I'm against it personally, but many other countries have similar laws and don't suffer from the same problems, so it's not exclusively down to that. Being able to buy a ton of guns and ammo at Walmart can't help, though.
A few more probably but not many more. The ability to buy a gun doesn't massively increase the likelihood of some sick **** killing a bunch of people. He'll either just get one illegally or, in this country, use a knife. In Switzerland almost anyone can own a gun and in many parts you can carry it legally. Israel has plenty of civilian-owned guns as does Sweden. I think other parts of US society contribute to these things more than the access to guns.
I really can’t see how you can say that the ability to freely buy a gun didn’t contribute to this slaughter. But that’s your opinion so fine
The American agenda requires that it's society is comfortable with gun violence so they can carry on starting wars for generations to come with other nations...what better way than to sell them at your local grocers.
No problem with someone owning a gun to be used on their own land. But what's the need for semi automatic weapons?? If people could only own say rifles, this tragedy in theory couldn't happen to this extent. If someone can legally buy 6000 odd bulletts, something is seriously wrong.
A bit off topic, but there's this weapons store in Calais, France (I think it was Calais, if not then somewhere close) that sold guns and ammunition to anyone, without the need of any licence or registration. Anyone from the UK could buy one and take his chances of smuggling it back into the UK (via ferry or Eurotunnel).
There's people here in the States arguing if it were easier to get guns this wouldn't have happened because someone could defended themselves in the movie theater. Some people even think this whole thing is a Obama party conspiracy trying to turn Americans against owning and purchasing guns.
The NRA allegedly have a bunch of people target popular forums with this kind of crap after anything like this happens. Don't know if it's more worrying to think that that's true or false, to be honest. As the nutter was wearing body armour from head to toe, I think that more firearms would've resulted in even more deaths, if anything. Very little chance of taking out the guy wearing all black in a cinema, let alone one where people are running about screaming while there's gas being released into the air. Good chance of shooting random people by accident though, especially if several of them pull guns.
The one thing I will say is that think of an outlandish scenario like the ones that are so often portrayed in movies and even series like The Walking Dead and Falling Skies, where some kind of post apocalyptic state exists whether it be due to aliens, zombies, foreign invasion etc... I think the yanks stand a much better chance than we do to put up a fight, and ultimately that's what it comes down to. The second amendment states: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. This was conceived to allow: "In no particular order, early American settlers viewed the right to arms and/or the right to bear arms and/or state militias as important for one or more of these purposes: deterring tyrannical government; repelling invasion; suppressing insurrection; facilitating a natural right of self-defense; participating in law enforcement; enabling the people to organize a militia system. " Just look at Afghanistan and Iraq... As much as we might not agree with it, in particular the callousness and cold blooded murder and torture on occasion, they put up pockets of resistance to be a thorn in the side of the invading forces and deal psychological blows rather than be outfought and outgunned in large battles. I imagine this would be the same scenario if the tables were turned... American civilians would be able to arm themselves to the teeth to a degree that no other country on this planet probably could... just think about that.
An interesting counter argument but...I still think there needs to be a stricter limit on the type of weapons they can own and say the number of bullets. You can protect yourself with 6 let alone 6000 bullets!!
I watched Piers Morgan on CCN at work the other night and it had the author of 'More guns, less crime' on. He just sounded completely deluded and couldn't hold up an argument...although it was hard to take him seriously as he sounded like Kermit the frog.
That's where I stand on it too, but people use the whole Switzerland and their gun per capita as an argument for more guns. I think the reason the crime rate in Switzerland is so low is the fact they're not American.
Unfortunately comparisons will always be made where a certain way of life works in another country. The similarity (as this is a football forum) would be fantastic players/managers being expected to perform the same as they did in a particular country/team but turning out to be a ****ing nightmare here. (Possibly a piss poor comparison, but it’s all I could think of in this heat)
