Gun Control

How the hell did he get all that stuff? Was he like ex-military or ex-cop that smuggled body armor and the likes?

Kaio wrote:

He DID get all those weapons through legal means.

I'm sure nothing will happen to gun laws though. In fact, they might even get loosened because "this might have been averted if the rest of the theater was carrying guns too and was able to shoot him".

Yes, I've already seen that argument thrown around.

Wow that makes sense, just in case someone in the theater brings in a gun and starts to shoot others people should have the right to get bring guns to fight back wonder how that will turn out
@strider no he was at the top of his class and he was taking honors he was basically a genius, he got everything legally i believe except the tear gas he was also 24

See, that's a good example of where we definitely need to limit weapon control. He legally got explosives that even bomb technicians had trouble disarming? That's just ridiculous.

Superbuu3 wrote:

America really needs to do something about this. I don't know if he had those weapons legally or not, but either way how did a guy who'd do that get this shit. The fact he had body armour is fucked up to. I don't see a reason for those to be available to the public.

To be fair, it would be better if everyone could have body armour instead of guns.

Raz wrote:

Superbuu3 wrote:

America really needs to do something about this. I don't know if he had those weapons legally or not, but either way how did a guy who'd do that get this shit. The fact he had body armour is fucked up to. I don't see a reason for those to be available to the public.

To be fair, it would be better if everyone could have body armour instead of guns.

I agree but they realy dont need either otherwise the incident could happen again how about you limit one gun per household, that way you dont get four guns. And no assault rifles, seriously the reason for owning guns is self defense, why not just use a freaking pistol, this would also lead to alot less serious incidents
@strider i highly doubt those explosives were legal

Major STRYFE wrote:

Raz wrote:

Superbuu3 wrote:

America really needs to do something about this. I don't know if he had those weapons legally or not, but either way how did a guy who'd do that get this shit. The fact he had body armour is fucked up to. I don't see a reason for those to be available to the public.

To be fair, it would be better if everyone could have body armour instead of guns.

I agree but they realy dont need either otherwise the incident could happen again how about you limit one gun per household, that way you dont get four guns. And no assault rifles, seriously the reason for owning guns is self defense, why not just use a freaking pistol, this would also lead to alot less serious incidents
@strider i highly doubt those explosives were legal

I am on the side of limiting guns to farms and shit where they're actually needed, I agree that citizens shouldn't have access to them.

The average guy is not smart enough to booby trap his house.

Yeah and that is why he was the top of his class thats not ordinary

Prince Doebler wrote:

You have gun laws now and they're really crap and basically allow this stuff to happen.

Also tell me how people having guns solved this problem?

Were you and your buddies to busy protecting yourself from Mexico?

Prince Doebler wrote:

That's a pretty ignorant argument. Have a look at the statistics of shootings in countries that restrict firearms, then compare them to America. I'll get you started: http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/261-280/tandi269/view%20paper.aspx

Criminals won't know where to get them if they aren't readily available, your assertion that everyone who would otherwise use a gun to commit some kind of crime would be in with a black market is ludicrous. On top of that, provided they did have the means to find a way to get them, they would be far more expensive, as I have stated earlier in the topic.

Citizens having guns may not be a problem in itself as you can see from Canada and Switzerland, but clearly America is doing something wrong.

With heavier restriction, it also takes away spur of the moment shootings. Not every person who commits a crime with a gun plans to use it. What starts as self-defense intent ends in shooting someone over a heated argument or something like that. There are a lot of hot tempers around.

Seeing those stats above makes me think that America should definitely experiment with much heavier restrictions and then gauge from there how far we should allow it to come back.

Strider Zero wrote:

With heavier restriction, it also takes away spur of the moment shootings. Not every person who commits a crime with a gun plans to use it. What starts as self-defense intent ends in shooting someone over a heated argument or something like that. There are a lot of hot tempers around.

I completely agree with this.

Anyone who doesn't agree with this honestly is completely ignorant. If a woman comes home from work and sees her husband cheating on her, if there's a gun in her sock draw chances are she'll shoot both of them, if she's that pissed off. With a gun not at hand i'd doubt she'd pull off a double homicide +/- suicide.

Superbuu3 wrote:

Strider Zero wrote:

With heavier restriction, it also takes away spur of the moment shootings. Not every person who commits a crime with a gun plans to use it. What starts as self-defense intent ends in shooting someone over a heated argument or something like that. There are a lot of hot tempers around.

I completely agree with this.

Anyone who doesn't agree with this honestly is completely ignorant. If a woman comes home from work and sees her husband cheating on her, if there's a gun in her sock draw chances are she'll shoot both of them, if she's that pissed off. With a gun not at hand i'd doubt she'd pull off a double homicide +/- suicide.

yeah, murders resulting from crimes of passion would drop loads. It's not up for debate.

Doebler your country needs you, will you step up to the call?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2204843/Mexico-prison-escape-5th-population-jail-close-US-border-escaped.html

Zero this needs to be a global announcement!!!!!

Kaio representing! But where are Raz and Neo?

Dat Arizona state law may come in handy after all LOL.

Who says that it wasn't handy to begin with?

Really wish that I could join the hunt for these criminals. $15K per person is quite the reward.

You definitely should Doebler, you can become a vigilante and work your way up to a position of power in the law enforcement community, then impose martial law and run things however you like.

Nah. I'd actually be forcing the government out of the people's lives.

Even if we can't protect our borders...



You can be damn sure we'll avenge them.

Strider Zero wrote:

Even if we can't protect our borders...



You can be damn sure we'll avenge them.

Sig'd.

EDIT: Not if the image doesn't shrink in signatures.

Wait are you guys telling me i can go to america and get paid by the government to legally shoot criminals?

Superbuu3 wrote:

Wait are you guys telling me i can go to america and get paid by the government to legally shoot criminals?

Sounds like my idea of a good holiday. Bountyhunting is a bit harder than it used to be.