Don't you understand that the gun is the only thing between freedom and slavery?

Governments ban guns, not because they care for dead children/adults, but because they are afraid of their citizens.

I know Germany is a good country where most of the things are pink and nice, but other parts of the world are not like that. They are bad, because the people have no power. They are sheep and they obey, because they can't fight with rocks and molotov cocktails.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

Maybe you can find support for your theory there (or maybe not).

I can't find a similar list for mass murders. I guess they don't happen that often.

I think the solution is obvious. We need to arm kids. If all kids in schools carry guns, then this would not have happened. And as most victims were between 5 and 10 years old, be better start arming those pre-schoolers.

We need to ban all guns. Look at Switzerland - gun in every home. They probably kill each other like crazy. Not like in Germany where there wasn't any school masaccre ever.

/thread :P

I don't think our society is losing individual empathy, as a look through the ages shows.

Also, I do have the feeling, which I can personally observe on myself, that there is a "Catharsis effect" in playing extremely violent videogames. When I'm in a really bad temper, being really violent in VG calms me down. Now, I'm the first to admit that I am a less than perfect person in this regard, violent videogames are indeed a "release valve" for me.

Now, Bitrip Runner or AYIM, damn, those games nearly led me to a killing spree...

This is true, so true. The same goes with metal music. People listening to metal are usually calmer than oridinary. It's because the adrenalin and other things being released during playing a violent game or listening to hardcore music calms you down afterwards.

After killing multiple people in Hotline Miami, I'm calm as a lamb.

And doing that and/or banning/limiting legal ownership of firearms will stop the import/use of illegal firearms HOW?

Remember, most criminals don't use legally bought & licensed weapons...and they sure as hell don't follow gun laws.
----------------------
Actually it's easy to obtain ILLEGAL firearms(And many that are more powerful/dangerous/etc), and much harder(Depending on type of gun & the state it's being licensed in.....etc.) to buy/license one legally. And as I just said, banning/confiscating/limiting legal gun ownership won't do a damn thing about illegal firearm use & won't get all guns out of all hands.

In fact, if they banned legal firearms then you'd have many more guns in the hands of criminals than in the hands of legal owners(The number of illegal guns vs legal in the US is probably high now, but it'd be even worse if guns were completely banned/severely limited.).
It's part of it. Some killers crave the attention and fame(Or infamy) such acts usually bring about, and 24 hour "news" channels just give some of them what they want.

Why analyse so much?
If a person snaps and the only weapon he can find is a rock he can hurt maybe a couple persons before being apprehended.
On the other hand if he find a gun he can do a lot more damage.

What's the easiest and most effective way to start dealing with the problem of people snapping and killing others? Putting enormous amounts of resources into finding and helping people in risk of snapping or making it harder to get a gun?
To me it seems that people sometimes reason that we should do B before A.

Granted changing gun laws in USA is probably as hard as doing a nation wide "program" to find people that risk snapping.

Another thing is that to do something like this you have to plan at least a little. People think about going postal much more than folks realise but to go through with it like this guy is another thing. They're very hard to stop whatever you do.

Just some thoughts that always cross my mind when something like this happens. It's not something I think about much so my reasoning isn't all that solid I know.

To me it seems that many people think that banning most/all guns in the US would=No more(or vastly less) gun crimes/people owning or using guns in the US.

Example: In US prisons weapons can't be owned by inmates yet inmates still find ways to make weapons(And some even manage to get weapons smuggled in.).....and even then the marginal "success" some prisons have in controlling the amount of weapons/weapon use in their populations is mostly due to the amount of control they have over the inmates.

In the United States of America :

Kids murdered in their school.
Immediate calls for "WE NEED MORE GUNS!"
More guns made available, and easier to obtain.

More kids murdered in their school.
Immediate calls for "WE NEED TO DEREGULATE GUNS MORE!!!!"
So more and more guns are made even easier to obtain, and....

More people slaughtered.
And more calls for more guns and deregulation...


What's WRONG with this picture?

I'd say many non US citizens believe that.

That example is not all that good. You're using a group of people that's more prone to violence than most put in a hostile environment.

So... give every person in USa a single gun and everybody dies within a month. Makes sense.

Just like in Switzerland where there is approx 2 mln guns in 8mln nation. They are gone for centuries, they all killed each other many years ago.

Owning a gun = / = murderous intent.

I agree to an extent, but gun control would only be symptomatic relief; of course lessening the symptoms is important, but not as important as the intent, which is an impulse and therefore harder to control or prevent.

Absolutely bizarre throw-shit-at-the-wall-it'll-stick-eventually logic that the NRA use, though.

And what guns would you get rid of? How would you prevent those who wish to obtain illegal weapons from getting them from smugglers or the like? America is not the only place on the planet that manufactures firearms. Your country is home to one of the major small arms makers, namely Heckler & Koch. Benelli and Beretta, two more major producers, are Italian. Webley & Scott are British. And that doesn't even begin to touch on weapons made in China, Korea, Russia, etc.

If you can't understand hyperbole...however, I could see a reasonable argument being made for a school to train its teachers in how to handle situations like this and maybe, MAYBE having a locker in say the teacher's lounge or the principal's office that could be used in case of trouble. Any teacher with access to it would, by necessity, have to be very well trained and qualified on a range.

What should've changed is better capability for society to better identify those individuals with the leaning for committing acts such as this and working to get them help.

A semi-automatic requires the pulling of the trigger to fire each round. An automatic allows for continual fire with a single trigger pull. Semi-automatics have their place, even in a "civilized society". Imagine going hiking and having to defend yourself from a predator, such as a bear, wolf, or mountain lion. Which would you rather have, a weapon that requires a person to cock and reload after each shot, or a semi-auto? Europe doesn't have that problem because, to the best of my knowledge, lacks appreciable numbers of large predators anymore. I can go outside my house pretty much at any night and hear coyotes howling. I feel much safer when I go out to do field work if I have something with me (and yes, there were a few times it could've very well been necessary).

What place does having a car that goes 150mph have in a "civilized" society? A better argument would be for the banning of cars after someone drives drunk and crashes into a home.

They are using it as an excuse to push their agenda. They are using a parent's grief to try and change the country into one that the people are helpless to protect themselves and reliant on the government for protection.

Better education of what they do? Increased security in ports/shipping areas to cut down on the number of illegally imported weapons? Better understanding of why guys do these things (to better identify potential trouble)? Better communication between the mental health industry and the police/government on those that may be trouble? All of those would have a better impact, and better impact on society, than on taking away things that the VAST majority of owners are responsible and law-abiding about.

It is not the tool being used that is causing these tragedies. It is the people. There's a big difference.

The part where you ignore the fact that we've added gun laws(made them stronger in some cases) in many areas of the US over the years and it hasn't stopped all/most gun crime or illegal gun ownership.
It shows that people can find a way if they're resourceful enough....even in a tightly controlled prison environment.