Sorry, what I meant (and maybe should have said) was there were no massacres today. The point being that, while obviously there have been spree killings in other countries, they are few and far between compared to the USA, where it has basically become a normal fact of life.

If that were true then the total (not merely gun-related) homicide rate in comparable countries (western democracies) would be the same or similar to that of the USA. It's not. The homicide rate is far higher in the USA. I'm sure you can guess why.

It's pointless talking about crimes like rape and robberies, since they are always drastically under-reported. Rises could simply mean there is better reporting/recording, which is a good thing. As for the murder rate in England:

The murder rate in England and Wales fell by 14% to 550 homicides in 2011-12 – the lowest level since 1983.

Though it should be said the murder rate in the USA is, I believe, the lowest it has ever been since the 1960s. Though that's mainly because it was so astronomically high in the intervening years. Population 5 times larger than the UK, 30 times as many homicides. So much for people finding alternate ways to kill if they don't have access to guns.

Fairly sure that Breivik obtained his guns legally, like James Holmes. Despite gunloons claiming that illegal guns are the problem. As for Mexico, if you have to compare the USA to countries in mumbo-jumbo land to make your point, you truly have lost the argument.

that'd be happening in some imaginary fairyland maybe, reality proves for the last couple of thousand years that you would have to be alone on a deserted island to make that work.

i dont know how old you are but i am defintely old and disenchanted enough to accept what is reality. and that is that without proper laws and enforcement we would have a fucking riot out there.

I think you should be able to buy any gun you want but you have to go thru a process and purchases should be tracked. Someone all of a sudden starts buying 1000's of rounds of ammo or multiple weapons in a short period of time. It would send a big flag. But rest easy that will never happen because NRA gives big money and a real process would slow down gun sales and we cant have that.

That could never happen here in Canuckstikan. Yes we get killings and we had our horror stories like the Polythéchnique drama which ended with a tougher Gun Control law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89c...re#Gun_control

It's all about availability :( And why can't your guns sales go down?

whats REALLY funny is the thought of some rightwing raghead hater so clueless that he makes the mistake of thinking that sikhs are freakin alqaedas.

then slapping on his gear and taking a pistol to shoot them up, lol.

that is the very essence of rightwing stupidity, if true.

You must be making certain assumptions that are completely wrong about what I said.

As long as there are humans on this planet, there will be humans that violate other people's rights. Having a property right in something means you have the exclusive authority to determine how that resource can be used. If someone tries to violate those rights, you obviously have the right to stop them. So you also have the right to hire someone to do that for you.

What a government actually is is an organization that performs that task for you.

I never said we live in or should be living in or even could be living in some fairy land where everybody is friends with everybody else and no one commits any crimes. No, what I'm saying is that the existence of crime, the presence of criminals is a fact of life. The question is "how do you deal with this?". Do you allow the organization that is tasked with protecting people (the government in this case) to commit crimes or do you think that that organization should abide by the same rules as everybody else? Some people think the government should be able to do whatever it wants because it's the government. I say: "no, every act of injustice is immoral even if it is committed with good intentions".

No offense and professionally I like your style, but while on the one hand your are 'disenchanted ', you seem to have a kind of 'blind faith' in government. Like I said, governments are made up out of normal people. They are also imperfect. They don't always act with good intentions. They also get jealous. They also act to cover their asses or protect their positions. They can't exactly predict the outcome of their actions. They aren't 'immune to financial incentives'. They couldn't prevent all crimes even if they had unlimited resources. etc.

There's places where the government controls what comes in and what doesn't, when you have to get up and go to bed, where you can go and where you can't go. Those places are called prisons. Yet, even though the people there are completely under the control of those in charge, fights still take place, people still get raped, people still manage to get a hold of drugs and use them,...

What I'm worried about, and I'm not directly addressing you personally here, is that people have started to expect that the government fix everything. They have this almost religious, blind faith in the ability and the intentions of their governments and are willing to give up their personal rights and those of their fellow men in an attempt to reach this Utopian paradise. They allow their rights to be violated and forget what the purpose of that government was all about in the first place: to protect people's rights.

For the same reason Richard is blaming the utensil.

Really? I bet Castro would have classified himself as one.

Right, that Greyhound bus incident proves you don't need a gun to be a lunatic in Canada. Knives are the weapon of choice up there. So we just outlaw sharp and pointed objects?

You forgot that gay porn star who cut a body and sent it via mail to few places not to long ago and he fucked the torso to... Stick to the point of my comment BD it is about GUN Control... not about LUnatics that kills with any weapon of choice.

Hell hopefully no one in Canadia will kill someone with a computer mouse. I might be in trouble then... :upsidedow

The point being that controlling guns is not going to do anything but eliminate the ability of law abiding citizens to protect themselves. It will not prevent murder or mass murder.

"controlling guns"?

Guns are controlled.
:2 cents:

Why live in fear and to protect yourself. I have honestly NEVER felt I had to do this in the last 42 years of my life living in Quebec, BC, Ontario, England, Curacao... also spent time in the US.

Look at numbers BD places where gun availibility as higher gun rate death then others. Am I wrong?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate

They fucking give you a gun at birth in South Africa... no wonder it's numer 1 Eh!

With that said, not to proud of Canada ranking but it's better then US.

You'll notice more than half are suicides, so not as bad as it looks. Like my dad always told me, you can prove anything you want with stats. Just how you use them.

Most (almost all) of Canada's are suicides; that has to say something about living there.

Sure, they live somewhere with fewer guns used in violent crimes.

Yup and most US of A suicide is with drugs... (I only read Fox and TMZ) ;-) And I also prefer someone killing themself with a gun then a few other people as well TBH

We could dance all night but to be honest my point IS just about gun control.

If you guys prefer to play and collect toys that kills, well good for you. I'll stick with my backgammon board.

Sorry I missed that one. :pimp

So just maybe... with less guns, USA could possibly... Have LESS Suicide if the guns weren't as easily available on the market?

A right wing follower of Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin no doubt. Nice world you gun nuts have created.

Or if you can get a hold of a gun you will most likely shoot yourself.

It is too difficult to find anyone to play backgammon with. This is not 1973.

Worst argument ever. If we can get the suicidal out of the way, that would probably save everyone a lot of grief.

I guess we need to know what you consider a "gun nut" before anyone can respond to that.

You're right genius. The only things stopping every Canadian from putting a gun in their mouth and pulling the trigger is hockey season and strict gun control.

Considering you get on here after every bi-monthly mass shooting blaming the victims and defending guns that would be you.

Care to show me once that I ever blamed the victims? Ever.

It's the fuckers with the spoons you need to watch the most. Those are the really dangerous ones. Remember the spoon massacre last year? Sixteen people were killed by a single man armed with a spoon.

But wait! It gets better yet! The shooter was killed by an off duty police officer...

I always hear the same old argument - If the public was armed this wouldn't have happened. Yet in this case, there was someone armed - a police officer trained to handle such situations. Even though there was an armed police officer present, the shooter shot and killed six people before he was shot dead?

So in other words... Having someone who is armed still results in innocent people being dead.

How many you suspect would have been shot if he wasn't there?

Dunno.

I'm just saying there was a police officer there, fully trained and armed, and people still died. All of this happened in seconds. The shooter walked in, pulled out a gun, and before anyone knew what was happening no less be able to react, people were already dead.

There was an armed police officer there and people still died.

I own firearms but I'm under no illusion I'll be able to defend myself in a movie theatre instantly without killing the wrong person. The odds of me shooting myself by accident are much better than me taking out a shooter in a dark movie movie theatre.

Getting senile?

Try looking outside of Montreal. Toronto has been ripe with shootings in the past two months.

Last I checked Toronto is still in Canada. Otherwise it wouldn't be such a pain in the ass for me to work there and I wouldn't need a damn work permit after all of these years.

See you Thursday...

and if we didn't have gun crazy america next door importing the majority of guns used in crimes those recent incidents would of turned out much differently or not happened at all.

originally the only guns protected by law took like 3-5 minutes just to load. now you can kill hundreds in that same time frame. things have changed big time but the same laws from the 1700's still apply. that doesn't make sense.

Bullshit ! Ive watched many movies,the hero immediately reacts pulls out his gun and takes out the bad guys no matter where he is or doing. lol

Damn straight. Fucking turban wearing brown skinned fucks are ALWAYS involved in EVERY shooting in the US.

Who let them in, anyway? They should fuck off back to their own country

AMIRITE?

Damn right, its not that everyone needs a gun, we all need a John McClane with us :1orglaugh He's great at taking out crazies.

Its starting to sound like that's exactly the situation, the guy was a right wing white supremacist. I say arrest Michelle Bachmann and charge her with aiding and abetting a terrorist.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8740FP20120806

Photos of the gunman
http://globalgrind.com/news/wisconsi...-photos?page=0

I don't care who or what gun man was. Or what or who he hated.

My problem is that we hand guns out like candy. We sit here and say "We need to protect ourselves" while handing guns to the people we want protection from.

I hear you on that and I'll keep on saying it... way to easy to get a gun in the us.

There you have it, directly from Reuters. The guy was a trained Army veteran.

Now they have to disband the Army too. God help us if the Army trains one more person on how to pull a trigger.

Problem solved.

</sarcasm> for the slow people who don't get it.

This is the problem.

A friend of mine recently went through a divorce. He's always wanted a firearm, wife wouldn't let him, and now that he's single the first thing he did was go out and get a handgun. He's fifty years old, just lost everything, his house, his beautiful wife that was ten years younger than him.... He's pissed off, the ink hasn't even dried on his divorce (I don't think even think it's final yet) and no one fucking questioned him buying a handgun.

Not at all. We need the Army for obvious reasons. But why does someone who was in the Army need a firearm?

I am a former US Marine. At Paris Island they trained us to assemble an M16 with a blindfold on in the dark. (I am so not fucking kidding either.) Can you explain to me why I should be allowed to have that same weapon here in my house?

Think about that for a second. Do you really want a former US Marine who was an instructor in infantry tactics to have an assault rifle in his house? Doesn't this concern anyone?

Did anyone even ask me if I had any mental problems when I filled out the paperwork?

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/...4/facepalm.jpg

Spoons make people fat!

You are an Idiot.

I can shoot and kill several people in a crowd in a few seconds with an armed police man right beside me.
You were NOT there.
You have NO IDEA how fast he killed those people
What room they were in, if even in the same room.

I can tell you this, the guy with the gun would of kept killing people if the off duty police man was not there ---

Then you do NOT need weapons. If you can not handle a weapon, and being prior military, that is SAD!

I can get a gun on the street faster than in a store. Well depending on what type. (hand guns)

Yes the paperwork asks you.... But that is a stupid question, who is going to put yes, lol.

This last killing was with Hand guns I Do believe.
An assault weapon is just the LOOK of the gun.
I can put an extended mad in my 30-06 and shoot just as fast.
they are SEMI AUTO

#1, you watch too much TV. #2, later reports did not say it was an off-duty cop that was there. So, not sure that is a fact

I should have expected that you did not have the mental capacity to pick up on the sarcasm; even after I explained later that if blaming guns you might as well blame the sikh for being there.

I don't really expect you to understand English the way we speak it over here, so I understand if the sarcasm went over your head.


I guess I need to add that tag from now on . . . maybe I should just add it to my sig :1orglaugh

the problem is "white supremest"
We should round them up, segregate them, chain them, brand them, hell make them work the fields.
Oh Wait! ----

Ok I am done here, but this is what I believe.

There should be a background check on any weapons like 14 days ish
The person should have to keep the weapon locked up and report stolen or sold asap
A person should have to train on the weapon once a year or every other year! (create jobs)
Do I want more gov control, NO but I do not want them to go house to house taking guns away from everyone either. Have to meet in the middle somewhere!

Looks like he branded himself

http://static.globalgrind.com/sites/...gust/l-1_1.jpg

Hotlink: http://static.globalgrind.com/sites/...gust/l-1_1.jpg

More guns is more evil... they should forbid them!

These threads always bring out the gun nuts.


Simple. Less guns = less gun deaths.
Hello common fucking sense. :)

I do not watch too much TV. In fact, I rarely watch TV. However, in this case, it came from the local news - I was putting together a new entertainment center yesterday night which was the only reason I was watching TV.

However, it doesn't matter. If someone was there and was armed to protect themselves, would they have been able to stop him?

We this idea that we MUST have guns to protect ourselves, yet every time we have a mass murder no one has a gun to stop the shooter. Why is that? A crowded movie with two hundred people in it, and not one person had a gun? Why is it every time there is a shooting in a mall no one has a gun to stop him?

Our right to defend ourselves is the primary reason shooters get guns.