Mass shooting in San Bernadino, California
- Thread starter Johnnypenso
- 222 comments
- 10,321 views
- 11,143
- Central Coast, NSW
- Com_Fox5
- EelX 5
I actually see where this is coming from, most of these terrorist acts come from innocent and nice people who were a bit different socially so terrorist groups manipulated them into doing these cruel things to make them feel like they belong somewhere.
Though I wouldn't say it would be worth it as while we do have a lot of fights, getting views from different places is making us closer and closer to a world filled with acceptance, of course stuff like this will make the journey a bumpy road but I say it will be worth it when we get past it.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,305
- United States
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
Guns - especially machine guns - are bad. Swords are good. We have evolved technologically faster than we have evolved morally and socially.
- 2,726
- England
- ECGadget
- Eh???
That would work. Maybe redirect them all to a gif of a panda on a slide. I think that gif could mellow even the hardest of hearts.
In fact, they should do that. We don't need any stupid terrorist rubbish on our interwebs, or sites that promote shooting and killing or abuse.
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
Knights could and did go on occasional killing sprees - I watch Game of Thrones!!
But historically, your true knight killed only at the behest of his liege lord or the King, and always with the sanction of the Church. Peasants, as a rule, had no sword, and certainly no training in its use.
- 11,143
- Central Coast, NSW
- Com_Fox5
- EelX 5
Even if you could easily get a sword, you would need to practice in order to successfully kill someone as well as not hurt yourself and even then you can't do a Mass Killing with a sword.
You give any noob any gun and all they have to do is point and click to perform a mass killing.
You give any noob any gun and all they have to do is point and click to perform a mass killing.
For most of it's history, the US has been under conflict (American revolutionary wars, world wars, war with Mexico, etc..), so I understand that the gun is part of the American culture (for better or worse is almost a commodity for them), I also do understand that there are places where you need the gun (i.e. rifle or shotgun for sporting and defense purposes against animals).
What I don't get is automatic rifles, why would you mass produce or mass sell automatic rifles, unlike a shotgun or revolver they are an unnecessary force against a potential natural attacker (i.e. a bear, or buffalo or whatever), one would think that a pistol or shotgun should be enough as a personal deterrent, but an automatic rifle is an offensive, it has no right to exist on the civilian life.
I don't live in America and honestly I don't care, but if there is something wrong with the whole "keep the gun" as part of the American identity is the fact that an automatic rifle is different from a bolt action rifle or a pistol, the uses for gun vary so where is the argument there, why does it have to be generalized?
What I don't get is automatic rifles, why would you mass produce or mass sell automatic rifles, unlike a shotgun or revolver they are an unnecessary force against a potential natural attacker (i.e. a bear, or buffalo or whatever), one would think that a pistol or shotgun should be enough as a personal deterrent, but an automatic rifle is an offensive, it has no right to exist on the civilian life.
I don't live in America and honestly I don't care, but if there is something wrong with the whole "keep the gun" as part of the American identity is the fact that an automatic rifle is different from a bolt action rifle or a pistol, the uses for gun vary so where is the argument there, why does it have to be generalized?
- 7,703
- Indy
- xXKingJoshXx
- 2,359
- Ventura, California
Fully automatic weapons are NFA items in the US. This means they are closely watched, extremely expensive, require approval from the ATF and have yearly tax for owning such items. This means, you cannot buy parts to convert a semi automatic into a full auto without approval from the government. Most people who own full autos are collectors, wealthy, and are used in movies. I don't know where some are getting the idea that they are legal for everyday purchase either via gun show loophole (no such thing in California), or off the shelf at Joe Blow's Gun Shop. As far as I know, there has never been any case of an NFA item being used in a crime after it's implementation in 1934. Another note, California has a law regarding AR15 and AK47 variant rifles that require a magazine lock requiring a tool to drop the magazine to prevent quick reloading and also a 10 round limit for such rifles. The suspects had high capacity magazines and no mag locks (per pictures). The law only affects people who follow laws.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act
- 1,629
- Texas
- RC45
- RC45
Almost correct. You can purchase NFA items from any SOT FFL. The transfer tax is one time, not annually and yes only 1 crime committed by a with legal NFA weapon - a crooked cop shot up a drug house with his UZI.
I
Either way, yes, the civilian access to legal machine guns is very regulated and involves guns manufactured before May 1986. Newer NFA weapons can only be owned by LEO and .mil personnel.
- 4,464
- Azle, TX
- supermanfromazle
- SanjiHimura
We finally have a picture of the female shooter:
No wonder someone tipped off CAIR.
No wonder someone tipped off CAIR.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
It's ironic that you think that any noob can do a mass killing just by picking up a weapon and firing and yet when an armed citizenry is proposed as a possible deterrent you have people leaping up and telling us that someone with a weapon coming to his own defense in this type of situation will likely be ineffective or do more harm than good.
You don't live in America so you also don't know that it's near impossible for an ordinary citizen to get an automatic weapon and one has not been used in a mass killing in nearly a century. The weapons commonly used in mass shootings are semi-automatic, meaning you have to press the trigger once per bullet in order to fire. The automatic part of that is that the next round is loaded into the chamber automatically when the previous round is fired.
I don't know all the technical names, but the problem is still the same, for example; why would you have an Ak-47 to protect yourself from a bear?
I'm referring to assault rifles, it's an offensive weapon, not a defensive one, it only applies when the opposite deterrent also has that kind of weapon, but there are not that many "practical" or "justifiable" for a person to own an assault rifle in a civilian environment.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,498
- Texas
Finland, Sweden, Canada, Norway, Switzerland, & I believe a handful of others could also be asked your question, so I'm not sure why you're directing it solely towards the US. Secondly, people buy them to collect them or shoot them at gun ranges to enjoy them. It's a hobby like anything else & with it, a whole world of people that can into great detail about the history, craftsmanship, & so forth about guns. Nobody is buying an AK47 to protect themselves or hunt animals. Huge possibility they already have specific guns for those reasons if they own assault rifles.
On the topic, here's a politician pushing for more gun control by conjuring up a term that does not exist & could not possibly be true if automatic weapons are already heavily regulated.
Last edited:
- 11,143
- Central Coast, NSW
- Com_Fox5
- EelX 5
The issue is that, that "collectible" can be a very dangerous thing to others if the person possessing the gun snaps mentally as they have a weapon already in place to go out and harm civilians and is much more easier to pull off and does more damage than say, someone owning car snaps and goes on a running over spree, and anyone can snap, no one can go all high and mighty and say they are mentally perfect so they should keep an AF47 as something can push the person over the edge.
McLaren
Premium
- 45,498
- Texas
People collect swords & knives as well. Last I checked, they're pretty dangerous in the wrong hands as well.
First off, that's why background checks are typically in place & get far more difficult as you try to own higher-tier weapons. Second, the underline argument doesn't work. If no one is mentally perfect to own a gun, then there's a lot of other items out there nobody should be owning. You're blaming an object instead of a person. If someone snaps with an intent to kill, mankind has shown us it doesn't need a gun b/c apparently, crock pots do wonders with the right materials.
- 11,143
- Central Coast, NSW
- Com_Fox5
- EelX 5
Differences, for starters, you need majority of knifes as they are not just made for killing purposes (some exceptions include throwing knifes), not to mention it is far more rarer to mass kill with a knife unless you have A LOT of training.
Swords require a lot of training to even be closed to be used as a successful murder weapon, reason why Guns are better choices is because they are much more easier to use than a Sword and also less risky on the user as an inexperienced Swordsman can hurt himself while wielding his sword more often than a Gun user.
Lets not forget Guns do more damage both in quality and quantity.
While it is true that the person is at fault I think guns also play a crucial role in the amount of innocent lives are being killed, the more this is getting ignored, the more people are going to get mercilessly murdered.
I'd hate to bring this up again, look at Australia we haven't had a Mass Killing ever since the Tasmanian Shootings in which that event is what the government forced the gun laws in the first place. We have had less killings from the mentally weak as we have taken their best choice of murder away from them. With this, I think it is hard to ignore guns being innocent in all this especially with how routinize Mass Shootings are in the U.S. It isn't because Australia is better than America mentally (I would even argue it is the opposite).
- 5,487
- Vic, Australia
- gundalini
