The NRA should be declared a terrorist organization

Thank you for that.
I hadn't heard of godwins law.

 

^ I second that

 

Whenever a tragedy such as Auroura happens, people usually fall into two groups; the responsible gun owners who become afraid of losing their guns, and those who believe the problem can be solved be taking away, or further restricting access to guns. Then there are those that try to bring up the bigger, and more important issue, which is "what went wrong enough to cause a person to do this?" Which usually gets drowned out by the opposing sides sniping at each other and defending their positions.

The media feeds off of this, and in turn feeds the fire more, and the most ill informed seem to always get the loudest megaphones. In all of this, nobody asks why a young man would identify with a comic book villain, and kill as many random people as he can? If you want to understand the problem, start there.

The NRA is, among other things, a lobbying organization. I think they do a lot of good things for shooting sports( training, competitions, promotion) but I'm not a member because I don't agree with their political stance, that's my right. But they clearly do not put weapons of mass destruction( that lovely inciting Bush era phrase) into the hands of people. Nobody does. There is simply a cultural demand. If nobody wanted those guns, nobody would buy them, and the manufacturers would be out of business, just as if nobody wanted pot, the growers and dealers would be out of business.

Popular media sells a world destruction fantasy, a Red Dawn dream, day in and day out, and we are inundated with media influence from day one. We have become more compartmentalized, and less social. How can tbese circumstances not grow a sick mind?

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

Bull shit! I'll say it again, I'm a gun owner. I own five guns, and I'm not afraid of losing them. But I am afraid of these nut jobs that can get their hands on guns of mass killing. There is absolutely no reason for ANYONE to have a gun with a hundred round clip of bullets, other than to do what that scumbag did in the movie theater. And anyone that tries to defend ownership of those guns is just as responsible for those killings as the asshole that did it.

 

^ what about a zombie apocalypse? Or an apocalypse of any kind?

As an American I believe there should be a legal path to take if I want to prepare for a zombie invasion. I would be okay with tightening regulations, but if I want an assault rifle I should be able to get one legally. Because no matter what the laws are the criminals are still going to have them. If shit hits the fan I don't want them to be the only ones with them.

 

:smilielol5:

Ever hear of people who like to collect things?
How about because I want one?

Hey doofus, you seem to not grasp the concept of a free society such as we strive for in America.
In order for YOU to enjoy the freedom to own the guns that you do, you have to accept the risk of the occasional nut job. Same for freedom of speech. If you want to voice your opinions and thoughts then you also have to accept hearing those who may not agree with you, and tolerating the real hardcore political or religious whackos.


HONESTLY!
Why is that such a fucking hard concept to wrap your friggin' heads around.
Fuck, I don't like shit like this killing any more than the rest of you, but I also fully understand that if I want measures to be taken to further lessen the CHANCE that some tragedy like this will happen again, I must be willing to sacrifice some of MY freedoms as well.

In my opinion incidences such as this are actually so few and far between compared to the population numbers and all that it just simply does not warrant my giving up more personal freedoms to guard against "maybe".

Same fucking mentality that has people being strip searched at the airports.
The terrorist act wasn't the killing this idiot committed, but the fucking media frenzy that followed that promotes fear and irrational, knee-jerk reactions and policies.

"Don't worry citizen, you will barely be allowed to set foot out of your door, but it is all so we can keep you safe and secure.":devil:

 

I like guns and I don't believe in gun control I think we would all be safer if we all had one and knew how to use it. NRA shouldn't be seen as terrorist but a lot of their supporters should be

 

A zombie apocalypse, BWHA HA HA HA HA! You and that 8ball moron have both done too many doses. They just arrested another idiot in Maryland that claimed to be the Joker. He had a hole collection of those assault weapons, and an apartment full of bullets. They arrested him because he said he was going to blow up a bunch of people he didn't like. Your zombies are idiots like him. But you don't need an assault riffle to get rid of them, just one well aimed bullet from a .45. Aim for the gonads. When the apocalypse comes there is no amount of guns that's gonna save you. You might just prolong your suffering a few days.

 

I'm the moron?

The apartment was full of bullets? How did they open the door?
An apartment full of bullets is pretty useless and harmless. After all a bullet is only lead with a thin copper jacket. For them to be any fun at all you have to seat them into a brass case with a load of powder and primer cap to create what is known as a cartridge or "round" to use the common vernacular.

:rofl:

that statement pretty much shows you really don't know jack-shit about guns and most likely your gun knowledge comes from watching John Woo movies.

 

And there is absolutely no "reason", according to that logic, to allow people to have cars that can exceed the speed limit. Or to have more than one car. There is no "reason" to allow access to pornography. Or fast food. No-one needs superspeed internet connections.

And so on.

As I said earlier, Australia banned lawful possession of the type of firearms you seem concerned about in 1996. But the last 5 years have seen an explosion in shootings, with - guess what?- illegally owned guns. And unless I miss my guess, ownership of incendiaries and explosives in Colorado is unlawful. But Holmes is still alleged to have had them.


Until governments address the cause of this type of tragedy - which is mental health and societal disenfranchisement- attacking the symptom- which is the tragedy itself- is of little help. Of even less help is attacking the means by which evil was done. And I say this conscious of the need for answers, and of the pain and anguish the survivors and the families of the fallen are suffering. But trying to soothe that pain by a firearms ban is as sensible as banning alcohol because a drunk driver crashes a truck into a hospital.

 

Thanks, I believe you proved at least one of my points very well. What interests me about your reply is the phrasing you used; "I am afraid", "guns of mass killing", "just as responsible".

I understand how easy it is to become afraid when faced with such an act, and I also understand that fear throws logic and reason out the window. Fear is often necessary, and helpful, but not when making decisions after the fact.

If you can look rationally at the history of these kinds of acts, it may become clear that more restrictions and laws never help, and don't really save anyone. They just offer a placebo effect to those who are afraid.

 

I was using the word "afraid" because you used it first. You are just using bull shit semantics. If you REALLY look at the stats, states with gun control laws have a lot smaller murder rate using guns. The "red" states (republican) that have no gun control have much higher murder rates. Here's the proof that you are either lying or just full of shit.
USA Gun Violence Statistics


USA Gun Violence Statistics Document



GUN VIOLENCE in the UNITED STATES
Some Indicative Data:
Gun Ownership

• The US has an estimated 283 million guns in civilian hands
• Each year about 4.5 million firearms, including approximately 2 million handguns, are sold in the United States
• An estimated 2 million second hand firearms are sold each year
• The percentage of American households with a gun has been steadily declining (high of 54% in 1977 to 33% in 2009)
• The average number of guns per owner has increased from 4.1 in 1994 to 6.9 in 2004.

Sources: Injury Prevention (2007); ATF (2000); National Opinion Research Center (2008); Pew Research Center (2009)
Gun Deaths:
More than 30,000 people are killed by firearms each year in this country
More than 30 people are shot and murdered each day
1/2 of them are between the ages of 18 and 35
1/3 of them are under the age of 20
Homicide is the second leading cause of death among 15-24 year-olds
And the primary cause of death among African Americans of that age group
Gun Homicides (average annually):
Less than 50: Japan
Less than 150: Germany, Italy, France, etc.
Less than 200: Canada
More than 10,000: USA
Source: IANSA (International Action Network on Small Arms of the United Nations)

Injuries and Deaths from Guns
Everytime a gun injures or kills in self-defense, one is used:

• 11 times for a completed or attempted suicide
• 7 times in a criminal assault or homicide
• 4 times in an unintentional shooting death or injury

Source: Journal of Trauma, injury, Infection and Critical Care (1998)
Per Capita Annual Gun Death Rate (per 100,000 population):
Highest: Louisiana (19.04, 45.6% households contain guns)
#25: Pennsylvania (10.90)
Lowest: CT, NY, New Jersey (4.99), RI, MA, Hawaii (2.20)
National: (10.32)
Source: Centers for Disease Control
Costs of Gun Violence

• Gun violence impacts society in many ways: medical costs, costs of the criminal justice system, security precautions such as metal detectors, and reductions in the quality of life because of fear of gun violence.
• U.S. lifetime medical costs for gunshot injuries total an estimated $2.3 billion
• U.S. taxpayers pay for almost half ($1.1 billion or 49%) of lifetime medical costs for gunshot injuries

Guns Recovered from Crime

• Only 1% of gun dealer account for almost 60% of crime guns recovered by police and later traced
• In one year, at least 30,000 guns were “lost” out of gun dealers inventories
• Guns with a short “time to crime” are disproportionately represented among crime guns. Guns manufactured and sold 3 years or less, prior to recopvery by police in crime make up 34 % of recovered and traced crime guns, but only 14% of the US gun stock.
• Guns sold as paert of a multiple sale at a gun dealer were up to 64% more likely to be used in a crime than guns not part of such sales.
• “No background check” sales account for an estimated 40% of gun sales in the U.S.

Sources: ATF (2000); Brady Center; National Institute of Justice (1993, 2007); Police Foundation (1997)
Distance From Legal Point of Purchase to Crime Recovery:

Within 10 miles
More than 100 miles
Philadelphia
61.2%
18.1%
Pittsburgh
62.9%
12.6%
Newark
9.1%
81.5%
New York City
4.4%
83%
Source: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
Percent of Recovered Crime Guns First Legally Purchased In-State:
Pennsylvania: 78%
New Jersey: 27% (18% from PA)
New York: 28%
Source: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
Some Interesting Poll Data
77% of NRA members favor a waiting period for purchase of a handgun
82% of American support limiting the sales of military-style assault weapons
94% of police chiefs favor requiring a background check for all handgun sales.
Support for background checks on private gun sales, including gun shows:

• 87% of American
• 83% of gun owners
• 69% of NRA gun-owners

Support for limiting handgun sales to one per person per month:

• 65% of Americans
• 59% of gun owners

Support for registration of handguns

• 79% of Americans
• 69% of police chiefs
• 61% of gun owners
• 59% of NRA members

http://www.heedinggodscall.org/content/pfctoolkit-10

 

"I was using the word "afraid" because you used it first. You are just using bull shit semantics. If you REALLY look at the stats, states with gun control laws have a lot smaller murder rate using guns. The "red" states (republican) that have no gun control have much higher murder rates. Here's the proof that you are either lying or just full of shit."

Firstly, I have to say guilty as charged, semantics, being the study of the meaning of words, is what I'm using to a certain extent, since I only have the words you use to go by.

Thank you for posting that data, however, I read it very carefully and couldn't find where it showed any statistics that demonstrate your assertion that gun control works, and that there is more gun violence in what you referred to as "the red states"(which I took to mean Republican dominated). But I was curious, so I took the liberty of finding that data myself. Here are links to the information I used:

This one is pretty straight forward, measuring gun violence by the number of attack per 100,000 people

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state

I then compared that to what states have the strictest gun laws

http://www.bradycampaign.org/stategunlaws/


For the most part, the numbers add up, the states with stricter gun laws have less, if only slightly, gun violence.

Take my home state, NY, for example. One of the few states to actually be colored green by the Brady Camp, shows only ten to twenty attacks per 100k. However, NJ, which actually got a better score than NY with the Brady Camp, actually fared worse when it came to actual gun violence.

Vermont, on the other hand, has much poorer gun control laws, getting a dismal 6 points out of a hundred, but beat NY and NJ, with only 1-10 attacks per 100k.

California leads the pack in gun control strictness, so naturally one would asssume it would have the most promising numbers for gun violence, but as you may have already guessed, CA did worse than NY.

Considering that, would you be willing to agree that there may be other factors involved, such as education, income, or other cultural factors?


Also, I wanted to see what the numbers were for mass murderers, since that was closer to the original topic, so I found this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers#Americas

Just considering rampage killings in the U.S., the earliest attack is 1958. From then to Aurora, the number of people killed in the attacks is close to a dozen. This number remained steady regardless of the types of weapons used. Granted, many more were injured in Aurora, but over all the numbers remain nearly the same, Improved technology did not raise the death rate significantly, and increased regulation did not lower them.

 

What were they planning to blow up the UN building.