People who protect the Second Amendment say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people". While in some way this may be true, guns sure make it a lot easier for people to do the job, amirite?
I don't know if I like the whole "guns don't kill people people kill people" argument. While I am leaning pro-2nd-amendment myself, this is not really a good argument for it.
Lack of health care makes crazy people more abundant but what are we trying to do to solve this delema. Lets look at the real problem it's not guns its society
If crazy people had the right care put in place to get the help they need maybe some of these senseless acts would stop tell me this if a proposal was put on your local ballot that raised your taxes $100 a year for mental health funding would you vote yes or no . In this country the majority vote NO which is sad my kids lives and my family's lives and even my neighbors lives are worth $100 how about yours
So increasing the quality/quantity of mental health care would suddenly make the mentally ill realize that they have a problem and seek help? Or would they just go ahead and do what they were gonna do anyway?
No your missing the point pick up your phone call your local mental health facility and you have a loved one in crisis and their refusing to come in what can you do they will tell you nothing until they commit a crime or hurt someone or themselves!
Is having guns meant to be a deterrent for crime? That just seems like neglecting common sense to me. And we have quite a few less mass shootings than America, so my point stands.
How is that neglecting common sense? Nobody is going to attack armed citizens. What neglects common sense is taking away the number one defense of citizens and expecting criminals to follow that law. The fact that you have mass-shootings at all means your laws don't work. And still, overall crime is a much bigger deal than mass-shootings. I don't see why boasting less mass shootings over safer citizens is a good thing. The concept just leaves me dumbfounded.
Besides, here's where my point still stands: Mass-shootings only happen in gun-free zones.
So I've had a think, and I do agree that guns work as a deterrent, and that criminals will always be able to access guns. However, it comes down to a matter of morals to me. The crime rate in Britain IS higher, but its mostly petty crime, like stealing purses and bikes and such. I would much rather not have a weapon, and lose my purse rather than have the guilt of taking a human life for the rest of my life. Also, guns take away the emotional impact of killing; do you think it would be as easy to go into a school and strangle or stab little children? I used to hunt game, and shooting a rabbit is easy, but I could never kill one with a knife or my hands. If guns were genuinely just a deterrent for crime, you shouldn't be able to buy anything bigger than a hand gun. Like I said, its just a personal moral issue, others might rather kill someone that was committing crime, but its not for me.
Personally, I could never kill a rabbit unless I absolutely had to, no matter with what implement. If someone attacks me, I will go at them with whatever I have at my disposal.
Hunting is a different argument altogether, and I've changed my mind since then. I don't even eat meat anymore. However, I'd rather go out and shoot my own organic meat, that I know has had a good life and is humanely killed is better than something from the supermarket.
Not necessarily. In some cases, maybe but if there were background checks, and there was a big majority of good people who carried firearms, it would definitely make it more difficult for bad people to be brave enough to try an kill another because there's the chance that the bad guy may end up being the one on the stretcher.
And pencils make it easier to make spelling mistakes
And cars make it easier for drunk drivers to crash
And ice cream makes it easier to get fat
Wanna ban all of these?
Awesome post banning guns is not the answer Thank you!
Read this comment in Pooh's voice.
I don't know if I like the whole "guns don't kill people people kill people" argument. While I am leaning pro-2nd-amendment myself, this is not really a good argument for it.
It's so easy to kill someone with knife. Where's the control?
Lack of health care makes crazy people more abundant but what are we trying to do to solve this delema. Lets look at the real problem it's not guns its society
Please explain how lack of health care creates crazy people.
If crazy people had the right care put in place to get the help they need maybe some of these senseless acts would stop tell me this if a proposal was put on your local ballot that raised your taxes $100 a year for mental health funding would you vote yes or no . In this country the majority vote NO which is sad my kids lives and my family's lives and even my neighbors lives are worth $100 how about yours
So increasing the quality/quantity of mental health care would suddenly make the mentally ill realize that they have a problem and seek help? Or would they just go ahead and do what they were gonna do anyway?
No your missing the point pick up your phone call your local mental health facility and you have a loved one in crisis and their refusing to come in what can you do they will tell you nothing until they commit a crime or hurt someone or themselves!
BANG
Anybody die?
I can't get around my head around American gun laws.
And considering how much higher your violent crime rates are, we can't get our heads around yours.
Is having guns meant to be a deterrent for crime? That just seems like neglecting common sense to me. And we have quite a few less mass shootings than America, so my point stands.
How is that neglecting common sense? Nobody is going to attack armed citizens. What neglects common sense is taking away the number one defense of citizens and expecting criminals to follow that law. The fact that you have mass-shootings at all means your laws don't work. And still, overall crime is a much bigger deal than mass-shootings. I don't see why boasting less mass shootings over safer citizens is a good thing. The concept just leaves me dumbfounded.
Besides, here's where my point still stands: Mass-shootings only happen in gun-free zones.
So I've had a think, and I do agree that guns work as a deterrent, and that criminals will always be able to access guns. However, it comes down to a matter of morals to me. The crime rate in Britain IS higher, but its mostly petty crime, like stealing purses and bikes and such. I would much rather not have a weapon, and lose my purse rather than have the guilt of taking a human life for the rest of my life. Also, guns take away the emotional impact of killing; do you think it would be as easy to go into a school and strangle or stab little children? I used to hunt game, and shooting a rabbit is easy, but I could never kill one with a knife or my hands. If guns were genuinely just a deterrent for crime, you shouldn't be able to buy anything bigger than a hand gun. Like I said, its just a personal moral issue, others might rather kill someone that was committing crime, but its not for me.
Personally, I could never kill a rabbit unless I absolutely had to, no matter with what implement. If someone attacks me, I will go at them with whatever I have at my disposal.
Hunting is a different argument altogether, and I've changed my mind since then. I don't even eat meat anymore. However, I'd rather go out and shoot my own organic meat, that I know has had a good life and is humanely killed is better than something from the supermarket.
You may have fewer shootings, but you also have a sixth of the population.
Maybe your head is too square, little lady.
Not necessarily. In some cases, maybe but if there were background checks, and there was a big majority of good people who carried firearms, it would definitely make it more difficult for bad people to be brave enough to try an kill another because there's the chance that the bad guy may end up being the one on the stretcher.