Captain Awesome wrote: If somebody wants to kill 20 children, they can do in a number of ways - they can do it with a handgun, they can do it with a shotgun, they can set the school on fire, they can swing machete, they can poison the water, they can put an explosive charge, and many other ways. You can't blame the tool they're using for the end result because taking away his gun wouldn't stop him from doing it - in fact it could have made it worse. While the thought of everybody around me carrying a gun is somewhat scary (I own a number of them myself but don't carry them around and feel no need to), you can't blame guns for this heinous crime, you have to look at the sick person who did it. You want to ban guns? Sure, but you won't get rid of mass murdering, you'll just shift the way they happen.
I didn't say guns should be banned. If society wants their children put at risk by making it relatively easy to acquire guns, then so be it. The easier guns are to acquire the more rampage killings there are.
Rampage killers don't poison water or start fires. They want to do the killing themselves. I'm fairly certain that if he had a knife or machete he would have been stopped long before he killed 30 people.
The blame lies with him with help from the guns. If he had a knife I guarantee you he would not have killed 30 people. How easy was it for him to use the guns? Poisoning the water or blowing up the school is far more difficult and will stop some people form committing the act. Some still will, you're correct, but a lot won't .
tgm929 wrote: If society wants their children put at risk by making it relatively easy to acquire guns, then so be it. The easier guns are to acquire the more rampage killings there are.
You're incorrect. Rampage killings are not the product of easy access to guns. Here in Canada you can acquire guns somewhat easy. How many mass murders do we see? Many countries' citizens have much easier access to firearms, yet no pattern of mass murder. If you think easy access to guns is what makes these murders possible, look at other countries says otherwise.
Rampage killers don't poison water or start fires. They want to do the killing themselves.
I was simply saying there are many ways to kill people. If you want to ban guns in hopes of stopping these murders, you won't succeed. If you were to ask me (and I'm just some *bleep* online, not a professor), I'd say you have to go after the root cause of this mass murders, not the tools.
Mama wrote: Take the money everyone wants to add to gun control and put it where it belongs. Mental health!! Guns dont kill, sick people do.
Captain Awesome wrote: You can't blame the tool they're using for the end result because taking away his gun wouldn't stop him from doing it - in fact it could have made it worse. While the thought of everybody around me carrying a gun is somewhat scary (I own a number of them myself but don't carry them around and feel no need to), you can't blame guns for this heinous crime, you have to look at the sick person who did it. You want to ban guns? Sure, but you won't get rid of mass murdering, you'll just shift the way they happen.
Glacier wrote: The problem with the quick emotional responses to shootings (like we saw in Quebec many years ago) is that the only people who suffer are the legal law abiding gun owners. Criminals can still easily obtain guns either with gun control.
It's just utterly heartbreaking. I feel gutted watching this unfold. I'll be holding my kids extra close tonight.
This is so sad. Guns or no gun policy, these things also happen in Canada, one of the latest was Dawson college in Montreal, fall 2007, then I think École Polytechnique back in 1989... there was also the Quebec City parliament shooting a couple years ago, and back in September, the attempted murder against Quebec PM Pauline Marois.
I'm guessing this guy wasn't "a criminal" until he started shooting.
I'm guessing he was mentally ill long before he started thinking about shooting.
A poster said that gun control doesn't take guns away from criminals.
The majority of murders in Canada happen when a husband decides to stop being a law abiding citizen and grabs his (legal) long gun and shoots his wife for whatever reason.
The fact he might be mentally ill has little do do with the fact that guns are accessible to any law abiding citizen.
Every murderer in Canada was a "peaceful duck hunter" (to borrow a big C talking point) until they became murderers in a blink of a eye.
SurplusElect wrote: A poster said that gun control doesn't take guns away from criminals.
Peaceful duck hunters who are mentally stable are not the kind of people who go off the deep end and become criminals in a blink of an eye. Mental illness is the issue here.
grammafreddy wrote: Peaceful duck hunters who are mentally stable are not the kind of people who go off the deep end and become criminals in a blink of an eye. Mental illness is the issue here.
Incorrect. You are saying only mentally unstable people are capable of murder.
How many murderers in Canada are currently serving jail time because they were criminally responsible for murder and therefore not mentally ill? Better question - how many get off because of mental illness?
You're a peaceful duck hunter until you find out your wife was sleeping with your brother. Then it's fight or flight.
If is turns out to be fight and you have a gun in the closet at the ready...then you see why the majority of murders in Canada happen exactly like I just described.
Then factor in humans natural resistance to kill. It is VERY difficult to stab or choke someone out. Shooting someone is exponentially easier - as shown by countless studies by various military organizations across the globe.
SurplusElect wrote: If is turns out to be fight and you have a gun in the closet at the ready...then you see why the majority of murders in Canada happen exactly like I just described.
No, it doesn't. Firearms are only responsible for 27% of homicides in Canada.
SurplusElect wrote: Incorrect. You are saying only mentally unstable people are capable of murder.
If is turns out to be fight and you have a gun in the closet...then you see why the majority of murders in Canada happen exactly like I just described.
Actually, that's NOT what I am saying - but you are interpreting it that way because that's how you WANT to interpret it.
Are you saying every person who has a gun would shoot the person who gets caught with their spouse?
See how ridiculous you sound?
grammafreddy wrote: Are you saying every person who has a gun would shoot the person who gets caught with their spouse?
I am saying that "normal law abiding citizens" are just that until something happens that makes them become criminals.
And when there is a gun at the ready, the percentages are much higher that someone is going to die.