid.

    Are you seriously saying airports would be safer if everyone had a gun on them?
    How about nightclubs, should everyone have a gun on them there? And pubs and football matches?

    The idea that everyone having a gun is your response to gun crime is beyond ridiculous.

    Silly me in thinking that gun crime was caused by guns. How could I not realise that gun crime is caused by there not being enough guns?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    That target being a person, the intention to inflict a wound or kill.
    Is there nothing that is non human? Animals are people too! Paper targets are people too! Skeet are people too! Cans are people too! Bottles are people too!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    No one can be this stupid.

    Are you seriously saying airports would be safer if everyone had a gun on them?
    How about nightclubs, should everyone have a gun on them there? And pubs and football matches?

    The idea that everyone having a gun is your response to gun crime is beyond ridiculous.

    Silly me in thinking that gun crime was caused by guns. How could I not realise that gun crime is caused by there not being enough guns?
    And arson is caused not by people but by the petrol and the lighter used to set it on fire
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    This is really bad and all but I can't help but think of the "Florida Man" meme.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    And arson is caused not by people but by the petrol and the lighter used to set it on fire
    What's your point?
    How does this justify allowing a gun crazy public to buy murder weapons and take them to public places?

    Clearly the primary usage of a gun is to 'defend yourself' and shoot things. The primary usage of petrol is not to light fires...
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Is there nothing that is non human? Animals are people too! Paper targets are people too! Skeet are people too! Cans are people too! Bottles are people too!
    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
    I'm also confused as to how whenever there is a mass shooting, the answer is apparently 'more guns!'

    I always thought that the 11,000 gun related deaths a year were because people had guns. How silly, apparently it's because there aren't enough guns.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    What's your point?
    How does this justify allowing a gun crazy public to buy murder weapons and take them to public places?

    Clearly the primary usage of a gun is to 'defend yourself' and shoot things. The primary usage of petrol is not to light fires...
    The primary objective of a lighter and matches is to light something should they be banned?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
    I'm also confused as to how whenever there is a maaa shooting, the answer is apparently 'more guns!'

    I always thought that the 11,000 gun related deaths a year were because people had guns. How silly, apparently it's because there aren't enough guns.
    Do you not think it's a bit misleading including suicide numbers when you have been talking about people killing others?

    Maybe instead of guns more should be done about the inner cities where a lot of gun crime occurs typically with illegal guns
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    The primary objective of a lighter and matches is to light something should they be banned?
    You are trying to make tenuous links here. A lighter is used to light cigarettes or candles, not shoot people. How many people are killed intentionally each year by a lighter, as opposed to being intentionally killed by a gun?

    The purpose of a gun is generally to shoot people.

    You really are ridiculous at times. Whenever a mass shooting happens your response is that there should be more guns.

    So airports would be safer if everyone had a gun? Nightclubs would be safer if everyone had a gun? Schools would be safer if everyone has a gun?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Do you not think it's a bit misleading including suicide numbers when you have been talking about people killing others?

    Maybe instead of guns more should be done about the inner cities where a lot of gun crime occurs typically with illegal guns
    It doesn't include suicides.

    And maybe the answer to gun crime is to make it far harder to get hold of a gun both legally or illegally rather than your solution of 'more guns!'

    The UK largely bans guns has barely any gun crime. The US has very liberal attitudes towards gun ownership and has incredibly high gun crime.

    I wonder which is the better approach...
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fergijane88)
    What a surprise!! Not what you'd expect from a country with no firearms regulations!
    Poor people.
    Not quite, but yeah.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You are trying to make tenuous links here. A lighter is used to light cigarettes or candles, not shoot people. How many people are killed intentionally each year by a lighter, as opposed to being intentionally killed by a gun?

    The purpose of a gun is generally to shoot people.

    You really are ridiculous at times. Whenever a mass shooting happens your response is that there should be more guns.

    So airports would be safer if everyone had a gun? Nightclubs would be safer if everyone had a gun? Schools would be safer if everyone has a gun?
    It is not a tenuous link a lighter is used to start a fire and that can include burning a building down
    A gun is used to shoot at something which could be a person.

    Apply what you say consistently.

    If all Americans are buying guns with the sole reason of killing each other how was there why was there only 107,000 injuries when there are an estimated 357 million guns in the USA meaning a huge 0.02997198879551821 of guns have caused injury.

    Whenever this happens my reaction is always don't let the government take away your rights
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    It doesn't include suicides.

    And maybe the answer to gun crime is to make it far harder to get hold of a gun both legally or illegally rather than your solution of 'more guns!'

    The UK largely bans guns has barely any gun crime. The US has very liberal attitudes towards gun ownership and has incredibly high gun crime.

    I wonder which is the better approach...
    When cracking down on illegal gun possession has been proven to work but blocked because the people with them were effecting one group who was caught with the guns more then I would say doing that is better than talking everyone's rights away.

    The uk is an island the USA has a huge land border with groups taking illegal guns and drugs etc across the border its hardly an apples to apples comparison
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    It is not a tenuous link a lighter is used to start a fire and that can include burning a building down
    A gun is used to shoot at something which could be a person.

    Apply what you say consistently.
    Clearly it is far more difficult and takes far longer to kill someone by starting a massive fire with a lighter than it does to shoot lots of people with a gun.

    Clearly there are nowhere near as many homicide caused from lighters as there are from guns.

    Clearly you have to weigh up the relative benefits and the drawbacks. How many people are killed from guns compared to killed from lighters? Lighters and matches actually provide a practical use to people, guns at best are for entertainment and at worst for shooting others.

    Trying to make out like they are the same is pure idiocy on your part.

    If all Americans are buying guns with the sole reason of killing each other how was there why was there only 107,000 injuries when there are an estimated 357 million guns in the USA meaning a huge 0.02997198879551821 of guns have caused injury.
    You never fail to amaze me. Huge numbers of people are killed each year by guns. Whatever percentage you throw at me, the fact remains that thousands of people are brutally murdered each year and tens of thousands more are injured, often severely because they make owning a gun so darn easy.

    Compare that to gun crime in the U.K....

    Whenever this happens my reaction is always don't let the government take away your rights
    What about the rights of 11,000 murdered people each year not to be murdered by a gun? Do they not count.

    You'd rather defend the rights of potential murderes and mass shooters to acquire guns than you would of innocent civilians not to be killed.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    How paranoid can a people get?
    Well, that's just anti-Americanism, isn't it?

    From the point of view of the pro-gun people, this is something enshrined, not in law, but in the constitution of the country. It's not a option or a privilege, but a right stemming from the foundation of the nation. That's compelling stuff. This isn't like changing the speed limit on the motorway, it's major constitutional stuff.

    From a practical perspective, they would also say - the US is a very large country with many very remote rural areas - how do people in these areas in very remote locations protect themselves from crime and violence when calling the police isn't practical?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Full gun ban in the US will never work.

    There are simply too many guns to seize and guns will still probably be smuggled in the country.

    Additionally, for a full gun ban you need public support from everywhere and that is simply not the case.

    Also, I would be quite hesitant allowing people to carry guns to the airport (even on the plane). You need to realise that not everyone is a competant shooter and an armed person (not trained in the police or army) are more likely to accidently shoot an innocent. Also it can result in more armed innocent to be shot by police because the police may mistaken them to be a perpretrator (as they are carrying a gun).
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Idiot.
    Clearly it is far more difficult and takes far longer to kill someone by starting a massive fire with a lighter than it does to shoot lots of people with a gun.

    Clearly there are nowhere near as many homicide caused from lighters as there are from guns.

    Clearly you have to weigh up the relative benefits and the drawbacks. How many people are killed from guns compared to killed from lighters? Lighters and matches actually provide a practical use to people, guns at best are for entertainment and at worst for shooting others.

    Trying to make out like they are the same is pure idiocy on your part.



    You never fail to amaze me. Huge numbers of people are killed each year by guns. Whatever percentage you throw at me, the fact remains that thousands of people are brutally murdered each year and tens of thousands more are injured, often severely because they make owning a gun so darn easy.

    Compare that to gun crime in the U.K....



    What about the rights of 11,000 murdered people each year not to be murdered by a gun? Do they not count.

    You'd rather defend the rights of potential murderes and mass shooters to acquire guns than you would of innocent civilians not to be killed.
    Simple question what kills people a gun or a person?

    Do you think that the government should be able to just remove people's rights when they like?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    When cracking down on illegal gun possession has been proven to work but blocked because the people with them were effecting one group who was caught with the guns more then I would say doing that is better than talking everyone's rights away.

    The uk is an island the USA has a huge land border with groups taking illegal guns and drugs etc across the border its hardly an apples to apples comparison
    The UK has barely any guns and barely any gun crime. The US has lots of guns and lots of gun crime.

    Of course there's no link though...

    According to you, people's right to have a murder weapon is more important than people's right not to be shot...

    I also notice that you are avoiding my questions about how everyone having a gun in an airport or nightclub would make things safer...
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.