New Zealand gunmen kill 49 people at two mosques

[Stripe]

It would have been nice if the victims had been well armed.

Dozens of innocent people might have been saved. Even better, the pothead murderer might have been killed.

 

[fool]

It would have been nice if the victims had been well armed.

Or even a little armed.
One guy charged the shooter with a credit card machine. That was the best option he could come up with.
God bless him.

 

[fool]

Dozens of innocent people might have been saved. Even better, the pothead murderer might have been killed.

He went back over the piles of people and shot them again in case anyone was just playing dead.
He took his time, there was nothing to stop him.

 

[Stripe]

He went back over the piles of people and shot them again in case anyone was just playing dead.
He took his time, there was nothing to stop him.

Apparently he was training in NZ to murder people elsewhere. Then he thought: "Why not here?"

The response from the government is never going to make that question more difficult.

 

[Town Heretic]

Or even a little armed.
One guy charged the shooter with a credit card machine. That was the best option he could come up with.
God bless him.

If more guns was the solution we'd be the safest Western industrial democracy instead of the least safe, when it comes to gun violence. Meanwhile, Western industrial nations that have enacted stronger gun laws and restrictions aren't burying their dead from gun violence by the dozen(s).

 

[Stripe]

If more guns was the solution we'd be the safest Western industrial democracy instead of the least safe, when it comes to gun violence. Meanwhile, Western industrial nations that have enacted stronger gun laws and restrictions aren't burying their dead from gun violence by the dozen(s).

You mean the Western industrial nation of New Zealand that has some of the most restrictive gun regulations around?

Yes, Australia is worse. Do 50 people have to be murdered there as well before you will stop peddling stupidity?

 

[JudgeRightly]

If more guns was the solution we'd be the safest Western industrial democracy instead of the least safe, when it comes to gun violence. Meanwhile, Western industrial nations that have enacted stronger gun laws and restrictions aren't burying their dead from gun violence by the dozen(s).

Seems you overestimate the number of gun owners in the US.

Yes, we have enough guns in the US for every citizen to own at least one. However, that doesn't mean that every citizen owns one.

The number of citizens who own guns is most likely (no solid numbers, as the law doesn't allow for a database of who owns what, if anything) around a third of the population (if surveys are any accurate). https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/politics/guns-dont-know-how-many-america/index.html

Which is one of the many reasons that gun control laws have very little effect in our society. Most people don't buy guns, and those responsible citizens who do are restricted in where they're allowed to have them, whereas those who acquire them illegally don't care about the law.

In other words, the solution isn't more laws, it's harsher punishments for those who break the law.

 

[Stripe]

The solution isn't more laws, it's harsher punishments for those who break the law.

This is true, but statistics regarding how many guns are in circulation and who owns them aren't overly useful.

 

[JudgeRightly]

This is true, but statistics regarding how many guns are in circulation and who owns them aren't overly useful.

That was sort of my point.

It really doesn't matter how many guns there are, so long as those who use them to harm others are punished appropriately.

 

[ok doser]

In other words, the solution isn't more laws, it's harsher punishments for those who break the law.

Overwhelmingly, those are inner city blacks
shooting other inner city blacks

to the leftist, it's a win-win - blacks, who they hate, killing each other and stats that can be manipulated to give a rationale for taking guns away from law-abiding citizens

 

[Town Heretic]

Seems you overestimate the number of gun owners in the US.

What I noted (and what we know) is that we have more guns by far than any other Western industrial democracy and yet we're far less safe than any other Western industrial democracy. We know that our cousins, with stronger laws and restrictions, have far fewer gun related fatalities.

Yes, we have enough guns in the US for every citizen to own at least one. However, that doesn't mean that every citizen owns one.

Or that they don't (though they don't), or that the sort of general owner of a gun here differs from other democracies, though I'd suppose where you have little comparative restrictions there is at least the chance of a larger and more diverse group of owners.

The number of citizens who own guns is most likely (no solid numbers, as the law doesn't allow for a database of who owns what, if anything) around a third of the population (if surveys are any accurate). https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/politics/guns-dont-know-how-many-america/index.html Which is one of the many reasons that gun control laws have very little effect in our society.

What you're saying is 1) we can't know how many people own how many guns but, 2) we can speculate that it's a third of our population and, using the lowest available estimate 3) that number somehow illustrates why gun laws are relatively ineffective.

The third leg doesn't necessarily follow, isn't established by the first two. It's on par with saying that if or where most people don't drive laws relating to cars would have very little effect on how those cars are used. There's no real causality established in either claim.

Most people don't buy guns

Probably true. And most gun owners here are over 50 and male. More gun owners are found in the South and we have higher rates of death and violence than other areas by gun.

and those responsible citizens who do are restricted in where they're allowed to have them, whereas those who acquire them illegally don't care about the law.

The worst of our mass shootings weren't committed by people furthering criminal enterprise and our Western industrial and democratic cousins all have criminals too.

In other words, the solution isn't more laws, it's harsher punishments for those who break the law.

In countries where laws are more restrictive the rates of violence and death attributable to guns is dramatically lower.

 

[Stripe]

We're far less safe than any other Western industrial democracy.

Demonstrably untrue, of course. What you mean is shooting deaths are greater.

The murder rates are not so different.

We know that our cousins, with stronger laws and restrictions, have far fewer gun-related fatalities.

And when you ban cars, people don't die on the roads.

Or that they don't (though they don't), or that the sort of general owner of a gun here differs from other democracies, though I'd suppose where you have little comparative restrictions there is at least the chance of a larger and more diverse group of owners. What you're saying is 1) we can't know how many people own how many guns but, 2) we can speculate that it's a third of our population and, using the lowest available estimate 3) that number somehow illustrates why gun laws are relatively ineffective. The third leg doesn't necessarily follow, isn't established by the first two. It's on par with saying that if or where most people don't drive laws relating to cars would have very little effect on how those cars are used. There's no real causality established in either claim.

Hey! Words. :chuckle:

 

[ok doser]

And when you ban cars, people don't die on the roads.

almost three times as many traffic fatalities as firearm fatalities, in 2017

3x

Hey! Words. :chuckle:

werds iz gud

 

[ok doser]

The murder rates are not so different.

80% of which are drug and gang related

the us has a drug and gang problem, not a firearms problem

and if i have to operate in an area infested with drugs and gangs, i want to be darn sure that i'm better armed than them

legally


betcha New Zealand doen't have much of a drug and gang problem

 

[Truster]

It would have been nice if the victims had been well armed.

What would you suggest a person should use to arm themselves in the face of Almighty vengeance? They weren't victims they were the targets of wrath.

 

[JudgeRightly]

What would you suggest a person should use to arm themselves in the face of Almighty vengeance? They weren't victims they were the targets of wrath.

So... In other words, blame the victim?

What a wicked thing for you to say!

You're not in line with what God says:

“Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man. - Genesis 9:6 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis9:6&version=NKJV

“You shall not murder. - Exodus 20:13 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus20:13&version=NKJV

“He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death. - Exodus 21:12 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus21:12&version=NKJV

Keep yourself far from a false matter; do not kill the innocent and righteous. For I will not justify the wicked. - Exodus 23:7 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus23:7&version=NKJV

‘Whoever kills any man shall surely be put to death. - Leviticus 24:17 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus24:17&version=NKJV

These six things the Lord hates, ... Hands that shed innocent blood, - Proverbs 6:16-17 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs6:16-17&version=NKJV

Truster, you fit this verse very well:

He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the just, Both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord. - Proverbs 17:15 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs17:15&version=NKJV

 

[Idolater]

Dozens of innocent people might have been saved.

Yep. They at least would have had a chance, which is really all we gun-rights 'nuts' are saying. We have an inalienable right to have a chance if we are ever targeted by a murderer. Where 'murderer' also denotes 'attempted murderer,' because hopefully, we can stop them.

Even better, the pothead murderer might have been killed.

If the death penalty can be avoided, I think it should be.

It can't always be avoided, and that should always be because of the murderer, and not because of innocent people, imo.

Murderers have the power to take away our preference to not kill them. This one in NZ certainly took away that choice from the innocent people there, but they were unable to do anything about it, because they were all unarmed. If they were well armed, they would have had a chance. They had no chance.

https://us.cnn.com/2019/03/20/asia/new-zealand-christchurch-gun-ban-intl/index.html

Stupid.

 

[Idolater]

Or even a little armed.
One guy charged the shooter with a credit card machine. That was the best option he could come up with.
God bless him.

And God damn laws that infringe in how easy it is for innocent people to procure and keep and carry superlative military grade weaponry, such as standard issue rifles and carbines. Where 'standard issue' is literally the standard service rifles and carbines that every military the world round provides to their warriors; i.e. specifically selective fire. Not 'semi-automatic.' No responsible military outfits their warriors with 'semi-automatic' weaponry (besides handguns), because they would be outgunned all other things being equal. So talk about 'semi-automatic' weapons being 'military' is Fake News. 'Semi-automatic' weapons (besides handguns) are Not Military. They are all civilian weapons.

 

[Idolater]

He went back over the piles of people and shot them again in case anyone was just playing dead.
He took his time, there was nothing to stop him.

Horrifying.

This is why we carry. This is why we want more freedom to carry. This is why we need to be permitted to carry longguns, not just handguns, which are better than a credit card machine, but are still not what you really want to have if ever confronted by a murderer. You want a longgun, a rifle or carbine. I've said for a long time what I heard someone else say: Handguns are what you use to fight your way to your rifle.

 

[Idolater]

If more guns was the solution we'd be the safest Western industrial democracy instead of the least safe, when it comes to gun violence. Meanwhile, Western industrial nations that have enacted stronger gun laws and restrictions aren't burying their dead from gun violence by the dozen(s).

We don't need more guns, we've got 120 per 100 Americans here. We innocent people need to be permitted to carry them more.