(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Sadly, mass shootings are a thing in our society. However, far too many people are far too quick to place the blame on the gun, instead of the person responsible. We blame drunk drivers for crashing and killing people, bombers for creating bombs that kill people, and stabbers for stabbing someone...but yet when it comes to guns, we blame the gun and try to ban or restrict them. Today's mass shooting, like every other recent high profile mass shooting, took place in a so called "gun free zone" where it is posted by the owners that guns are not allowed. Here's the problem. CRIMINALS DON'T OBEY THE FUCKING LAW. So by posting up a facility as a gun free zone, all you are doing is making it an extremely easy target for someone planning something nefarious, since most law abiding citizens won't bring a gun into the gfz. Yet, look up at the times where someone with a gun stopped someone else who had opened fire. You don't hear about them, because they never had a chance to become a mass shooting since a good guy with a gun stopped the bad guy with the gun before he could do serious damage. Point and case: Gun control doesn't work, and gun free zones are like big painted targets for mass shooters. Now, I'm not so bad as to say we shouldn't have background checks, but instead of our government trying to institute MORE background checks and other restrictions like standard capacity magazine bans, Modern Sporting Rifle (omg it's a gun but it looks extra scary, lets ban it) etc. why not actually fix and enforce the current laws on the books? The current National Instant Check System should do the job, but being a government handled entity, it has it's failure. Fix that and enforce other laws instead of trying to take away the rights of millions of law abiding gun owners.


Rant Over.
Discuss.

What countries are you talking about, countries that has no working law enforcement?

some basic research aka not leaving first page of a google search brought me this
You must login or register to view this content.

We had one mass shooting in 2011, which was terrorism by a Anders Brevik. That's one, and only one. That's why the statistics is that high in Norway. I don't know much about other countries, but pretty sure even we don't allow weapons, there are still killings here. But still more in USA.

How often does it happen here, mass shootings. And how often in USA? I consider more than 3 people killed as mass shooting.

they do happen in europe and people do die. the population of the US just makes the death toll alot higher. so if you equal the populations the stats for the us arent really all that noteworthy compared to say norway and finland which are well policed countries not the wild west where anything goes

Perhaps, but are the weapons ever used for good situations in the US? Have there been situations where killing another human to protect your self, came out as they said it would? Guns are made to kill, not to scare or warn someone.

they happen daily they just dont make the front page of the news because the news outlets need to start a shitstorm to get as much views and hits to make more money and what starts a shitstorm better then race baiting and spewwing shit about school shootings

Any statistics or research documents proving so?

There are more people that get killed with a shot gun, than defend them self. Just by looking at the news, and assuming really.

It appears you ignored my earlier post:

"Almost all handguns are banned from civilian possession, ownership, purchase, or sale in the United Kingdom as a result of the Second Firearms Act of 1997. This was in response to the Dunblane Massacre, in which 43-year-old Thomas Hamilton walked into an elementary school and shot dead 16 children, aged six or younger, and one teacher before killing himself. He used four handguns.Now that modern handguns are no longer legal to have in the UK, let us take a look at some murder rates. The rate for intentional homicide in the UK in 1996—the year of the Dunblane Massacre—was 1.12 per 100,000. It was 1.24 in 1997, when the Firearms Act went into effect, and 1.43 in 1998. The rate rose to a peak of 2.1 in 2002 and has fallen since to 1.23 as of 2010. These numbers have, however, been called into question due to possible under-reporting of violent crimes in the UK.It cannot be denied that the rate of homicides via guns has fallen dramatically since Dunblane, but the rate of murders has gone up. To say these higher numbers are the result of fewer people able to arm themselves for defense is drastically jumping to a conclusion, but the fact does remain that more people are killing each other in the UK today than when guns were legal to have. Even the police are almost all armed with tasers instead, so handguns are very hard to come by. All the numbers are higher in the US, of course, where there are more people, and there have been no more school shootings in the UK since Dunblane.But in 2005, there were 765 intentional murders in the UK and most of these were committed with knives. Blunt objects follow, then strangulation, fire, and poison. Banning guns has halted rampage shootings, but it does not address the issue of people killing each other. In the US, the number of intentional homicides in 2004 was 10,654—a number that would have been much lower without access to guns, but still terribly high. Opponents of gun control are always quick to question how many victims of knives, clubs, and strangulation would be alive if they had had a gun."

P.S. Good luck to you whenever something catastrophic happens in your country and you have no way to protect yourself

I am not worried about anything happening here, we have Police and Military. We don't need to take the law in our own hands here