[andyt]

With it taking this long to find this guy, wonder if he's in a hole somewhere, dead.

[Xort]

andyt andyt:

So if there were more and more lethal guns in the hands of civilians, these trained, armed. police would not be dead?

The point is that laws to limit firearms ownership don't protect anyone.

Again as I said in the threat about the shooter in California, we are not kept safe by laws that limit access to items. We are kept safe by people that don't want to hurt others.

BRAH BRAH:

This is from his Facebook page.

Megadeth has always had a way with words.

And for some top quality reporting;

http://globalnews.ca/video/1377235/monc ... e-presence

Feel free to skip to the 1:20 mark to hear a guy from 4chan badly singing Snake Eater, and having the new attribute it to Bourques.

[andyt]

We have plenty of people who want to hurt others, and always will. Reducing their opportunity to get guns will reduce the carnage. That keeps us safer than otherwise.

$1:

Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide....more here

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firea ... and-death/

[Xort]

andyt andyt:

We have plenty of people who want to hurt others, and always will. Reducing their opportunity to get guns will reduce the carnage. That keeps us safer than otherwise.

Guns are a rather terrible way to kill a large number of people unless you are working with a large number of other people with guns.

Bombs and explosives are far more deadly. I'd rather have one person with a rifle, or even a machinegun, than someone with a rental truck packed full of explosives.

~

That said, in what way would your suggested ban on pistols have stopped this? Or even a ban on rifles given the ease of smuggling from the US?

Anyway their is no relation between firearm ownership and murders;



Many, studies prove this. I can dig them all up if you would like.

[andyt]

And yet, how common are gun shootings vs rental trucks full of explosives.

We have to do what we can. Reducing legal guns isn't a cure all, but it's part of what we can do, so we should.

[andyt]

Justin Bourque’s gun-filled Facebook page offers glimpse of accused killer’s mindset

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/06/05 ... -shooting/

[housewife]

andyt andyt:

We have plenty of people who want to hurt others, and always will. Reducing their opportunity to get guns will reduce the carnage. That keeps us safer than otherwise.

$1:

Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide....more here

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firea ... and-death/

Sorry not buying... If someone really wants to hurt someone having a gun or not will not stop them. If they are a nutbar with no reguard for life a boom will work just as well. If you look around the house almost everything can be a weapon. Heck steal the right vehical and you can kill lots of people with out having to worry about your safty till you run out of gas. No amount of laws is going to save people if a nutbar is bent on killing a large number. With the right amount of money and the right conections you can get anything. Nothing can save you from that sort of crazy thinking.

[andyt]

And yet mass killings by vehicles are rare. As are attacks with scissors or pots and pans. Can't remember the last mass slaughter by hammer.

Yes, if someone really wants to kill they will - we don't have to make it easy for them.

[jj2424]

Gunnair Gunnair:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Gunnair Gunnair:

It took an equal amount if time for the usual wouldn't-have-happened-if-we-were-all-armed 'tard to show his face.

Which one was that?

JJ

Where did I say that? I don't even own a gun and I live on the edge of town bordering the prairie.

retard...

[housewife]

andyt andyt:

And yet mass killings by vehicles are rare. As are attacks with scissors or pots and pans. Can't remember the last mass slaughter by hammer.

Yes, if someone really wants to kill they will - we don't have to make it easy for them.

Really you have no idea... While I'm sure pots and pans would do the job I was more thinking of all the lovely cleaning supplies I have. Maybe the bone saw or all the knives we have. Safty is an illusion. There seems to be more and more nutbars every day and some of them think that the only way to make their point is to stage a mass slaughter.

Maybe instead of flushing money down the drain with shit like the gun registery we should invest in mental health or more hospitals to hold the nutbars

[andyt]

It's you who's raised the gun registry.

We should invest in mental health, although that won't make you safe either - most of these guys are only identified after they act out - minority report is just a movie.

Again, not many mass murders with cleaning supplies either. There seems to be something about guns that makes them the weapon of choice.

[Jabberwalker]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

So, how can you reconcile that it's a good idea that your daughter learns to shoot; but hobbyists don't need guns?

Why do hobbyists need access to every type of gun?

I never said they did. I asked how is your daughter (or anyone's child) going to learn to shoot if they have no access to guns? Will they have to move to the country and become farmers? Will they have to get their hunting licenses and then learn how to shoot by practising on those poor animals? Will they just show up at the Olympics and have to wing it like the Jamaican Bobsled team or Eddie the Eagle?

Yeah, yeah, 2+2=746. I've come to expect deeply intelligent posts from you but this, clearly, is not one of them. You didn't read what I posted.

[Jabberwalker]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

50 bucks , that's where this creep got his weapons.

I surely hope that you don't live in my city. You're dangerous, buddy.

You're a clown. I'm only dangerous to those that threaten me or my family. But pray tell what have I said here that makes you think am.

But it's nice that you think I'm dangerous because I'm a legal gun owner.

Always a good combination... firearms ownership combined with well demonstrated anger issues.

Get help.

[housewife]

andyt really you have no imagination... cleaning supplies are chemicals and you can make all sorts of things with them.

Guns make news and they are so very easy to get. You don't need any imagination to use them either.

I did not say that investing in mental health or hospitals would make anyone safe. I said that Safty is an illusion.

[Xort]

andyt andyt:

And yet, how common are gun shootings vs rental trucks full of explosives.

Depends on where you take your date from. If you want to include Iraq and Afghanistan truck bombs kill more people than other intentional mass murders.

$1:

We have to do what we can. Reducing legal guns isn't a cure all, but it's part of what we can do, so we should.

If you want to save lives their are far more effective steps that can be taken before you take legally owned firearms away from people.
Any number of traffic and road programs, and technological improvements to the health care system to cut the number of accidental deaths.

You are orders of magnitude more likely to be killed by medical malpractice than you are from getting shot, not just limited to spree shootings which are statistical nothings.