'Mass shooting' reported at small town church in Texas - Sensationalist Headlines

Not to belittle the situation but. Mass shootings are nothing new, the news has just taken it apon themselves to televise them more [url]http://www.nbcnews.com/id/9115379/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/gunman-slays-texas-church-then-kills-self/#.WgTkAIhryUk[/url] 2005, it got a mention in the newspaper and a 20 second message on the evening news. (I lost someone in this shooting) Guns are not the problem. mental health is.

[QUOTE=kulcris;52874540]Not to belittle the situation but. Mass shootings are nothing new, the news has just taken it apon themselves to televise them more [url]http://www.nbcnews.com/id/9115379/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/gunman-slays-texas-church-then-kills-self/#.WgTkAIhryUk[/url] 2005, it got a mention in the newspaper and a 20 second message on the evening news. (I lost someone in this shooting) Guns are not the problem. mental health is.[/QUOTE] Because no other country in the world has problems with mental health. Clearly the widespread access to guns and cultural attatchment to them has nothing to do with the [I]mass shootings[/I] the U.S keeps dealing with. But hey, what do I know, right?

[QUOTE=Ona;52874549]Because no other country in the world has problems with mental health. Clearly the widespread access to guns and cultural attatchment to them has nothing to do with the [I]mass shootings[/I] the U.S keeps dealing with. But hey, what do I know, right?[/QUOTE] You dont know shit, stop pretending you do. Especially in this thread where theres multiple pages of people discussing this already, trying to inform people. Theres no excuse. [editline]b[/editline] You're actively, OPENLY ignoring any nuances of the situation and focusing solely on the tool used, but nothing else, and refuse to even explain how you would go about fixing it based on that. So dont pretend you have any understanding beyond that, because you evidently dont.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874525] You expect me to talk about this shit rationally and sensibly, and yet you don't seem to be getting the whole [I]point[/I] of what I'm saying: [B] This issue is not logical, or rational. [/B] Logic and reason have no place in this discussion. They haven't for a long time. [/QUOTE] Isn't logic and reason the point of having a good discussion? Even if there weren't any in the past, that doesn't mean we can't talk about guns without getting too over-emotional.

:snip:

[QUOTE=Ona;52874549]Because no other country in the world has problems with mental health. Clearly the widespread access to guns and cultural attatchment to them has nothing to do with the [I]mass shootings[/I] the U.S keeps dealing with. But hey, what do I know, right?[/QUOTE] [url]https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/4wb9p3/mass-shootings-in-europe-in-2016[/url] europe [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia[/url] Austrailia, This is everywhere, not just america and not just with guns. mass killing of people is what mentally sick people do best. Remove my right to own a gun and il own a knife. remove my right to own a knife and il own a bat. There are more ways to kill people then can be controlled. but if the mental health of Americans were to be taken into consideration more then it has in the past, maybe we could help control some of the maniacs that are loose in my country. I was born and raised in Texas. have shot guns all my life. do i feel like guns should be taken away. No. that is one of the founding concepts of America. The right to bear arms. and im sorry (not sorry) if you have a problem with that but the continued advancement of technology does not change that fact.

Hey Ona, you gonna address my response to you? It's rational and devoid of emotion. Ignoring human rights for factual safety can reduce crime, would you accept it or say your feelings override crime reduction?

And before you even say it, i'm not mad at you for being anti-gun, i dont care, i'm getting annoyed at you for being blissfully, willingly ignorant to justify shitting on an entire country because you dont want to understand.

[QUOTE=AaronM202;52874555]You dont know shit, stop pretending you do.[/QUOTE] Did I state a factually incorrect statement? Perhaps my subtly was lost on you. Allow me to elaborate: Every country with a high poluation density has mentally ill people living in it. And while most sufferers of mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence rather than purpetrators of it, it is true that some mentally ill people are violent and wish to inflict mass harm. Despite this, however, many countries with high density populations manage to get through the years [I]without[/I] these unhinged individuals causing massive casualties. Even in countries with noticably poor mental health care, this can be a rarity. Not so in the U.S.A, though. In large part due to the fact that it's very easy in many areas of America to gain access to firearms, both legally and illegally. In these places, these deranged individuals have a means through which they can easily and effectively kill and injure dozens, sometimes even hundreds of people at a time. Again, these mass shooting events do not happen nearly as often or as severely in many other countries as they do in the U.S. The [B]main significant difference[/B] is the availability of guns. You can call then "tools" all you want and go on and on about all the responsible, safe and sensible gun owners. That doesn't change what guns are - deadly weapons designed for precision destruction, usually of living targets. Nor does it change that the difference between a madman and a madman with a gun can be counted in bodies. If you have factual evidence to refute my claims, please, feel free. I invite you to practice what you preach. Here's your opportunity for reasonable debate.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874599]Did I state a factually incorrect statement? Perhaps my subtly was lost on you. Allow me to elaborate: Every country with a high poluation density has mentally ill people living in it. And while most sufferers of mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence rather than purpetrators of it, it is true that some mentally ill people are violent and wish to inflict mass harm. Despite this, however, many countries with high density populations manage to get through the years [I]without[/I] these unhinged individuals causing massive casualties. Even in countries with noticably poor mental health care, this can be a rarity. Not so in the U.S.A, though. In large part due to the fact that it's very easy in many areas of America to gain access to firearms, both legally and illegally. In these places, these deranged individuals have a means through which they can easily and effectively kill and injure dozens, sometimes even hundreds of people at a time. Again, these mass shooting events do not happen nearly as often or as severely in many other countries as they do in the U.S. The [B]main significant difference[/B] is the availability of guns. You can call then "tools" all you want and go on and on about all the responsible, safe and sensible gun owners. That doesn't change what guns are - deadly weapons designed for precision destruction, usually of living targets. Nor does it change that the difference between a madman and a madman with a gun can be counted in bodies. If you have factual evidence to refute my claims, please, feel free. I invite you to practice what you preach. Here's your opportunity for reasonable debate.[/QUOTE] How do you fix it then? No, dont tell me "ban them", based on the country known as the United States of America, its constitution, its amendments, its politicians, its citizens, and its existing policies and laws, how do you fix this problem? What practical method of solving gun crime is there in your mind that would [i]actually[/i] work and not just be a deadlock of political shit flinging from both the populace at large and the barely sentient suits in the government? What do you do that doesnt immediately anger anyone who owns a firearm or has an interest in one? What do you do that effectively curbs gun crime in realistic, actually feasible terms? Knowledge of subject. Practicality. Cause-And-Effect.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874599]Did I state a factually incorrect statement? Perhaps my subtly was lost on you. Allow me to elaborate: Every country with a high poluation density has mentally ill people living in it. And while most sufferers of mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence rather than purpetrators of it, it is true that some mentally ill people are violent and wish to inflict mass harm. Despite this, however, many countries with high density populations manage to get through the years [I]without[/I] these unhinged individuals causing massive casualties. Even in countries with noticably poor mental health care, this can be a rarity. Not so in the U.S.A, though. In large part due to the fact that it's very easy in many areas of America to gain access to firearms, both legally and illegally. In these places, these deranged individuals have a means through which they can easily and effectively kill and injure dozens, sometimes even hundreds of people at a time. Again, these mass shooting events do not happen nearly as often or as severely in many other countries as they do in the U.S. The [B]main significant difference[/B] is the availability of guns. You can call then "tools" all you want and go on and on about all the responsible, safe and sensible gun owners. That doesn't change what guns are - deadly weapons designed for precision destruction, usually of living targets. Nor does it change that the difference between a madman and a madman with a gun can be counted in bodies. If you have factual evidence to refute my claims, please, feel free. I invite you to practice what you preach. Here's your opportunity for reasonable debate.[/QUOTE] Guns mean nothing in this equation, Any madman with the internet can build a bomb. Any madman with an id can rent a car. Any madman without a history of mental illness and not felonies can buy a gun. <<< much harder then the other situations i would say. Any madman with a cabin in the woods and a good knife could me a mass murderer. its not about what is used to kill people its about the mental ability to go out and kill people. American media has built this hatred of police. and helped increase political strife in America. I live in a pretty bad neighborhood. if someone breaks into my house i want my trusty gun by my side. if you took everyones guns away you would have MORE violence caused by break-ins guns are here. you cant just remove them. Do you think criminals will give up their guns? doubtful. and if a criminal has a gun i want mine Simple as that

[QUOTE=AaronM202;52874612]How do you fix it then? No, dont tell me "ban them", based on the country known as the United States of America, its constitution, its amendments, its politicians, and its citizens, how do you fix this problem? What practical method of solving gun crime is there in your mind that would [i]actually[/i] work and not just be a deadlock of political shit flinging from both the populace at large and the barely sentient suits in the government? What do you do that doesnt immediately anger anyone who owns a firearm or has an interest in one? What do you do that effectively curbs gun crime in realistic, actually feasible terms?[/QUOTE] If I honestly knew that, do you think I'd be wasting my time on a gaming forum? My problem is that, as far as I can tell, this issue is primarily down to the cultural attitude towards guns and the emotions of everybody involved. And short of mind-wiping the entire continent, I don't see that changing any time soon. I mean, sure, you [I]could[/I] start, I dunno, removing the cultural tendancies to glorify firearms. Perhaps downplay the importance of gun ownership as a "right" which in turn makes any form of gun control seem "restrictive". You guys [I]could[/I] start implementating a social mindset that doesn't equate guns to freedom and vice versa, start [I]really[/I] educating people about how and why guns are dangerous, teaching not only gun safety, but demonstrating [I]why[/I] it's important. Stop displaying firearms in media as some kind of empowerment fantasy that can turn every joe schmo into a terrorist huntin' hero or zombie killin' badass, perhaps? I mean, you [I]won't.[/I] And even if you did, it'd take years, at least, to make any real impact. So instead we sit and shit fling and scare monger and scream words like "freedom!!!" And "rights!!!" Until one of us loses the will to continue. Like I said, if reason or logic had any place here, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874599]Did I state a factually incorrect statement? Perhaps my subtly was lost on you. Allow me to elaborate: Every country with a high poluation density has mentally ill people living in it. And while most sufferers of mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence rather than purpetrators of it, it is true that some mentally ill people are violent and wish to inflict mass harm. Despite this, however, many countries with high density populations manage to get through the years [I]without[/I] these unhinged individuals causing massive casualties. Even in countries with noticably poor mental health care, this can be a rarity. Not so in the U.S.A, though. In large part due to the fact that it's very easy in many areas of America to gain access to firearms, both legally and illegally. In these places, these deranged individuals have a means through which they can easily and effectively kill and injure dozens, sometimes even hundreds of people at a time. Again, these mass shooting events do not happen nearly as often or as severely in many other countries as they do in the U.S. The [B]main significant difference[/B] is the availability of guns. You can call then "tools" all you want and go on and on about all the responsible, safe and sensible gun owners. That doesn't change what guns are - deadly weapons designed for precision destruction, usually of living targets. Nor does it change that the difference between a madman and a madman with a gun can be counted in bodies. If you have factual evidence to refute my claims, please, feel free. I invite you to practice what you preach. Here's your opportunity for reasonable debate.[/QUOTE] Do you think the US is the only country with guns? Do you think the US is the only country where it's [I]easy[/I] to get guns, or where guns are plentiful? Maybe you do, so I'm not going to wait for you to answer that. The actual fact is that the answer to all of those questions is no. Yet the US is the only country with this particular issue. Say it with me: It's not because of the guns. It's not because of the guns. It's not because of the guns. It's not because of the guns. America is a country wracked by long standing and deeply rooted societal issues, among them unfathomable poverty leading to drug abuse & utter lack of education which leads to gang activity, the worst attitude as a society towards mental health in the western world, and hot-burning flames of racial discontent. These things are root causes of violence. None of this was caused by guns. We can fix them. There is no need to demonize the millions of Americans who own guns for defensive, recreational, and historical purposes. It is not necessary. You need to do some research too. Take your feelings out of it. Take your fear of guns out of it. Put your emotions on the backburner and use your brain.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874650]If I honestly knew that, do you think I'd be wasting my time on a gaming forum? My problem is that, as far as I can tell, this issue is primarily down to the cultural attitude towards guns and the emotions of everybody involved. And short of mind-wiping the entire continent, I don't see that changing any time soon.[/QUOTE] Okay, so discuss [i]REALISTIC, PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS.[/i] It'd be more productive than this shit-flinging you're doing. [QUOTE=Ona;52874650]I mean, sure, you [I]could[/I] start, I dunno, removing the cultural tendancies to glorify firearms. Perhaps downplay the importance of gun ownership as a "right" which in turn makes any form of gun control seem "restrictive". You guys [I]could[/I] start implementating a social mindset that doesn't equate guns to freedom and vice versa, start [I]really[/I] educating people about how and why guns are dangerous, teaching not only gun safety, but demonstrating [I]why[/I] it's important. Stop displaying firearms in media as some kind of empowerment fantast that can turn every joe schmo into a terrorist huntin' hero or zombie killin' badass, perhaps?[/QUOTE] How many decades would this take? Centuries? Thats implying the parties could actually work together on this, or somehow force the entertainment industry to control art and make people portray things a certain way. How do you force people to make things in fiction that fit your end goal? That sounds horrific. Very authoritarian. Would it even be effective? Do you know how many firearms are in the US? Theres one for every man, woman, and child in this country, where do you think they're going to go? And, still, that would never happen, yet again you ignore my actual question to keep trying to hammer in "ban guns". I asked for a realistic approach, you failed. [QUOTE=Ona;52874650]I mean, you [I]won't.[/I] And even if you did, it'd take years, at least, to make any real impact. So instead we sit and shit fling and scare monger and scream words like "freedom!!!" And "rights!!!" Until one of us loses the will to continue.[/QUOTE] Right. Scare mongering. Didnt you imply i should be afraid of walking down my street because Rawhide Jim will blow my ass away if i so much as dare to leave my home at the top of the page? [QUOTE=Ona;52874650]Like I said, if reason or logic had any place here, we wouldn't be having this discussion.[/QUOTE] You're the only one saying this, everyone else is trying to discuss it with logic and reason. What is [i]wrong[/i] with you?

In regards to most of the people who just replied to me with essentially the same argument of "the guns arent to blame, its because of [insert reason here]!", I want you to do a very quick mental exercise for me: Take all those factors and apply them to someone who has, or would, commit a mass shooting. Then, in this hypothetical situation, simply remove the gun. To make things easier, and stay on topic, imagine for a moment that the purpetrator of this recent Texas church shooting did not have access to a firearm. Do you think they would be able to do what they did without access to a gun? Yes, all those other factors can act as a catalyst for their motivations. But without the tools to turn those motivations into actions, I would argue that the death toll for these individuals would be much lower. And perhaps wouldn't exist at all. Of course people can resort to other weapons - knives, clubs, cars, explosives, ect... however, short of people building high-yeild IEDs (not as easy as you'd think, especially without access to firearm and aummunition components) the death rates for all these things tend to be much, much less severe than guns.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874695]In regards to most of the people who just replied to me with essentially the same argument of "the guns arent to blame, its because of [insert reason here]!", I want you to do a very quick mental exercise for me: Take all those factors and apply them to someone who has, or would, commit a mass shooting. Then, in this hypothetical situation, simply remove the gun. To make things easier, and stay on topic, imagine for a moment that the purpetrator of this recent Texas church shooting did not have access to a firearm. Do you think they would be able to do what they did without access to a gun? Yes, all those other factors can act as a catalyst for their motivations. But without the tools to turn those motivations into actions, I would argue that the death toll for these individuals would be much lower. And perhaps wouldn't exist at all.[/QUOTE] Why are you incapable of discussing anything seriously like an adult? [editline]9th November 2017[/editline] You just ignored fucking everything everyone just said in one post.

God fuckin Fuck this, i've got better shit to do than argue with you

[QUOTE=Ona;52874650] I mean, sure, you [I]could[/I] start, I dunno, removing the cultural tendancies to glorify firearms. Perhaps downplay the importance of gun ownership as a "right" which in turn makes any form of gun control seem "restrictive". You guys [I]could[/I] start implementating a social mindset that doesn't equate guns to freedom and vice versa, start [I]really[/I] educating people about how and why guns are dangerous, teaching not only gun safety, but demonstrating [I]why[/I] it's important. Stop displaying firearms in media as some kind of empowerment fantasy that can turn every joe schmo into a terrorist huntin' hero or zombie killin' badass, perhaps? [/QUOTE] I have to disagree with this, I own guns to protect my family. I have no fantasy of killing a terrorist or hunting zombies. If it came down to it i would pull the trigger to make sure my family was safe. Guns are entertaining in the media, nothing more. anyone who buys a gun knows they are deadly. and SHOULD be treating them with the respect you would give anything deadly. That being said. When i bought a car i knew it was deadly. When i bought a knife i knew it was deadly. Guns are a means to protect yourself. if you want your grandeur ideas of killing terrorist have them. but the underlining issue here is still mental health. You cant protect people from everything but they can be helped after something happens. The guy who killed my grandfather was nuts. 100% certifiably nuts. He had gas masks, and 27 or so guns in his house. Had he EVER had the cops called on him for a violent act he should be bared from buying guns until a full mental screening is done. Yes that is restrictive but it is needed. Will crazies still gain access to guns? probably. i can go down to walmart and buy a rifle for under $300. or i could buy a handgun on Craigslist for under 200. Removing guns is not an option, HELPING MENTALLY ILL people is. anyways that is all i'm going to input on this as its bringing up bad memories.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874435]I long ago accepted that there is no way to criticise American gun policy on this forum (or really anywhere with a large base of US users) without several people reflexively lashing out at you. [/QUOTE] You know why people are bitching about you? Its not that you're anti-gun, or that you're outside the US, its because you're just so completely stuck up your own ass and refuse to even consider anything anyone says that doesnt agree with what you already believe. Its because you're openly, repeatedly, and flagrantly condescending and snide towards anyone who disagrees with you. Its because you're openly, and happily ADMIT to being ignorant and having a child-like understanding of a serious situation like this with a gleeful REFUSAL to want to understand anything beyond "THING BAD BAN NOW", despite any argument, despite anything anyone says, you dont consider it in the slightest, so much so that you barely acknowledge half of what anyone says, and completely ignore the rest of what they say. You call the ones who disagree with you blood-sucking parasites and imply they're redneck hicks. Its because you dont want to talk, you want to shit on people, you want to hate people, you want to openly mock people, you dont want to discuss a damn thing, you just want to attack attack attack attack attack. And when responded to, you scream and howl the same thing over and over and over and over, even when prompted to try and step outside that boundary. People arent bitching about you because you're anti-gun, they're bitching about you because you're infuriatingly pig-headed with an arrogant sense of superiority while understanding absolutely [i]nothing[/i].

[QUOTE=AaronM202;52874699]Why are you incapable of discussing anything seriously like an adult? [editline]9th November 2017[/editline] You just ignored fucking everything everyone just said in one post.[/QUOTE] I beg your pardon? I'm not name calling, I'm not insulting anybody, I'm not targeting any one poster, even. I simply stated a response to the arguments I saw levelled at me and countered with a hypothetical brain excersize to help underline my point. If I failed to understand your original argument, feel free to correct me. But it seems like the most common thread of debate I'm seeing is that the problem lies not with guns, but other factors such as mental health. Is that correct? You wanted calm, reasonable debate. Here it is. We can go back to screaming profanities if you'd prefer, or you can answer my counterpoint.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874722]I beg your pardon? I'm not name calling, I'm not insulting anybody, I'm not targeting any one poster, even. I simply stated a response to the arguments I saw levelled at me and countered with a hypothetical brain excersize to help underline my point. If I failed to understand your original argument, feel free to correct me. But it seems like the most common thread of debate I'm seeing is that the problem lies not with guns, but other factors such as mental health. Is that correct? You wanted calm, reasonable debate. Here it is. We can go back to screaming profanities if you'd prefer, or you can answer my counterpoint.[/QUOTE] You dont have counterpoints, your "counterpoints" were questions almost completely unrelated to what anyone said.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874599]The [B]main significant difference[/B] is the availability of guns. [/QUOTE] 'I am Ona and I have never heard of Switzerland'

[QUOTE=catbarf;52874725]'I am Ona and I have never heard of Switzerland'[/QUOTE] Or New Zealand, [I]his neighbor[/I]

[QUOTE=AaronM202;52874724]You dont have counterpoints, your "counterpoints" were questions almost completely unrelated to what anyone said.[/QUOTE] My counterargument was to take the circumstances given and to hypothetically remove guns from the equasion, then compare the results in a logical manner. I don't see how that's an invalid argument to make. Again, I'll put it simply: if the Texas church shooter did not have access to firearms, you feel they would have still been capable of doing the amount of damage they did? And if so, why do you think this? Dunno how else to put it, to be frank. Also, I do love all these personal attacks being levelled at me, despite the fact that my beef is with the culture surrounding guns in the U.S and I don't believe I've personally targeted anybody here. All this coming from the same posts insisting I talk "rationally". What fun.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874746]My counterargument was to take the circumstances given and to hypothetically remove guns from the equasion, then compare the results in a logical manner. I don't see how that's an invalid argument to make. Again, I'll put it simply: if the Texas church shooter did not have access to firearms, you feel they would have still been capable of doing the amount of damage they did? And if so, why do you think this? Dunno how else to put it, to be frank.[/QUOTE] Nobody asked you about that. That question is a deflection of everything everyone else said. Whats the point of this hypothetical to begin with? No shit if he didnt have a gun he couldnt shoot people, but the guns are here, and theres one for everyone here and then some, you cant just ban them outright, thats impossible.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874746]Again, I'll put it simply: if the Texas church shooter did not have access to firearms, you feel they would have still been capable of doing the amount of damage they did? And if so, why do you think this? [/QUOTE] Well, he could have blocked the entrances and firebombed the place. It's been done a few times here in the US, and in other countries. Good luck banning gasoline and rags.

[QUOTE=Ona;52874746]My counterargument was to take the circumstances given and to hypothetically remove guns from the equasion, then compare the results in a logical manner. I don't see how that's an invalid argument to make. Again, I'll put it simply: if the Texas church shooter did not have access to firearms, you feel they would have still been capable of doing the amount of damage they did? And if so, why do you think this? Dunno how else to put it, to be frank.[/QUOTE] Lets see, if i was a crazy guy who wanted to kill people but didnt have any guns.... *drives truck away slowly as to not hit anybody with it, while also ignoring the hundreds of farms containing nitrogen fertilizer* [url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/truck-rams-bastille-day-crowd-in-southern-france/2016/07/14/18772ce6-4a0d-11e6-bdb9-701687974517_story.html?utm_term=.ed1002a0e704[/url] [url]http://nypost.com/2017/10/31/8-killed-truck-pedestrians-downtown-nyc-terror-attack/[/url]

[QUOTE=Ona;52874722]I beg your pardon? I'm not name calling, I'm not insulting anybody, I'm not targeting any one poster, even. I simply stated a response to the arguments I saw levelled at me and countered with a hypothetical brain excersize to help underline my point. If I failed to understand your original argument, feel free to correct me. But it seems like the most common thread of debate I'm seeing is that the problem lies not with guns, but other factors such as mental health. Is that correct? You wanted calm, reasonable debate. Here it is. We can go back to screaming profanities if you'd prefer, or you can answer my counterpoint.[/QUOTE] 1. Look up the rape stats for Australia 2. Look up the population count for Australia 3. Look up the rape stats for the USA 4. Look up the population count for the USA After you do that ask yourself why doesnt your country make rape illegal? (it already is), i guess at birth all males in aus should be castrated so they cant rape people, i mean after all its the tool used thats the problem, not the person

Taking guns away isn't that simple buddy. Let's do something simple so you can wrap your head around the scale of such an acquisition shall we? So you live in Australia, with a total populace of 24.13 million people as of 2016. Dang, you got a lot of folks buddy. Side-quiz: how many are in the United States? Well roughly 323.1 million based off of 2016 census records, of which 240.2 million are adults. [url]http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/12/section-3-gun-ownership-trends-and-demographics/#who-owns[/url] [thumb]http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/03/3-12-13-14.png[/thumb] [i]37%[/i] of those adults own a firearm (which btw has not changed much since 2013, in fact it has only gone down by less than 10%) giving us a whopping [i]88.7 million people with guns[/i]. Hell we're not even talking about households that own multiple. So let's get real crystal clear here Ona. Think about if every single person in Australia, man woman and child, had a firearm. I want you to think of every single person you've ever seen walking down the street and multiply that number by a little more than 3, then try to convince every single one of them to give up their weapon because "guns are bad mkai". Good luck.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;52874753]The texas church shooter, by law, should not have had access to firearms. The law was not enforced, because agencies did not communicate. Again, if people had done their god damned job, this wouldn't be a discussion. You want more laws, and yet the ones on the books aren't being followed. And yet you scream and shout "WHY DON'T YOU WANT MORE LAAAAWS".[/QUOTE] This isn't about what "should" have been. This whole event "should" never have even happened, I think we can all at least agree on that. But the fact remains that, despite the current legal situition, the access to firearms is far more widespread in the U.S than it is elsewhere. [QUOTE=Talon 733;52874763]1. Look up the rape stats for Australia 2. Look up the population count for Australia 3. Look up the rape stats for the USA 4. Look up the population count for the USA After you do that ask yourself why doesnt your country make rape illegal? (it already is), i guess at birth all males in aus should be castrated so they cant rape people, i mean after all its the tool used thats the problem, not the person[/QUOTE] Are you suggesting that Americans are born holding guns? Ignoring that weird leap in logic, I will agree that this country has a pretty big rape problem. We also have a lot of mysogeny, a lot of homophobia, xenophobia, and countless other issues. I'm not exactly "patriotic" for this sweaty ball of rock I live on. But we still don't have nearly as many gun crimes, even when scaled for population. Funny how that works out, huh?