Should Obama create new Gun Laws?

@Vaeternus: That all adds up and is easily comparable.

Did you notice that you had to add up 5 or 6 different methods of murder just to add up to guns? actually accidents are not murder. So stabbing, strangling etc COMBINED still account for only 1/2 of the number of murders with a gun. The statistics are right in front of you. How can you deny getting rid of guns wouldn't make a significant difference? Besides a gun, what other legal method could be used to kill that many people in such a short amount of time?

@Glitch_Spawn said:

@Ohgawd said:

I know a lot of very liberal people who support gun laws (I'm not a conservative, this is just an observation). And these same self-proclaimed liberals are the ones who are regularly smoking pot illegally. I find it pretty funny that the same people easily breaking the marijuana law somehow think that creating gun control laws would get people to follow them.

By the way, you know who else created gun control laws? Stalin, Mao, Mussolini, Hitler, etc, etc...

False equivalencies, self loathing conservatism, there is nothing wrong with pot, it's has never killed anyone and not to mention it is very very easy to get.

Get the fuck off of comic vine

PS I don't even smoke marijuana and believe in stricter gun laws. Going to call me a commi now?

I don't lash out much on CV. You set me off. Congratulations.

Get that rage checked. By the way, you missed the whole point of what I typed. i wasn't even making a statement about the dangers of pot. The point I was making is that the same people who can so easily disregard laws against marijuana and not get caught somehow think that laws would prevent people from getting guns in their possession anyway. They already know that laws didn't do jack squat in preventing them from getting weed if they really wanted it, so why would they think laws would be effective in taking away guns from people who wanted to get them?

Oh, and you were flagged by the way. You want to address me, keep the F bomb out.

@Ohgawd: They already know that laws didn't do jack squat in preventing them from getting weed if they really wanted it,

It has worked on weed. I know many many people who would smoke weed if it were legal. I know many people who would smoke weed if they were not drug tested at work. The US keeps tons of weed out the US every year. SO while you can still get weed, it is more difficult to get than if it were legal.

@pooty said:

You do realize gangs also use other weapons besides guns such as their fists and knives historically speaking, besides guns. I'm talking about killers in general. Fraction of the population, you have to remember isn't just killed exclusively by guns. There's car accidents, flight accidents, DUI(which kills a lot every year) hit and runs, stabbings, beatings etc besides just gun murders every year. That all adds up and is easily comparable.

If you try to take guns away, people will still get them as the black market will be in even higher demand then they are now.

Ultimately, I don't think it's worth it to be honest. Best case scenario it may help a little at first but people will still kill people with or without guns, and they will still get their hands on them regardless of banning guns. Weed is illegal in most of the USA, yet people still get it among other illegal drugs. Guns are no different.

@Shawnbaby said:

@Vaeternus said:

@pooty said:

You do realize gangs also use other weapons besides guns such as their fists and knives historically speaking, besides guns. I'm talking about killers in general. Fraction of the population, you have to remember isn't just killed exclusively by guns. There's car accidents, flight accidents, DUI(which kills a lot every year) hit and runs, stabbings, beatings etc besides just gun murders every year. That all adds up and is easily comparable.

If you try to take guns away, people will still get them as the black market will be in even higher demand then they are now.

Ultimately, I don't think it's worth it to be honest. Best case scenario it may help a little at first but people will still kill people with or without guns, and they will still get their hands on them regardless of banning guns. Weed is illegal in most of the USA, yet people still get it among other illegal drugs. Guns are no different.

Just a couple of points here -65% of all murders in the states are caused by guns. That's almost 2/3rds. Some of those murders probably would have happened anyway...but some of them probably wouldn't have.-Guns on The Black Market will cost a lot more than Guns in a store. A lot of the people that might want a gun to start a shooting spree would likely not be able to afford one. Economics 101...Supply and Demand. When the demand for guns increases....so too shall the prices of those guns.-People don't go on Killing Sprees with their Fists and Knives. You don't kill 12 people and wound 58 more with just a knife. -Also, you've got it backwards. Gun Laws aren't going to change anything overnight...but in the Long Run they will probably save more lives.

Exactly. guns give people courage to do things that they don't have the courage to do. You take guns out of the hands of drug dealers and gang members and they are no so tough. Very few of them would attack a person with a knife or H2H. That is proven by the fact they use guns to hide behind

@Shawnbaby: Those are some pretty crazy statistics. I don't have a problem with gun control, but the complete prohibition of them is a different story.

@pooty: Agreed.

@Shawnbaby said:

@Vaeternus said:

@pooty said:

You do realize gangs also use other weapons besides guns such as their fists and knives historically speaking, besides guns. I'm talking about killers in general. Fraction of the population, you have to remember isn't just killed exclusively by guns. There's car accidents, flight accidents, DUI(which kills a lot every year) hit and runs, stabbings, beatings etc besides just gun murders every year. That all adds up and is easily comparable.

If you try to take guns away, people will still get them as the black market will be in even higher demand then they are now.

Ultimately, I don't think it's worth it to be honest. Best case scenario it may help a little at first but people will still kill people with or without guns, and they will still get their hands on them regardless of banning guns. Weed is illegal in most of the USA, yet people still get it among other illegal drugs. Guns are no different.

Just a couple of points here -65% of all murders in the states are caused by guns. That's almost 2/3rds. Some of those murders probably would have happened anyway...but some of them probably wouldn't have.-Guns on The Black Market will cost a lot more than Guns in a store. A lot of the people that might want a gun to start a shooting spree would likely not be able to afford one. Economics 101...Supply and Demand. When the demand for guns increases....so too shall the prices of those guns.-People don't go on Killing Sprees with their Fists and Knives. You don't kill 12 people and wound 58 more with just a knife. -Also, you've got it backwards. Gun Laws aren't going to change anything overnight...but in the Long Run they will probably save more lives.

I am pretty much on the same page with you here.

@Shawnbaby: Those are some pretty crazy statistics. I don't have a problem with gun control, but the complete prohibition of them is a different story.

@pooty: Agreed.

I don't think Ohgawd was comparing weed itself to guns, but rather the principles and hypocrisies of those who support one yet are against the other are typically the same group of people...

@Ohgawd said:

Just want to say I agree with you on the principle of "weed supporters" usually being hypocritical libs yet are against "guns" and give you props for admitting you're not a conservative yet pointing this out. Most liberals I know will never admit this.

@Shawnbaby said:

Well, again if you take every "death yearly" due to other elements NOT gun related, and compare those numbers to gun murders each year, it's comparable. Do you know what the DUI death rate it yearly? Cases of people killing their kids? Random murders not gun related?

That's obviously the other 35-40% of deaths are obviously due to other things in life. Yet, I don't see people banning alcohol(oh wait we tried that) or cars do you to prevent more deaths?

I want to point something out concerning the black market comment since I forgot to bring that up in my previous post, if you ban guns all together I can almost guarantee you the black market for them will go up BIG time. Like I said concerning weed and other illegal drugs, they're illegal yet people still get their hands on it. As long as there's a black market which sadly there will most likely always be, you won't be ridding anything for good. It's merely a temporary solution that will decrease the % by 10% at most if not less. I live in NYC, one of the biggest anti-gun states and cities in the world, yet people die a ton here from guns year in, year out. Nuff said.

@pooty said:

Still, that being said it's not like guns make up 90% of deaths in this country..if that were the case I may agree with you but as I just told the other guy, as long as a there' sa black market out there you can't stop gun control. My point is (and I didn't even cover every other scenario keep in mind) between drunk driving, racing, sports incidents, and other non-gun related fatalities it's definitely comparable. As they make up nearly 50%. Not quite, guns depending on the stats you look up will show anywhere from 60%-70% that's still another 40%+ to account for NOT gun related...

Why won't ridding guns make a significant differences? Simple, two words. Black Market. As long as there is one, people will get guns. Also, as I've told the other guy. I live in NYC, one of the most liberal, anti-gun cities in the world yet people die daily from guns here...enough said. Does banning guns make a difference? Maybe, but it's so trivial it ultimately makes no difference.

@Vaeternus: Still, that being said it's not like guns make up 90% of deaths in this country

Old age causes death. Heart attacks cause death. Bee stings cause death. we are talking about MURDER. the WILLFUL taking of life.

drunk driving, racing, sports incidents, and other non-gun related fatalities it's definitely comparable.

I hope you don't think i'm talking about ridding the world of all forms of death. I'm talking about the "intentional or willful taking of someones life". And guns make up 70% of those numbers.

Simple, two words. Black Market. As long as there is one, people will get guns.

Two words: Too expensive. Three more words: harder to obtain.

Maybe, but it's so trivial it ultimately makes no difference.

that statement I totally, 100% disagree with. Many people would not be able to afford guns. They would be harder to get. People wouldn't want to risk losing jobs or being put in jail over a gun. Many people wouldn't feel the need for a gun if they knew others didn't have them. And i'm just quoting murder stats, where the person actually dies. I will gladly look for the number of assaults and attempted murder and i'm POSITIVE the numbers will be much higher. Cars, airplanes, an axe, a knife are helpful tools when used correctly and they usually are. A gun........................is nothing but a tool to harm and kill.

@Shawn,

Ok, whether it's gun control or gun ban. You really believe it's going to make THAT much of a difference if a psycho such as the guy who killed 12 people in the DKR premiere from getting one? But you definitely don't sound as hard on guns as pooty does then I trust.

True, you do need a license to drive but not to live...once people are behind the wheel, they drive how THEY want to. At that point on the law/cops can stop them, and let's face it. You can't have a cop watching every driver, every second. Guns do though, they have permits, waiting times, reasons and cost money to obtain one...legally. Besides, what about jobs concerning guns where you need one?

And again, It doesn't matter, Black Market is the one portal, the one opening for people to get them. They WILL get them, I don't care how much money it costs, people will get the money or find a way thru connections to get them. I can name you every hardcore drug right now that's been illegal for decades yet, people get it with ease. Money isn't an issue if you're determined enough to get it or have the right connections at the end of the day. Black Market merely makes it slightly more harder to get a gun, NOT impossible. There's a difference. Gas prices increase daily, does that stop people from getting gas? No.

@pooty,

I'm aware that you're talking murder, I'm talking murder regardless of intent or not is still murder taking someone else's life. I never mentioned old age, killer bees etc. So not sure why that was even brought up...I brought up examples of humans taking each others lives..

I'm not, as stated above I'm referring to other stats which make up the other 40%+ of people killing each other. BTW, I found thru my own research that Shawn baby's stats are what I have found, gun murders 60-65%. Not 70%+_

Simple, two words. Black Market. As long as there is one, people will get guns.

Two words: Doesn't matter. Again, I can name you every hardcore drug right now that's been beyond illegal for YEARS from cocaine to heroin, yet are they "hard to obtain"? Answer: no. Besides, HARD to obain doesn't translate into=impossible. I have gotten things hard to obtain through some determination, work and something called money. Nothing "illegal" per-se, but let's just say hard to get in my area...I made happen.

People lose their jobs now through silly things such as facebook posts, who needs guns to lose their job right? lol Of course there's a whole lack of jobs in general now but that's another story I won't dig into here. Moving onto your point, even if you rid guns from the world people will still find a way to get them. And still, I've noticed everyone in this topic FOR Gun banning, can't explain how and why people kill people long before guns were an issue...as if guns are the sole reason and only way to kill people. This is why I disagree with your post.

@Vaeternus: I'm aware that you're talking murder, I'm talking murder regardless of intent or not is still murder taking someone else's life. I never mentioned old age, killer bees etc. So not sure why that was even brought up...I brought up examples of humans taking each others lives..

That statement incorrect. Murder without intent does not exist. It's an oxymoron . a car accident or plane accident is not murder. I brought up bees and old age because you brought up things that kill but are not murder. Car accidents etc have nothing to do with this topic. Murder is the intentional taking of life.

my own research that Shawn baby's stats are what I have found, gun murders 60-65%. Not 70%+

I said 69% and a few percentage point difference is allowed in any statistic. Even if we use 60% guns still murder more than all the other weapons combined. If guns are 60%, all the others combined are only 40%

Black Market. As long as there is one, people will get guns.

Do you deny that it will be more expensive, more risky and less available on the black market?

yet are they "hard to obtain"? Answer: no.

They are MUCH harder to obtain than legal drugs like aspirin or cold medicine. and illegal drugs are far more expensive. The price and risk keep many people from using drugs. I don't see why guns would be any different.

who needs guns to lose their job right

With people being desperate for jobs they wouldn't risk it just for a gun

even if you rid guns from the world people will still find a way to get them.

again we know that. but the cost and risk would stop many people from obtaining them

I've noticed everyone in this topic FOR Gun banning, can't explain how and why people kill people long before guns were an issue

They used knives, bow and arrow, strangling, poison etc. But all this was discussed pages ago. My link even showed that.

all that was to answer your post but my only two questions for you are:

If there were 13000 murders by every means and we outlawed guns which cause 60%, how much would that number decline? I see a decline of at least 25%. What do you say?

@ShawnBaby, ok then. Concerning the guy who got the guns in question, sadly he's just a prime example of what many people can do then go nuts. I don't think the state should alter their gun laws due to one wacko. Now, me personally perhaps there should be more strict standards for a gun like AR-15. But if he did it legally, said he had valid reasons like home protection or something, then went nuts I guess that's just too bad in that case. But most people aren't like that so..

Shooting sprees happen all over the world, it's just for some reason "a big reason" when it happens in America because some people have this concept that we're perfect or something. I'm all for more stricter rules for getting a gun but not banning them all together or gun control to a vast extent. That's just my opinion of course, I can respect your views though.

@p0oty,

It's not incorrect, you said murder I listed incidents of murder despite intentional or not. You assumed I meant "all ways to die" which I never said, you did. Murder can be accidental, ever heard of second degree murder or involuntary manslaughter? I suggest you look these up. One is murder without intent or plans to murder someone(example, drunk driving but it's still considered "murder" due to the fact of a human taking another one's life. And the ladder point you can murder someone due to mental disorders or temporary insanity. These two are very different from "first degree murder" so yes, I'm correct. I never said "normal car accident" I said, DUI, big difference guy.

Well, either way roughly 65% mid 60's % there's still 40%+ to make up for not gun related...

Not denying that it's HARDER to get on the black market, but you seem to be denying that the black market still exists and thus will still get guns out. Why do you deny that just because something is hard to obtain=near to impossible? That seems to be your reasoning.

What? No they're not lol, over the counter drugs are easy as hell to get. Only some states place certain cold remedies and meds behind the counter due to kids popping them to get high, otherwise I can go down to my CVS right now and get several cold meds and such that I can technically get high off of, and/or aspirin too. illegal drugs being more expensive is only that because they're illegal, otherwise they're actually comparable to otc drugs which can be pricey if you're sick or something. Example, my friend needed meds for high sugar that costed 300+dollars for one bottle...so he winded up going with a different brand and generic for far cheaper. High prices will only go so far, look at the price of cars, consoles etc? Pricey yet people still buy them, there will ALWAYS be someone to buy it if you want it badly enough. No matter what it is. Guns are no different then anything else.

The average person maybe, but there are people who just don't care who would carry a small gun regardless or if your job requires it you have every right to as long as you have your gun permit on you. As for cost, it would merely decrease but not stop people all together from getting one.

Yes, because they're primitive yet still deadly weapons...but you're acting as if guns are the sole reason people kill each other or murder each other with guns exclusively...as your link even says, that's not the case. Even now it's still not the case, people still strangle, suffocate, stab, beat, burn and other ways to kill people

Yet people would still kill each other even without guns(or via black market guns), so even if that number is 25% which is better but not a drastic decrease(50% to me is drastic) there's nothing to say those % numbers of 25% would be consistent year in, year out....it may decrease at first but I see that number fluctuating, most likely going lower over time since again we have black market. If there was no black market and we guaranteed to ban guns for good, then I'd agree but sadly that isn't the case so.

No he shouldn't...

One basic fact is that in countries where guns are banned/very heavily regulated, such as for instance England, there are WAY fewer gun deaths per capita than there are here.  Sure you can't completely stop the black market, but it seems to work fairly well in other countries.
 
People will find other ways to fight and kill each other, but without guns, a lot less people will die.  Less people dying is good.  People have a constitutional right to life as well as a right to guns.
 
One other thing: I just read that since the Virginia Tech shootings, people have actually become more likely to see all these shootings as acts of individual crazy people and less likely to see them as symptoms of overall societal problems.  Which to me is nuts.  How many more shootings can we have?  At the very least there needs to be more money put into enforcing the gun regulations, but of course the Republicans won't let any cost increases go through.

I own 3 guns (all rifles), and used to own 2 handguns, I'm a gun enthusiast, now that being said I am in favor of gun control, but not gun eradication. I believe in more thorough background checks, and licenses for certain guns (such as handguns, due to their ease concealed), and fully illegal for fully automatic weapons. There is no reason for a civilian to have a fully automatic weapon, but if a law abiding citizen, such as myself wants to go out hunting or target shooting then I should be able to, provided I go through the necesarry requirements.

Also maybe public places such as movie theaters and stadiums could install metal detectors and security personell to further hinder people such as the Aurora, CO. shooter (who prior to this had no criminal background) so he wouldn't have gotten as far as he did. These are just thoughts tho.

I own 3 guns (all rifles), and used to own 2 handguns, I'm a gun enthusiast, now that being said I am in favor of gun control, but not gun eradication. I believe in more thorough background checks, and licenses for certain guns (such as handguns, due to their ease concealed), and fully illegal for fully automatic weapons. There is no reason for a civilian to have a fully automatic weapon, but if a law abiding citizen, such as myself wants to go out hunting or target shooting then I should be able to, provided I go through the necesarry requirements.

Also maybe public places such as movie theaters and stadiums could install metal detectors and security personell to further hinder people such as the Aurora, CO. shooter (who prior to this had no criminal background) so he wouldn't have gotten as far as he did. These are just thoughts tho.

@Shawnbaby: Yeah, alot of places do here aswell but not all of them.

Owi What's wrong with having more money in your pocket? I guess you support higher taxes huh?

@shawnbab, so wait you're in Canada? Then why if I may ask are you concerned for USA if you're living in another country? It's not like Canada doesn't have problems of their own.

I'm not mistaken about them, I'm well aware thanks. But you're making a big deal in a country where you don't even live in, you think Canada doesn't have murders? Hell, you guys can't even get along on two separate parts of the country. I've had friends live up there and friends that do live there. One from BC, the other from Quebac, they hate each other yet never even met...like what? ok...I'm not attacking Canada, just pointing out a simple fact. Murders happen everywhere, not just America.

Involuntary Manslaughter is what I'm referring to, and is a prime example of someone who isn't all mentally there or temp insanity. If someone has a mental disorder, that's a good reason for it NOT being with intent...if someone is off their meds and throws an air conditional out their window and it hits someone and kills them. You're telling me that's intentional murder? No. And I know this because I know someone who did this very thing...as crazy as it sounds, my friend's mother has mental disorders and has done several things while off her meds. Which is why it's accidental.

Now, DUI is more along the lines of Voluntary Manslaughter or second degree depending on the situation.

No, I'm not saying if we can't stop "all killings, no point in trying" I'm saying, banning or putting severe gun control on guns won't change a damn thing. People will still get them on the black market. Again, how many things are illegal in the world? In the USA there's tons of hardcore drugs illegal and "not exactly easy to get" yet people still get them? Same thing will happen with guns...mark my words.

Owi What's wrong with having more money in your pocket? I guess you support higher taxes huh?

No, I'm not saying if we can't stop "all killings, no point in trying" I'm saying, banning or putting severe gun control on guns won't change a damn thing. People will still get them on the black market. Again, how many things are illegal in the world? In the USA there's tons of hardcore drugs illegal and "not exactly easy to get" yet people still get them? Same thing will happen with guns...mark my words.

Owi What's wrong with having more money in your pocket? I guess you support higher taxes huh?

@shawnbab, so wait you're in Canada? Then why if I may ask are you concerned for USA if you're living in another country? It's not like Canada doesn't have problems of their own.

I'm not mistaken about them, I'm well aware thanks. But you're making a big deal in a country where you don't even live in, you think Canada doesn't have murders? Hell, you guys can't even get along on two separate parts of the country. I've had friends live up there and friends that do live there. One from BC, the other from Quebac, they hate each other yet never even met...like what? ok...I'm not attacking Canada, just pointing out a simple fact. Murders happen everywhere, not just America.

Involuntary Manslaughter is what I'm referring to, and is a prime example of someone who isn't all mentally there or temp insanity. If someone has a mental disorder, that's a good reason for it NOT being with intent...if someone is off their meds and throws an air conditional out their window and it hits someone and kills them. You're telling me that's intentional murder? No. And I know this because I know someone who did this very thing...as crazy as it sounds, my friend's mother has mental disorders and has done several things while off her meds. Which is why it's accidental.

Now, DUI is more along the lines of Voluntary Manslaughter or second degree depending on the situation.

No, I'm not saying if we can't stop "all killings, no point in trying" I'm saying, banning or putting severe gun control on guns won't change a damn thing. People will still get them on the black market. Again, how many things are illegal in the world? In the USA there's tons of hardcore drugs illegal and "not exactly easy to get" yet people still get them? Same thing will happen with guns...mark my words.

@Owie

I don't know about "stunning" but it tends to fluctuate, still that being said I don't support raising taxes right now of all times. With the country is debt, severe debt...roads, power grids etc are trivial compared to the national debt. They'll be fixed in due time and trust me, where Iive there's tons of bridges, potholes etc that need fixing it's slowly getting done. I'm not worried about that. I understand we need taxes but we don't need them constantly raised. Well, you also have to consider the amount of people in England compared to the USA and the crime rates. But also keep in mind, that was also one year you said too right? Plus, while that's a good point I also believe in USA people tend to "get things" more so then other places I've noticed.

@Shawnbaby said:

@Vaeternus said:

Owi What's wrong with having more money in your pocket? I guess you support higher taxes huh?

@shawnbab, so wait you're in Canada? Then why if I may ask are you concerned for USA if you're living in another country? It's not like Canada doesn't have problems of their own.

I'm not mistaken about them, I'm well aware thanks. But you're making a big deal in a country where you don't even live in, you think Canada doesn't have murders? Hell, you guys can't even get along on two separate parts of the country. I've had friends live up there and friends that do live there. One from BC, the other from Quebac, they hate each other yet never even met...like what? ok...I'm not attacking Canada, just pointing out a simple fact. Murders happen everywhere, not just America.

Involuntary Manslaughter is what I'm referring to, and is a prime example of someone who isn't all mentally there or temp insanity. If someone has a mental disorder, that's a good reason for it NOT being with intent...if someone is off their meds and throws an air conditional out their window and it hits someone and kills them. You're telling me that's intentional murder? No. And I know this because I know someone who did this very thing...as crazy as it sounds, my friend's mother has mental disorders and has done several things while off her meds. Which is why it's accidental.

Now, DUI is more along the lines of Voluntary Manslaughter or second degree depending on the situation.

No, I'm not saying if we can't stop "all killings, no point in trying" I'm saying, banning or putting severe gun control on guns won't change a damn thing. People will still get them on the black market. Again, how many things are illegal in the world? In the USA there's tons of hardcore drugs illegal and "not exactly easy to get" yet people still get them? Same thing will happen with guns...mark my words.

Awesome...you have 2 friends in Canada that apparently hate each other despite never having met...and you just assume everyone in the entire country is like those 2. Way to overgeneralise. This one dude in your country just shot up a movie theatre...should i just assume the rest of your country is the same? No? Then don't do the same thing to us. Yes, we have problems here. We have murders here....the murder rate in Canada is 1/6 of America's though. Murders happen everywhere...but they happen at a much higher rate in your country than in mine. As far as "Involuntary Manslaughter" is concerned...it's very likely that this dude in question is Insane. Does that make those 12 people he killed any less dead? No...you know what would make those people less dead? If he never had those guns in the first place. If anything the idea that crazy people can amass large stockpiles of weapons is an even better argument for gun control. Again, you keep making this "There's still going to be murders" argument...and yes...that's true...there will always be murders...doesn't mean steps shouldn't be taken to try and prevent as many as possible. Why am I concerned about the US? Well, I do have friends that live there for one thing... I'd rather not see them get shot just for trying to watch a movie. But,in general, I really dislike it when innocent people get shot to death just because they happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time...no matter what country they happen to live in. And i dislike it even more when the prevalent attitude is to do nothing about it.

I knew you'd say something about generalizing, not really. I have tons of friends that I think are cool from Canada, some of which have lived there and in USA(with with all due respect I think THEY can judge a lot better then me or let's just say have a better idea) Obviously you're Canadian so you have your own view as well I'm sure.

But as for the 2 friends online, yes they hate each other I was in an MSN chat and invited both. As soon as they said oh cool, you're from canada. Once they told each other where they were from, one guy stayed quiet the girl from Quebec started cursing him out...like wtf? So, I'm not generalizing or said "everyone" in canada is like that, but you make it out to be like America has the worst crimerate in the world and constantly kill each other, yet you're lecturing me about generalizations? lol Much less you're chiming in on an issue that doesn't concern your country technically. But I can respect your views. No country is perfect afterall so I'm sure you and I can agree on that much at least. Overall country stats can be overrated at times too. Example, I live in NYC. You know the bad rep we have? Yet, if you look up highest crime rate cities in USA. NYC isn't even listed...so again, people will just assume too much. I believe Detroit is among the worst. If you're referring to the wack job who killed 12 people, yeah he's not temporarily insane. He's just crazy evil imo. His GF breaks up with him so he figures oh, well might as well use those weapons, call myself the joker and kill random people for fun...obviously, demented people are different from flat out sick people.

Yeah, instead they'd be dead by something else....do you not know that bomb killings in Iraq and such yearly are ridiculous with terrorists? Ones who strap bombs on their chests and jump into crowds. No guns there...so again, you can't stop crazy murderers if they're THAT determined. Yeah dude, you're way overrating the situation. It was ONE incident in a movie theatre what? Like historically speaking? I'm sure I can find terror attacks or incidents in Canada if I looked. So I really don't know why you're making the movie thing a huge deal. I go to the movies all the time, 99 times out of 100 nothing will happen in fact I'll even say 10 times out of 10 nothing will. Now, you go somewhere where "weapons" in general are more legal, and that can decrease obviously but again this goes for anywhere.

I'm all for doing something about it, I'm just not for taking people's gun rights away due to one or two idiots who decide to kill people one day for no reason. I just don't think that's fair. For anything, not just guns. If the next 4 months, say a gang of "car killers" who kill hundreds of people in total by running them over and bailing, become well known. Are you going to ban or have "car control"?

@Vaeternus said:

@ShawnBaby, ok then. Concerning the guy who got the guns in question, sadly he's just a prime example of what many people can do then go nuts. I don't think the state should alter their gun laws due to one wacko. Now, me personally perhaps there should be more strict standards for a gun like AR-15. But if he did it legally, said he had valid reasons like home protection or something, then went nuts I guess that's just too bad in that case. But most people aren't like that so..

Shooting sprees happen all over the world, it's just for some reason "a big reason" when it happens in America because some people have this concept that we're perfect or something. I'm all for more stricter rules for getting a gun but not banning them all together or gun control to a vast extent. That's just my opinion of course, I can respect your views though.

@p0oty,

It's not incorrect, you said murder I listed incidents of murder despite intentional or not. You assumed I meant "all ways to die" which I never said, you did. Murder can be accidental, ever heard of second degree murder or involuntary manslaughter? I suggest you look these up. One is murder without intent or plans to murder someone(example, drunk driving but it's still considered "murder" due to the fact of a human taking another one's life. And the ladder point you can murder someone due to mental disorders or temporary insanity. These two are very different from "first degree murder" so yes, I'm correct. I never said "normal car accident" I said, DUI, big difference guy.

Well, either way roughly 65% mid 60's % there's still 40%+ to make up for not gun related...

Not denying that it's HARDER to get on the black market, but you seem to be denying that the black market still exists and thus will still get guns out. Why do you deny that just because something is hard to obtain=near to impossible? That seems to be your reasoning.

What? No they're not lol, over the counter drugs are easy as hell to get. Only some states place certain cold remedies and meds behind the counter due to kids popping them to get high, otherwise I can go down to my CVS right now and get several cold meds and such that I can technically get high off of, and/or aspirin too. illegal drugs being more expensive is only that because they're illegal, otherwise they're actually comparable to otc drugs which can be pricey if you're sick or something. Example, my friend needed meds for high sugar that costed 300+dollars for one bottle...so he winded up going with a different brand and generic for far cheaper. High prices will only go so far, look at the price of cars, consoles etc? Pricey yet people still buy them, there will ALWAYS be someone to buy it if you want it badly enough. No matter what it is. Guns are no different then anything else.

The average person maybe, but there are people who just don't care who would carry a small gun regardless or if your job requires it you have every right to as long as you have your gun permit on you. As for cost, it would merely decrease but not stop people all together from getting one.

Yes, because they're primitive yet still deadly weapons.....as your link even says, that's not the case. Even now it's still not the case, people still strangle, suffocate, stab, beat, burn and other ways to kill people

Yet people would still kill each other even without guns(or via black market guns), so even if that number is 25% which is better but not a drastic decrease(50% to me is drastic) there's nothing to say those % numbers of 25% would be consistent year in, year out....it may decrease at first but I see that number fluctuating, most likely going lower over time since again we have black market. If there was no black market and we guaranteed to ban guns for good, then I'd agree but sadly that isn't the case so.

Murder can be accidental, ever heard of second degree murder or involuntary manslaughter? I suggest you look these up.

I looked them up. did you? second degree murder is intentional murder without premeditation. Manslaughter is not murder, hence they call it manslaughter not murder. so again, if it is not intentional, it is not murder. A DUI is not murder either by law. Look up the definitions.

Well, either way roughly 65% mid 60's % there's still 40%+ to make up for not gun related...

40% is less than half. and to get that 40% you have to add all other forms of murder together...and it still doesn't equal gun murder.

What? No they're not lol, over the counter drugs are easy as hell to get

That was my point. By making certain drugs illegal they will be less available than legal drugs.

High prices will only go so far, look at the price of cars, consoles etc?

Comparing guns to cars and video game consoles? Really? both of those have purposes that you can use and enjoy everyday. Guns are rarely used and only have a harmful purpose. People won't spend much money on something they may never use like a gun.

.but you're acting as if guns are the sole reason people kill each other or murder each other with guns exclusively

am i acting like guns are the sole reason people kill each other? can you show where I said or even slightly implied that? or did i say guns make up the majority of murder and guns account for more than all other forms of murder combined?

so even if that number is 25% which is better but not a drastic decrease(50% to me is drastic)

Let your mortgage or car note go up 25% or let your paycheck decrease by 25% and i'm sure you will notice it.

those % numbers of 25% would be consistent year in, year out....it may decrease at first but I see that number fluctuating, most likely going lower over time since again we have black market

every statistic fluctuates and this will be no different.

I still don't see how a 25% decrease in murder will not be worth it. People don't use guns everyday. They only hurt. bullets are expensive. many people don't wants guns taken away simply because of the principle. It's our right and no one can take away our rights. But if you did take away that right, after a while you may not even notice. If it were something that served a purpose like a car or supplied daily enjoyment like a video game that is one thing. but how often do people actually need to use a gun?

@P00ty,

Yes, I did and if you read second degree murder it says without premeditation, meaning accidents can cause someone's murder since it's not premeditated. Yes, I know manslaughter isn't murder but try telling that to a family who lost someone due to a DUI...they'll say, well they chose to drink and get behind the wheel, thus it's murder to some people...I already did, you need to consider various situations and variables.

40% is still a large amount, it's not like it's 5% then we can talk.

Do you not know that certain drugs are already illegal, yet people still get them?

No, just comparing the principles of things people want or need in some cases, and money not being an issue

Simple, your entire posts within this thread suggests you want guns banned and that there will be far less deaths and murders due to them. Less, sure. FAR though? Doubtful.

Fortunately I don't own a house nor a car due to extra, unnecessary expenses and Public Transportation. But I'll use a page from your book here, you're comparing house bills to gun death ratios?

Exactly, meaning that may be down one year and far higher the next in death ratios.

@Shawnbaby said:

@Vaeternus:

I didn't generalize anything. America has a much higher crime rate than Canada...that's a fact. And don't try anything about "population" because crime rates are determined per capita and not by population.

You want to find spree killers and the like in Canada?...I'll do it for you...here's a list of all the "rampage killers" in North and South America...look how often the US comes up on there. Note: this list doesn't include school massacres , workplace killings , hate crimes , or mass murders that took place primarily in a domestic environment. Also, not all of these are caused by guns to be fair. Only the ones that Have an "F" in the third to last column, the one marked with a "W".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers:_Americas

Ok, neither did I. Yes, America may have overall higher but not the world and certainly not quite as bad as you're making it out to be. But yes, population does make a difference being as how more people live here. I said I don't have to but could if I wanted to, my point was no place is perfect. Period, usa or canada. For every negative you find on usa, I can find one for you for canada but this isn't about "my countries perks vs. yours" or anything, merely pointing out that these things happen everywhere and anywhere.

That's great that those deaths and incidents weren't caused by guns, that only further proves my point on why guns don't just kill lots of people exclusively. And as I'm sure you know, on the other side of the world people don't necessary have guns so they make bombs and kill people in crowds...

I've said it once so ill say it again...Yes

@Owie

I don't know about "stunning" but it tends to fluctuate, still that being said I don't support raising taxes right now of all times. With the country is debt, severe debt...roads, power grids etc are trivial compared to the national debt. They'll be fixed in due time and trust me, where Iive there's tons of bridges, potholes etc that need fixing it's slowly getting done. I'm not worried about that. I understand we need taxes but we don't need them constantly raised. Well, you also have to consider the amount of people in England compared to the USA and the crime rates. But also keep in mind, that was also one year you said too right? Plus, while that's a good point I also believe in USA people tend to "get things" more so then other places I've noticed.

I've talked in depth in a reasonable way about this, but it is late at night, and I am tired of hearing this crap, so I'm going to vent.

LEARN TO READ THE CONSTITUTION YOU ******* ******! NOT ONLY IS GUN CONTROL A BAD IDEA, IT IS ILLEGAL. WHY ARE SO MANY ******* WILLING TO TRADE FREEDOM FOR A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY?

@PsychoKnights said:

I've talked in depth in a reasonable way about this, but it is late at night, and I am tired of hearing this crap, so I'm going to vent.

LEARN TO READ THE CONSTITUTION YOU STUPID ******! NOT ONLY IS GUN CONTROL A BAD IDEA, IT IS ILLEGAL. WHY ARE SO MANY IDIOTS WILLING TO TRADE FREEDOM FOR A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY?

If the Constitution is out dated.....amend it. Just the possibility of saving lives>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>freedom to own a gun.

@Vaeternus: I have only read your comments to me so excuse me for asking. But if banning guns is not the answer, what do you suggest should be done? If all you can answer is "Something needs to be done but i don't know what". that is fine. but if you have a plan of action i would like to hear that.

@PsychoKnights said:

I've talked in depth in a reasonable way about this, but it is late at night, and I am tired of hearing this crap, so I'm going to vent.

LEARN TO READ THE CONSTITUTION YOU STUPID ******! NOT ONLY IS GUN CONTROL A BAD IDEA, IT IS ILLEGAL. WHY ARE SO MANY IDIOTS WILLING TO TRADE FREEDOM FOR A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY?

Actually, "the right to bear arms" is in The Bill of Rights.. .not the Constitution. The Bill of Rights, published in 1791 (4 years after the Constitution) is a list of the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution. In total the constitution has been amended 27 times.

@PsychoKnights said:

I've talked in depth in a reasonable way about this, but it is late at night, and I am tired of hearing this crap, so I'm going to vent.

LEARN TO READ THE CONSTITUTION YOU STUPID ******! NOT ONLY IS GUN CONTROL A BAD IDEA, IT IS ILLEGAL. WHY ARE SO MANY IDIOTS WILLING TO TRADE FREEDOM FOR A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY?

Moral of the story is don't post late at night. I've made that mistake before as well ;)

Anyway, I'm sure it's just because you're tired, but please try to avoid insulting people in the future.

@PsychoKnights said:

I've talked in depth in a reasonable way about this, but it is late at night, and I am tired of hearing this crap, so I'm going to vent.

LEARN TO READ THE CONSTITUTION YOU STUPID ******! NOT ONLY IS GUN CONTROL A BAD IDEA, IT IS ILLEGAL. WHY ARE SO MANY IDIOTS WILLING TO TRADE FREEDOM FOR A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY?

Since when was gun control illegal?

@pooty: Yes, amend it. That is a legal solution for the pro-gun movement, but amending the Constitution is not the same thing as passing new laws. The process of amending the Constitution is a lot more complicated than simply getting a majority of congress to approve a bill and getting the President to sign it. Since the Second Amendment has never been amended, all the current federal gun laws are illegal.

Regarding it being okay to give up freedoms for security, I disagree completely. For one thing, I don't believe that greater gun liberties lead to more gun deaths, but putting that aside for the moment, are you really okay with giving up freedoms to save lives? I'm not. How about this life saving policy? We could put chips in everybody's arms which register their every movement. If someone committed a crime, we could simply see who was in that location and arrest them. Easy. No doubt that would discourage most crimes. Of course, we would all essentially be slaves to our government monitors, but who cares as long as it saves lives?

@Shawnbaby: Thank you Captain History! Without your help my statements would have been...completely accurate...because amendments to the Constitution become part of the Constitution. That is the whole point of Amendments. They are not separate documents. They add to/take away from the original document.

@k4tzm4n: Fair enough. I appreciate your patience. (grins) I will amend my original post.

@Enemybird: The federal government only has the powers to do those things specifically granted to it by the Constitution. The Founding Fathers felt so strongly about gun rights that they went further than that and specifically added an amendment saying that the federal government could not deprive the citizens of the right to bear arms. Any legislation which violates an amendment or for that matter simply overreaches the specific authorities granted to the federal government by the Constitution is illegal because it violates the Constitution. It should be struck down the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court has not been doing its job for the last century or so, and the Constitution is generally ignored. This has lead to the current political climate where the federal government can pretty much demand anything of the citizenry from mandating that they turn over their private e-mails and phone call records for the sake of national security to declaring that you will be fined if you do not purchase health insurance. Who what our overlords will decide must be done next in the name of "security."

If there is any part of this that I need to explain in detail, let me know. I will explain it calmly without insult. I just felt like venting last night.

@PsychoKnights: No worries.

@PsychoKnights: It's amazing that you made those comments to me. I just got done posting in another thread of how i APPROVE of a chip being put in our bodies. I value life over most freedoms. In 2010 there were 13,000 murders in the USA. Of those 8,500 were done with guns. Those numbers are just deaths and don't include assaults, near death injuries etc. Most of those were not caused by serial killers but by thugs, drug dealers, thieves and drug addicts and gang members. i want guns out of those peoples hands. and if new laws have to be passed or old laws amended, then i'm all for it. A gun only has one purpose: to harm. If we can't take them out of everyone's hand(which would be ideal) let's take them out of the wrong peoples hands. but here is a link to the thread i just commented on about the chip.

http://www.comicvine.com/forums/off-topic/5/fda-approves-electronic-chips-in-medications-o_0/684835/?page=2

you will find my reply on page 3 or 4.

@pooty said:

@PsychoKnights: It's amazing that you made those comments to me. I just got done posting in another thread of how i APPROVE of a chip being put in our bodies. I value life over most freedoms. In 2010 there were 13,000 murders in the USA. Of those 8,500 were done with guns. Those numbers are just deaths and don't include assaults, near death injuries etc. Most of those were not caused by serial killers but by thugs, drug dealers, thieves and drug addicts and gang members. i want guns out of those peoples hands. and if new laws have to be passed or old laws amended, then i'm all for it. A gun only has one purpose: to harm. If we can't take them out of everyone's hand(which would be ideal) let's take them out of the wrong peoples hands. but here is a link to the thread i just commented on about the chip.

http://www.comicvine.com/forums/off-topic/5/fda-approves-electronic-chips-in-medications-o_0/684835/?page=2

you will find my reply on page 3 or 4.

Wow! At least you are consistent in your stance on security over freedom.

I guess statements like, "Give me liberty or give me death," are stupid to you. I'm curious, if you were back in colonial times, would you fight for American independence or would you prefer the peace of British slavery?

If people did not have guns, they would stab each other to death. Guns are tools. Nearly everyone I know owns a gun, and none of them have ever used them to kill. Your idea that guns are only good for killing is simply wrong.

@PsychoKnights: Give me liberty or give me death," are stupid to you.

Yes. there are exceptions to that rule but guns and microchips are not them.

if you were back in colonial times, would you fight for American independence or would you prefer the peace of British slavery.

I don't consider making colonies and expecting them to follow rules as being slavery. England gave you what was needed to get there and to establish yourself. They paid the cost to be the boss. Nevertheless, if it were slavery like how the Egyptians did the jews or how whites did to blacks..... i would absolutely 100% fight to my death.

If people did not have guns, they would stab each other to death

they would stab, strangle etc. i agree. but no legal weapon is as quick, efficient or undefendable as gun. thats why people choose guns to kill more than every other method combined.

Your idea that guns are only good for killing is simply wrong

I said "to harm". what is another use for a gun?

Nearly everyone I know owns a gun, and none of them have ever used them to kill.

as said, your friends can keep their guns but something has to be done to keep them out of the hands of the 13,000+ who use them to kill every year and that number is nothing compared to the tens of thousands of injuries they cause.

@JediXMan said:

@Mercy_ said:

@JediXMan said:

@Mercy_ said:

If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns.

That being said, there should be more stringent rules and an effective screening system in place for those who wish to legally obtain guns.

If memory serves, that again wouldn't have made a difference here. While I do agree with you, this guy was a straight A student on his way to getting his PhD, with - again, if I recall - no prior offenses that would have raised a red flag.

Even if that were the case, it would make a difference in plenty of occasions.

And if a psych screening were required (assuming he wasn't capable of cheating it, which he could have been, who knows) it could have made a difference.

Oh, no. I'm agreeing with you that background checks and possibly psyche scans would help. All I am saying is that, in this case, it wouldn't have helped. That's all.

@Mercy_ said:

@Alurvelve said:

Exactly.

Indeed. It is naive to believe that banning guns would lessen crime.

Everything in this quote, +9001. There's enough regulating as it is for people who simply enjoy going to the firing range; it's the equivalent of driving for pleasure. You don't do psych tests for people in cars, do you? Yet car crashes kill way more people than gun shootings do, in the US, per year. It's a horrible idea to make much more strict gun laws. They won't help anyone.

@pooty: Wait. You want chips put in our bodies so we will be tracked 100% of the time by the ever-so-trusting government that is trying to bring us forced vaccinations, and that has brought us Japanese internment camps? The government that continues to spy on it's own citizens and condones cyber warfare on such a level that nobody even knew the US government was responsible until we (stupidly) admitted to it? These chips wouldn't even have to be 100% publically known. They could do all sorts of crap with them and they wouldn't HAVE to tell us. If you think the government follows it's own rules and regulations every single moment of every single day, you are

WRONG.

Who's to say they couldn't monitor everything about our physical bodies? Who's to say they didn't implant a CAMERA into your body without your knowledge? That sounds ridiculous, right? Well, if they put computer chips capable of transmitting data into people's bodies, that wouldn't be too far off. And let's not even get into the health aspect of what putting transmitting chips into people's skin would do... Skin cancer and organ cancer galore. Oh, yay. I'd move out and revoke my citizenship if anything even remotely similar to that came up, and I'd never trust another US government employee or official again. You're talking about modern day NAZISM, even if you don't realize it.

Now... About deaths. What about unintentional deaths? People kill others in cars, by accident, far more often than murders are committed. Should we only allow the people with Ph.D.'s to drive? Should we require psychological evaluations to drive? Should we enable the government to control virtually the last possible way for humans to travel large distances, so that the nanny-state can do whatever they want with it's citizens, and almost nobody can stop them? Again, Nazism. But I was also reading into your argument, with that one, so perhaps you agree as well that what I just proposed is ridiculous, which would be a good thing.

Another purpose for guns, by the by, is enjoyment. Maybe some people like shooting just for the fun of it. No, that can't be it, we're all secretly training to be assassins. That's why shooting is in the Olympics. Right.

Britain didn't necessarily enslave us in the sense of the Egyptians enslaving the Jews lo those any years ago, but they did tax us unfairly without representation, and they didn't really help us at all. Like, seriously. We were on our own, but still paying them for... Nothing. If that's what you want, give 20% of your money and paychecks for the rest of your life, to Obama, and live in Canada. That's essentially what was happening, and that's what you just defended.

@Shawnbaby said:

I did read what you said, and again while I'm not denying that guns kill people I'm merely pointing out they're not exclusive to people killing people...therefore this would only be a temporary solution. I know you never said that, but you said higher then Canada and acting as if you can't go to a movie without getting shot implying you get shot every time you go to a movie or something...thus slightly exaggerated.

@pooty,

Honestly, I support stricter laws on guns some where in between gun control and gun bans. While I don't support anyone just walking in and getting an handgun like a video game and walking out with it, I certain don't support banning them entirely either. I believe like the black market, make it tougher for people to get guns legally but have a more patient, legal process and damn good reason to own one. Hey, perhaps charge a "gun fee", require gun license to be required and you know how they have a driving test, have a gun test required if you want one or certain amount of guns every 2 years or something.

@Owi,

They're not that lowered, only in certain states with tax cuts. Otherwise a lot of politicians want to raise them because they think the government knows what to do with your money more then you do which I very much disagree with. It's not the biggest, just one of the biggest...economy is bigger with jobs obviously, wouldn't say a scare tactic by the republicans so much but them pointing out that liberals want to take more money from the people and think big government knows better which is bogus. It's simple, one side wants the people to have more money, the other wants big government. They're obviously the ones against the democrats who are in support of it, so that's just a natural reaction on their part. Also keep in mind a lot of libertarians also are against raised taxes. As for debt, we just need presidents that use logic, not stupidity. Meaning, DON'T spend more, spend less...

Yeah, there's some other sites with various stats etc that fluctuate. I'm a little skeptical with wiki concerning certain stats so forgive me. I've noticed for video games, comics etc they're pretty accurate with other things not so much. But I'm sure that's roughly accurate and seems similar to some gun stats I found on other gun sites murder ratios etc.

If other countries have war within itself, that's just another example of why guns are irrelevant if people can't live in peace there. Like how people strap bombs onto their chests and jump into crowds..no guns involved there, yet still murdering innocent people.

@Vaeternus: You clearly missed that over 90% of all those Rampage Killers used guns. Taking away a lot of those guns would have taken away a lot of those rampages...that's more than a temporary solution.

And yes..I said Higher than Canada..That's not an exaggeration or a generalization...that's a documented fact.

Also I never said that you couldn't go to a movie theatre without getting shot. I was using an example based on this most recent tragedy. Anything you inferred from that statement is on you.

People keep saying that gun control doesn't accomplish anything...but worldwide statistics disagree with that statement. People will say that "people will still find a way to kill other people"...and that's true...but it sure is a lot harder to kill 12 people with a knife than it is with an AR-15. People will say "They'll just start using bombs and more people will be killed" ..but not everyone can make a bomb...many who try end up blowing themselves up. People will "Second Amendment Rights" but the second amendment actually states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."...one of the key words in that statement is "regulated" another is "militia"...but people gloss over them.

I didn't miss them, I saw them but you're missing that historically speaking over 50% of mass murderers who have killed people in double digits have done so without guns....and or terror attacks. Were those deaths done by guns? No...planes and explosives. Or Fuel causing it I should say...same purpose as a massive bomb.

But you're acting as if there would only be 10% death ratio if guns were controlled now...I really doubt that.

No, I mean you're exaggerating the fact that of your movie example...it's not like that here. Just because it happened once...

Yes, you did say that. You said a few posts ago and I quote "

@Shawnbaby said:

Why am I concerned about the US? Well, I do have friends that live there for one thing... I'd rather not see them get shot just for trying to watch a movie.

"

You said right here you would not want to see friends of yours in USA get shot while trying to watch a movie. So yes you did say this and are exaggerating with it. Again, you're talking to a huge movie goer my whole life. If anything there's more risk of getting into a fight at a crowded bar or club then getting shot at a movie theatre. So no it's not on me, you were the one who said it as a case for your argument on gun control and that America is more violent then Canada.

I wouldn't say it's harder to kill 12 people with a knife as there are killers who have killed more people with knives, their hands and strangling them. Now, perhaps ALL at once in a matter of a minute spraying bullets everywhere? No. But does 12 deaths in a minute vs. 12 in a few days make any difference? I mean, a psycho is a psycho, death is death. Besides, another reason why I 'm against extreme gun control and gun bans is this...people will just turn to the next thing which would be knives, home made weapons, bombs etc, etc. So while you can say well gun stats have decreased...death stats most likely won't. The only way to alter that example you brought up is to alter the law entirely.

@minigunman123 said:

@pooty: Wait. You want chips put in our bodies so we will be tracked 100% of the time by the ever-so-trusting government that is trying to bring us forced vaccinations, and that has brought us Japanese internment camps? The government that continues to spy on it's own citizens and condones cyber warfare on such a level that nobody even knew the US government was responsible until we (stupidly) admitted to it? These chips wouldn't even have to be 100% publically known. They could do all sorts of crap with them and they wouldn't HAVE to tell us. If you think the government follows it's own rules and regulations every single moment of every single day, you are

WRONG.

Who's to say they couldn't monitor everything about our physical bodies? Who's to say they didn't implant a CAMERA into your body without your knowledge? That sounds ridiculous, right? Well, if they put computer chips capable of transmitting data into people's bodies, that wouldn't be too far off. And let's not even get into the health aspect of what putting transmitting chips into people's skin would do... Skin cancer and organ cancer galore. Oh, yay. I'd move out and revoke my citizenship if anything even remotely similar to that came up, and I'd never trust another US government employee or official again. You're talking about modern day NAZISM, even if you don't realize it.

Now... About deaths. What about unintentional deaths? People kill others in cars, by accident, far more often than murders are committed. Should we only allow the people with Ph.D.'s to drive? Should we require psychological evaluations to drive? Should we enable the government to control virtually the last possible way for humans to travel large distances, so that the nanny-state can do whatever they want with it's citizens, and almost nobody can stop them? Again, Nazism. But I was also reading into your argument, with that one, so perhaps you agree as well that what I just proposed is ridiculous, which would be a good thing.

Another purpose for guns, by the by, is enjoyment. Maybe some people like shooting just for the fun of it. No, that can't be it, we're all secretly training to be assassins. That's why shooting is in the Olympics. Right.

Britain didn't necessarily enslave us in the sense of the Egyptians enslaving the Jews lo those any years ago, but they did tax us unfairly without representation, and they didn't really help us at all. Like, seriously. We were on our own, but still paying them for... Nothing. If that's what you want, give 20% of your money and paychecks for the rest of your life, to Obama, and live in Canada. That's essentially what was happening, and that's what you just defended.

You want chips put in our bodies so we will be tracked 100%

If it happens thats fine, if it doesn't thats fine also. I see some benefit from it

ever-so-trusting government

anyone who trust the government is a fool. i don't trust them. but until i hear bad things about the chip that outweigh the good, i think it's a good idea.

The government that continues to spy on it's own citizens and condones cyber warfare on such a level that nobody even knew the US government was responsible until we (stupidly) admitted to it?

i have nothing to hide. they know almost every move you make already. they just made the tech smaller to use.

If you think the government follows it's own rules and regulations every single moment of every single day

again i don't trust them nor like them, but sometimes they have good ideas.

Who's to say they couldn't monitor everything about our physical bodies? Who's to say they didn't implant a CAMERA into your body without your knowledge? That sounds ridiculous, right? Well, if they put computer chips capable of transmitting data into people's bodies, that wouldn't be too far off

They know how the body works already and they put cameras in us for surgeries etc. To put a camera in me permanently doesn't make too much sense. What purpose would that serve? They can see my bowel movements up close?

And let's not even get into the health aspect of what putting transmitting chips into people's skin would do... Skin cancer and organ cancer galore

we are bombarded with radiation,pollution and chemicals 24/7.

What about unintentional deaths

that is not the topic we are discussing. we are talking about intentional murder. for this thread accidental death doesn't matter.

Another purpose for guns, by the by, is enjoyment.

Go to a shooting range where i know the guns will stay there. or get a video game simulation. guns are like heroin or meth. the only benefit is temporary enjoyment with long lasting consequences.

but they did tax us unfairly without representation, and they didn't really help us at all

true, no government is perfect

We were on our own, but still paying them for... Nothing. give 20% of your money and paychecks for the rest of your life, to Obama, and live in Canada. That's essentially what was happening, and that's what you just defended.

It would be no us without them putting up money and ships. It was a government INVESTMENT. Colonization is a business. as long as your investment makes money. you should profit.