guns, fags, and god

[Wesley]

This here. This almost has a good message, then smurf it up right at the end. You know why those terrorists killed those people? Because their god is not the same as your god. You know why that guy shot up all those people in that club? Because his god said homosexuality is wrong.

You know what? I say god/gods are wrong! smurf all that noise! Differences in a belief in some imaginary all powerful smurf have divided Humanity since the dawn of history, and probably before that!

Anton LaVey said that if he could point his gun at the sky and shoot God, he would do it in an instant.

Back to this cute little image... in a godless society, this tragedy would not have happened! smurf smurf smurf! Dammit, this really got me pretty good and pissed off. If Humans are held accountable for their own actions, if we can all just love each other, do our own thing without harming anyone else, we need no febreeze reward of an imaginary afterlife to keep us going. Let's do good while we are here for us, for now, for each other.

smurf!

[Beany]

In a Godless society this may well have happened. Many of the reports are linking the attack to the gunman's homophobic views, rather than religion. And yes, sometimes those go hand in hand. Sometimes they don't. Some people cause devastation because they believe that it is their religious duty. Some people attack Muslims, regardless of their own religious beliefs or lack of, because they blame all Muslims for terrorism.

Back to the image, one has to learn from their mistakes. Yes, the Nazis used gas chambers. But they wouldn't be able to do that in Europe nowadays. Yes, the 9/11 hijackers may have used Stanley knives. But governments in many countries responded by vastly tightening security. Is it not time that people give up their right to own a gun in the hope that it might make it more difficult for people to access them for bad?

[bella]

What this text intended to say was probably that we need basic human values like acceptance, respect, altruism and invulnerability of life. Many people find this in religion and the absence of these values is what they call godless.
It's too easy to just blame weapons and religions, maniacs and psychopaths will always find a way.
Either everybody needs to be armed or the availability of weapons must be restricted.

[Wesley]

I have calmed down and had a good night's sleep.

I am not as angry about it as I was.

I still say that the "problem" is not a godless society.

I'm glad this has turned from a rant into a debate.

[LaLou]

The problem is that some people insist on forcing their believes onto others. I don't care what your religion is. I don't care if you believe the same thing that I do. I will tell you about my believes if you ask me to, but I don't expect you to start believing the same just because I tell you to. I just expect you to show me the same respect. Don't force your believes onto me. My soul is NOT your responsibility, it's mine. (P.S. The "you" and "your" relate to the average religious bigot, not to someone here.)

A godless society isn't the problem. A society without respect for others is. Respect for another believe (or none), respect for another life. And thinking about it, trying to force religion onto someone is very much disrespectful.

[nich]

The first part is febreeze. The killer was American born and was able to walk into a gun store and buy weapons. Guns don't protect people. They kill them

There's a reason gun crime is extremly low in Japan. I really wish Americans would just accept this.

[Moe]

Don't know if you guys can watch this, but it is a facebook video a friend of mine shared
https://www.facebook.com/dan.houston.18 ... 098076742/

Story, two guys go into an internet cafe with guns to rob it, an older man with a gun pulls his out and chases them off.

Did the two guys legally acquire the guns? Maybe, I don't know the story behind it.
Regardless, even if illegally, they could have acquired those guns.
If the older man who had a gun wasn't allowed to carry, it would have ended much differently

[bella]

They shouldn't have been able to get those guns, whether illegally acquired or not. People just want to go out and can't feel safe anymore. To get back this feeling of safety they arm themselves, expecting to make use of their weapons.
There could have been hostages, ricochets with a much worse outcome.
There have been 31 shootings at schools since Littleton and nothing has changed with regards to gun laws.
Of course you can say people are to blame, not the weapons themselves but how else could a psychopath be stopped from abusing the right to bear arms?

[nich]

Two simple ways to stop gun crime. Don't let people carry guns (Especially if he was previously under investigation as a terrorist for smurf sake) and create a mandatory mental health program for kids.

If people didn't have the right to bare arms this whole situation wouldn't have happened. And having guns didn't protect these people either. That is undeniable.

[Moe]

We could just ban white males, (In response to Trump wanting to ban Muslims for the sake of ending terrorism)
Statistically, looking back at mass shootings in U.S., 64% of them were committed by white people (90% of that 100% being males) now, 64% may not seem like a large majority, but keep in mind that the other 36% is every other race (Asian, Black, Latino, Native American, et cetera)

[Wesley]

And the logic behind making guns illegal is a bit flawed. The guns already exist, so a criminal -- who already acknowledges that he/she is breaking the law -- will not mind breaking another law to get a gun.

What the original image up there is trying to convey is that people kill people. You take away their guns, they'll use a bomb. Take away their bomb, they'll use a knife. Take away their knife, they'll use a pointed stick.

[Beany]

A pointed stick it may be, but a pointed stick will not kill so many people so quickly. People would have stood more of a chance. Yes, people can get hold of guns illegally, but all you have to do is read the news to find stories of children who've accidentally shot friends, siblings, parents, etc. or people who've impulsively shot someone.

I know that growing up in a gun-free environment, I am likely to have a bias. I also know that people may feel safer if they have a gun for protection. But just as women are told that it's not safe to walk alone at night, perhaps people should be told that it's not safe for so many people to own guns. Neither of these solve the problem. But they reduce the chances of it happening.

I accept that that is a terrible example and the women walking alone thing is not as straightforward as that, but that is not for this topic.

[Moe]

[quote="Cho"]I know that growing up in a gun-free environment, I am likely to have a bias./quote]
I find myself in a similar yet very different situation.

Both my parents were in the army, both my siblings were in the military, but growing up, guns just weren't a thing.
My father didn't own a gun, he had no intentions of owning a gun, and would probably support a certain extent of extensible gun laws.
Hell, while we were in Colorado to get my middle brother, him and my dad had an argument about gun laws, with my dad in support of them.

However, having grown up in a gun free environment, the three of us have varying interests in guns. My eldest brother has a few, my middle brother doesn't yet, but plans to(Although he still doesn't even have his drivers license yet), and at some point I probably will too.

That being said, with my Father being on one side of the argument, and my brothers being on the opposite, I fall somewhere in the middle.

[Beany]

Out of interest, why do you think you'll own a gun?

[Wesley]

I own a few guns; rifles and pistols. I like them for target practice. I have never really thought about using them for home protection or self-defense. It is a hobby, like playing chess or archery. I develop the skill and coordination to put a tiny piece of lead and copper in a tighter and tighter group. There is also the collectability factor. Some guns are rare, or came from dad, grandfather, etc. A little piece of history.

I agree completely that guns make it easier to kill more people in less time, but which is worse: 4 dead people or 40 dead people? BZZZT! Trick question... to the mothers and brothers of the dead ones, it makes no difference how many were killed. Senseless slaughter is always terrible, even if it is just one person.

Back to the silly image, death is bad, and bad people will try to deal in death any way they can. In my opinion, god or gods will not stop this. In point of fact, organized religion has been the motivation of many of these killings, regardless of what weapon they choose.

Can't we all just get along?

[bella]

It's neither the presence nor the absence of religion which kills people. It's what people make of it or interpret into it to justify their deeds.
The principles of different religions are not so far apart, don't kill and respect your fellow humans. If only everybody could do so.

[Moe]

Out of interest, why do you think you'll own a gun?

Basically like Zot said, for me it would be more of a hobby thing.
I'd probably carry it on me when I go to certain places in case I were to need it for self defense, but that wouldn't be why I ownes one

[Moe]

It's neither the presence nor the absence of religion which kills people. It's what people make of it or interpret into it to justify their deeds.
The principles of different religions are not so far apart, don't kill and respect your fellow humans. If only everybody could do so.

Which is mainly why I don't understand how people manage to twist religion into their reason to do malicious things.

[nich]

I own a few guns; rifles and pistols. I like them for target practice. I have never really thought about using them for home protection or self-defense. It is a hobby, like playing chess or archery. I develop the skill and coordination to put a tiny piece of lead and copper in a tighter and tighter group. There is also the collectability factor. Some guns are rare, or came from dad, grandfather, etc. A little piece of history.

I agree completely that guns make it easier to kill more people in less time, but which is worse: 4 dead people or 40 dead people? BZZZT! Trick question... to the mothers and brothers of the dead ones, it makes no difference how many were killed. Senseless slaughter is always terrible, even if it is just one person.

Back to the silly image, death is bad, and bad people will try to deal in death any way they can. In my opinion, god or gods will not stop this. In point of fact, organized religion has been the motivation of many of these killings, regardless of what weapon they choose.

Can't we all just get along?

I disagree completely. Violence is at an all time high in United States. That's unacceptable. Yes there will always be killers but numbers do matter. The States should not just hand out guns to anyone.

[Moe]

The States should not just hand out guns to anyone.

They don't.I cannot go to a Gander Mountain, say "Hey, I want to buy this pistol" and they will just sell it to me on the spot. That will not happen anywhere.
Example: In my state I need to apply for a permit (for a handgun) to purchase.

Also, Federally, the Federal Firearms Act of 1938 requires that gun manufacturers, importers, and persons in the business of selling firearms have a Federal Firearms License. It also prohibits the transfer of firearms to certain classes of persons.

Another federal law increased the age to buy a handgun to 21.

In 1993, another law was passed that requires background checks on most firearm purchasers.

Also, in case you are one of the people that are in the "If spoons make people fat, then guns kill people, and the manufacturers should be held liable" boat, then you would be interested in the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that was passed in 2005 that prevents manufacturers and licensed dealers from being held liable for negligence when their products are used to commit crimes.


However, there are certain states (Vermont, Maine, Wyoming, Nebraska, Alaska and Arizona) that do not require a permit to carry concealed weapons, nor for the owner to be licensed.

Also, just because you have a permit in X state, does not mean that Y state also recognizes it.
I could legally by a gun in Minnesota, but my permit would not be recognised in Forida.

Needing a permit to buy the gun varies from state to state, but because of federal law, you do need to pass a background check, and licensed sellers are restricted from selling to certain classes of persons.

---

Out of curiousity, what do you think should be required for an individual to purchase a gun?