jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (11 posts)

Potential Theater Massacre Avoided

  1. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 5 years ago

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/man-att … ne-bullet/

    Imagine if this had been another theater... a gun free zone without any of those icky guns. I'm sorry, but very often adding more guns to the mix is exactly the solution.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image59
      Mark Knowlesposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Logic dictates that taking the guns out of the situation in the first place is the solution. Well done for pointing out yet another senseless gun massacre was going to happen. I agree - less guns is the answer. If that gunman had not been able to get a gun, this entire thing could have been avoided. Prevention is better than cure any day of the week - well done for bringing this up.

      Does this happen a lot? I think you said something about this happening millions of times a year - are there really that many gun massacres that would happen without armed vigilantes everywhere? Because it seems like you have a gun control issue. This rarely happens outside the US in civilized countries where guns are controlled properly.

      1. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this


        Gun control can't prevent people from getting guns in the US. Our base violent crime rates are higher. Our black market is much larger and more active. You just can't compare countries... different frameworks.

        More guns in the US have correlated to less crime. Less guns have correlated to more crime. The logic is clear to anyone who wants to see it.

        1. Uninvited Writer profile image85
          Uninvited Writerposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          So basically, you should give up, not change anything and not try to understand why this is happening just make sure every single person has a gun and assume everyone you meet wants to kill you.

          And it does effect other countries, the illegal guns that find their way into Canada come from the US. And the NRA has actually funded organizations in this country who are against gun control. Yes, criminals will get them, but we haven't had a mass shooting in Canada in a long time.

          Can't you keep the pro gun threads to a minimum? I think 6 is a bit much.

          1. profile image0
            JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I didn't say we should give up. I've said that gun control isn't the answer. It hasn't worked when we have tried it. Gun rights laws have correlated to less crime, not more. Gun control laws have correlated to more crime, not less.

            I've only started 2 gun threads, this was a specific incident, there's nothing wrong with it having its own thread.

        2. Mark Knowles profile image59
          Mark Knowlesposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Gun sales are at an all time high, yet the crime rate has not dropped noticeably, so I don't see how you come to this conclusion.

          The only thing in recent years that seems to have had a noticeable negative effect on crime rates is legalized abortion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Impact … n_on_Crime

          How about that huh?

          I think your ignorance on this matter stems from the fact that gun massacres are not the same as other crimes. If this nutcase who killed a bunch of kids recently had not been easily able to obtain a gun - it would not have happened. This is not the same as hard core criminals using guns to shoot each other.

          If you are going to use "logic," lol lol I suggest you offer some proof, because in every thread I see you in people seem to be noticing that you are some what economical with the truth and that your facts are almost always false. You think no one has noticed?

          Gun control cannot prevent hardened criminals from getting guns - I agree. Are most gun massacres committed by hardened criminals?

          1. profile image0
            JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Gun sales are at an all time high, but the number of people owning them, and the number of people carrying, aren't going up very much. When right-to-carry laws passed in a state, there were tremendous amounts of permit applications for the first 5 or so years. After that, most of the people who were interested in it already had it.

            I came to that conclusion by looking at homicide rates in states over time. When gun laws changed, homicide rates changed as well. For instance, Texas averaged 50% more homicides than the national average before it allowed citizens to carry. After it allowed them to, it averaged 6% more homicides than the national average. Time after time, you see the same thing. Gun rights laws correspond to lower homicide rates.

            It makes sense too. Mass murderers, and criminals in general, tend to target unarmed people. They don't want to get shot. They like the fact that they can go to a school or a theater, and know that they are probably not going to encounter anyone with a gun.

            It's quite a leap to call me ignorant on the matter, as I have, at one point or another, read just about every study on the matter. I have done my own statistical analysis, and I have presented sound logical arguments. If you want to use the responses of others on Hubpages as a measure, lol, go ahead. HP is a place where people will refuse honest discussion, they will believe a news article that says 'Report X says Y', over the actual report... it's not exactly the epitome of sound logical arguments. I'm well-versed in the rules of logic, so it doesn't matter if someone uses an emotional argument to say I'm wrong.

            I've offered plenty of proof over time, but what would you like to see? How about the plots of homicide over time, pre and post gun-law change? Would you like to discuss why mass murders nearly always occur in gun-free zones, if not for the fact that these criminals don't want to meet armed opponents?

            As far as easily obtaining a gun, anybody with an internet connection can buy one. It's easy enough.

            It can't prevent anyone from getting guns. The black market is now conveniently the eBlackMarket.com(not a real site, I'm not going to give out instructions for accessing an illegal market). If someone doesn't want to bother with stealing one, they can just buy one.

  2. ftclick profile image56
    ftclickposted 5 years ago

    Prevention is always the best cure.  Statistics don't lie.

    A lot of kids, teens, and college youth would not be able to accomplish their gun rampage on innocent people. Taking guns out does NOT always cause them to use other mass bloody weapons. Black market or not, if you take away the supply NOT every loon will find it.

    It seems the terrorist infiltrator / spy thing is working.
    It just means more big brother.
    More guns equals less crime ONLY in America?  in a developed country?
    More guns has caused America to have the most prisons, the most incarcerated in the developed world.

    1. profile image0
      JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Yeah, if we banned guns, there would be some people who wouldn't get their hands on them, that could now. But, there would be far more people who would take advantage of an unarmed populace, leading to far more deaths.

      See, while these mass-homicides are horrible, they are just a drop in the bucket. Is it worth risking tens of thousands of lives in order to try and save a couple hundred?

      Think about it. Mass-murders take place in gun-free zones. More gun-control just creates more gun-free zones. A gun ban makes the entire US a gun-free zone.

      Gun-free zones are not your friend. They simply tell people who want to harm others 'Hey, nobody here can fight back'.

  3. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

    Can you please post the exact statistics that prove your point?

    1. profile image0
      JaxsonRaineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      What statistics? Which point?