More shooting in the US

[pellaz]

.. if they carry a weapon and go to shoot someone then it is time to place them under the mental health act to assess and review their mental welfare ...

-after they shoot somone (s) it is too late boo

-current crop of mass shooters are nice citizens not your typical unstable. difficult to detect them, some gun owners here could be a candidate!

[Corsac]

-current crop of mass shooters are nice citizens not your typical unstable. difficult to detect them, some gun owners here could be a candidate!

If these people were so nice then the choice to pick up a gun and shoot other people would never have happened. There are many more ways of dealing with life then picking up a gun and causing harm to others with it. There's more to people then what you see on the outside.

[Pix]

For the second time in this thread you have threatened to produce arguments and failed to do so, do you actually have any? Watch it indeed! Is that a threat, are you going to shoot me rather than actually produce your arguments?

Do you have a rejoinder to my suggestion of carrying defibrillators? I'm neither a doctor nor a gun enthusiast but I'm certain that hot air is of no medical or defensive use, so what exactly should I be watching? On present form you'll forgive me for not holding my breath waiting for your now twice heralded arguments.

Probably not. I was just in a bit of a mood yesterday. If I were, then I'd bring up the victims of violence, perhaps where the girls were murdered with pitchforks because the guns were lawfully locked away, or how genocide has followed extreme gun control and how an armed Swiss society not only contributed to their remaining free from Axis powers but saved many fleeing Nazi persecution who'd otherwise been killed, and then point out how of course it's not about saving lives for you but controlling them, and if the children, elderly, etc, get horribly murdered, well screw them. I could point out where someone with a gun stopped mass shootings before they became headlines, I could point out the huge difference between the shooting at Appalachian School and Vermont Tech (one had guns and the other didn't) and ask if you prefer the high death toll of gun control to the low death toll of having guns (even then they had to run to their cars to get their guns, too bad they didn't have them on them), and then point out your desire is not about saving lives, is it?

I could also go onto how thousands of suicides are caused by bullying every year and yet no one seems to care about that. Or the children killed in drone strikes. But then that doesn't serve your political agenda, so why would you care?

Of course that's not really an argument, it's histrionics, like yours. 'Course it's closer to a real argument than what you say since I'm actually referencing the real world.

And your comparison with defibrillators is utterly ridiculous. I have no training with such, though I suppose if I did I might actually throw one in my first aid kit, just to have it in case I need it. The comparison isn't one of apples vs. oranges but of apples vs. cupcakes.

[pellaz]

gun owner ship may become a thing of the past as the masses adjust to become less middle class.
so you want to reduce gun crime? improve the economy.

[Buffylo]

Gun violence might become a thing of the past, but gun ownership wont. Americans have an independent streak a mile wide and wont be giving up their guns for the coming of a better economy. Gun sales are business and bidness is booming.