Mass shooting on campus in Oregon

And the retired cop who shot the guy in the movie theater a while back for throwing popcorn at him.

 

The thing is, O_T, even if one stipulates that the civilian with a gun is in a better position than the unarmed person (and, frankly, I'm not sure this is the case), the number of situations in which this theoretically armed civilian saves a life is so far outweighed by the number of Americans who are harmed by guns that we're getting a negative return on our right to defend ourselves. We're not defending ourselves with our guns. We just aren't. We're killing each other with them.

Dick tends to say it rather glibly, but this is the tradeoff we're making. We're allowing hundreds of thousands of people to die each year to maintain the right to defend ourselves from these theoretical situations that are virtually non-existent, relatively speaking. Captain SuperCitizen is a fantasy concocted by the NRA to make its members feel like superheroes, all so that the gun manufacturers can line their pockets on the blood of the American citizens they claim to protect.

Now, personally, I'm not advocating for taking away guns. Believe it or not, I am a strong believer in the 2nd Amendment. But given that we've already established the 2nd Amendment is not an unrestricted right, I do believe that there is a way to curb the sales of guns without infringing upon that right.

 

I don't think anything you're saying is unreasonable. The problem, however, is that all the plans to curb the sale of guns will, in the end, only curb the sale of guns to people who intend to use them with good intentions and will have absolutely no effect on those who have bad intentions.

 

Thing is, even the people who purchase them with good intentions often end up suffering bad outcomes. In the hands of a civilian, very, very rarely do guns end up as a life-saving device.

 

And that is the chance they take. No one buys a gun without knowing what a gun does.

 

Well, said pern. I am for gun rights as well, but they need to be sensibly regulated.

 

This idea that "it won't work, so let's not do anything" is absurd. You have no way of knowing the impact, and anything that makes bad people and the mentally unstable work harder to get guns is a good thing in my book.

 

If you're a stable, law-abiding citizen, you will pass the background check and get the gun you want.
I don't see a problem there.

 

If I were a strong advocate of gun rights, I would be concerned about who determines "stable." But seems reasonable to me.

 

Why is the fucking Daily Mail writing that story? Annnnnnnd.... why were you reading such a notoriously right-wing rag?

 

So nobody can accuse me of picking a site with a liberal bias.
.

 

Did a little digging and found that no one is even sure if the witness actually shot the guy being carjacked. The story stinks, and nothing ever appeared in the Houston Chronicle. Only TV stations reported anything, and they had conflicting reports.

The Daily Mail should stick to stories about people stabbing the shit outta each other in Britain.