Man slashes 22 children near China school

[RaininThrees]

Insane rampages are, sadly, not confined to the United States. One happened this very day in China, where a cruel madman attacked a group of children at school.

Here's the difference:




Twenty-two children injured. Versus, at current count, 20 little children and eight other people shot dead. That's the difference between a knife and a gun.

Guns don't attack children; psychopaths and sadists do. But guns uniquely allow a psychopath to wreak death and devastation on such a large scale so quickly and easily. America is the only country in which this happens again -- and again and again. You can look it up.

No one has been killed on American soil through what we define as an act of "terrorism" in more than a decade, but countless elements of our life are still shaped and warped by the open-ended "war on terror." (Or, if you count the Ft. Hood shooting as "terrorism," 13 people have been killed.)

Thousands of people die every year from gun violence, an unspeakable number at schools, and -- we mourn and "move on." "Nothing to be done."

For parents, siblings, and families whose lives have been forever changed (or ended), deepest sympathies. For us as a nation .... I don't know what to say.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/...-go-on/266293/

[bmulls]

Are you *****ing retarded? Show me a post where I said that? In my post yesterday, I advocated gun-restriction, because banning guns is impossible in the U.S. and it will never be achieved, hence the talk is useless.

You're retarded for thinking that restricting guns won't help decrease the rate of deaths in the US. You think it'd make no difference, because they'd just use knifes to stab people instead. This sums up your entire view point.

Your idea of "restrictions" are ridiculous and virtually the same thing as banning them.

[bmulls]

High powered weapons should be banned


I think he's arguing just for the sake of it. His points are pretty incoherent and all over the place.

Yeah okay. I'm the only person in this thread posting real statistics with sources. The rest of you are making emotional judgements out of your ass.

[ripthekik]

I think he's arguing just for the sake of it. His points are pretty incoherent and all over the place.

Yes, I think I'll stop arguing with him now. I'd continue to argue if there were a lot more guys thinking like him, but it seems the majority of ISH are pretty clear-headed and know what they're talking about. It's not worth it to convince 1 idiot.

Twenty-two children injured. Versus, at current count, 20 little children and eight other people shot dead. That's the difference between a knife and a gun.

That's right. That's the difference gun access makes, and guys like bmull refuse to face. You can't get rid of crazy people, or crime altogether. They will find a way. But restricting guns make it a hell lot harder. This guy here couldn't find a gun, he got a knife. Did he cause 20 deaths like bmull would have predicted? No, he caused 0.

That's the difference.

[MMM]

On screening for mental illness, isn't that a potential violation of medical privacy??? Would something like that even be allowed???

[RaininThrees]

On screening for mental illness, isn't that a potential violation of medical privacy??? Would something like that even be allowed???

I doubt it, but you can lower barriers for treatment and try and lower the stigma associated with metal disease.

Maybe more people get help, rather than retreat into themselves.

[Kblaze8855]

Because the vast majority of gang related murders are committed with illegally obtained firearms.

Banning guns would punish responsible law abiding citizens who enjoy hunting and target shooting while doing little to stop the majority of gun murders.

Yes, I acknowledge that these mass shootings are often committed by young white middle class males with legal firearms. However in the grand scheme of things these murders account for a tiny fraction of the total murder rate. They are just the ones we see about. "17 year old black killed shot in Baltimore" doesn't make the news because it happens all day every day. White kid on a shooting spree makes the news.

Serious question.......is the enjoyment of killing animals and target shooting worth it if even one child is more likely to die?

[bmulls]

Serious question.......is the enjoyment of killing animals and target shooting worth it if even one child is more likely to die?

That is a loaded question, it assumes I have some sort of responsibility for what other people do with their guns.

I'm sure you have a few drinks every now and then. Are you by proxy responsible for every innocent person killed by a drunk driver?

[ZenMaster]

That is a loaded question, it assumes I have some sort of responsibility for what other people do with their guns.

I'm sure you have a few drinks every now and then. Are you by proxy responsible for every innocent person killed by a drunk driver?

It's not about responsibility for other people.

People in the US do mass shootings with guns relatively often - fact.

People in other countries where guns are banned don't have mass shootings with guns relatively often - fact.

It's about realising that easy acces to guns for the broad population isn't smart or safe, at least not for a country like the US, the proof is in the dead bodies.

[RaininThrees]

Serious question.......is the enjoyment of killing animals and target shooting worth it if even one child is more likely to die?

You can do target shooting with a non-lethal airgun, and killing animals does not require an automatic weapon.

[red1]

now imagine if this fool walked in with an ar15. would've been a much different story

[bmulls]

You can do target shooting with a non-lethal airgun, and killing animals does not require an automatic weapon.

Nobody needs a car that goes faster than 70mph either. We should put a built in speed limit on all cars, right?

I am all for gun control measures designed to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people. Better mental health care, a more comprehensive background check which precludes people with mental health issues from purchasing guns, closing the "gun show loophole" whereby people can purchase guns from each other with little to no documentation, requiring all firearms to be locked up at all times, holding people accountable for crimes committed with firearms registered to them.

^^ These are all things I would support.

However I will never support further limiting the types of firearms that responsible law abiding citizens can own. I own an AR15 and I enjoy shooting it at the range. It is not fair or just to trample on my rights because other people abuse them.

[Just2McFly]

I personally think that gun control can include a weapons ban on specific types of weapons. I'm on the fence with Hand guns, but at the minimum they should be extremely, extremely, extremely hard to buy.

I live in Canada, am in my 30s, but I currently have absolutely no idea where I would have to go to buy a hand gun. No clue.

Automatic weapons should be banned outright in my mind. There is no reason for a civilian to own an automatic weapon. None. There is no arguing this point.

Detroit or Buffalo, which ever is closest.

[bmulls]

You can do target shooting with a non-lethal airgun, and killing animals does not require an automatic weapon.

Also, just FYI, none of these shooters used automatic weapons. Those have been banned for a long time now. To legally own a pre-ban automatic you would need an expensive permit, the personal endorsement of your local police chief and upwards of $20k.

[boozehound]

Here is a view that I think is quite reasonable. and that is the last Ill say.

http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2007/0...son-rifle.html