In partnership with CBSSports.com
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
2nd Amendment is to protect ourselves from the Government not necessarily the redcoats but I agree with your overall post.
You know why I think these events are more prevalent?
1. TV COVERAGE- They get famous from this shit and thats what a lot of these turds want
2. Failing family structure in the U.S. Parents don't always parent and kids spend a lot of time raising themselves. This does not work.
This post was edited by jgdomino 19 months ago
Pic Sigs are for losers.
But it's not illegal for Eric Holder to send thousands of "assault rifles" there.
so this is the "smart" position?
Phatboy if you had any balls I'd meet you at the AFA Boxing gym and have Coach Weichers put some gloves on us.
Newsflash: if the government wanted to take over, your collection of handguns and semi autos isn't going to stop them. They have an endless supply of military grade weapons and trained personnel.
If you have guns because of the true written meaning of the second amendment, you're pretty much a dumbass.
This post was edited by Devils0720 19 months ago
Not saying they couldn't but thats another problem with banning all guns, If it happened the gov would have to kill a ton of people to take their guns from them.
Ask our soldiers in Afghanistan how that's working out for them.
I honestly don't know. In a situation like this where it appears that the people lawfully owned guns that probably aren't that outrageous (i.e. commonly owned and used semi-automatic handguns and rifles), where are the loopholes or lapses in regulations that are missing short of outright bans? Maybe you could say that by allowing him to have apparently easy access to these guns that they weren't very responsible gun owners, but what would legislation forcing people to lock up their guns in a way that their 20 year old kids can't get to them actually accomplish and how do you even enforce it except after the fact of a tragedy like this?
My brother recently had to move to Europe for the military and he gave me one of his guns that he couldn't take with him. I think it is fun to shoot at the range but it also scares me sometimes to think about the fact that I now have a gun and ammunition under my bed. There is just so much responsibility that comes with that. There are millions of people in this country that can handle that responsibility, but there are many people who can't. I think the mental health angle is really important when you look at events like this and the Virginia Tech shooting, but there are always going to be people who fall through the cracks. Or even just people who are stupid and/or impulsive. I just don't know where to begin addressing that. But like some have said in this thread, I am wary of laws that might overreact to a tragedy for political reasons while not really doing anything to fix a problem.
that's how we end up with the patriot act
Real live examples pointed out are pretty stark, aren't they?
I hope the fact the mother decided she needed those guns in her house is mentioned as the root cause of this. The whole gun control debate is going to say "well if he didn't have access to gun then this wouldn't have happened". Well he didn't go down to Walmart and buy them, his mother brought them in her home and now she's dead as a result.
I hope more and more Americans realize that having a gun in your home makes you more likely to be a victim of gun violence and not more likely to prevent it.
When, I was in China, I was frequently asked if I felt safe in America with all the guns. It really caught me off guard the first time.
The ease with which Americans can acquire fire arms seems bat-shit insane to about every other developed country.
Also, how many people still hunt for sustenance? Because "protect recreational shooting!" is pretty low on the priority list for me at least.
This post was edited by HumphreyBogart 19 months ago
I absolutely agree that the Second Amendment prohibits the government from taking away your gun right now. Let's assume that whatever "gun policy" changes are being discussed come in the form of a constitutional amendment (recognizing that is unlikely). Or if you want to make it totally hypothetical, let's assume we're starting over and there is no Bill of Rights. So the question is what SHOULD the right POLICY be? To me the relevant questions are: What are the legitimate interests of people in owning guns? How compelling are they? How many lives would be saved and injuries avoided by banning/limiting access to guns? How compelling is the interest in achieving those benefits? What practical obstacles exist to achieving those benefits?
Evil does exist -- twisted, demented evil. We need not make excuses for, or pretend its a social problem, it's real it walks among us and today it took many innocents to their grave. I'm a lot less worried about guns than I am a society that fails to recognize that there is both good and evil on this planet and points to the murder weapon as opposed to the murderer as the problem.
I'm not saying this to campaign for unlimited gun rights -- I'm saying this because I believe the debate is misplaced
Fallacy. I'm not looking it up because I can't nail the search words. Guns prevent far more violent crime than they cause to those that own them responsibly.
America was founded on guns. I feel that since America and pretty much all of north and south america are newer countries in the grand scheme of things that mostly formed from armed revolution from common populations. Other countries also have for the most part all had monarchies or dictatorships that would fear an armed population. Guns are part of America and at this point changing it would cause a lot of pain and suffering.
Epidemiologically, you appear to be incorrect:
Data from a US mortality follow-back survey were analyzed to determine whether having a firearm in the home increases the risk of a violent death in the home and whether risk varies by storage practice, type of gun, or number of guns in the home. Those persons with guns in the home were at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 1.9, 95% confidence interval: 1.1, 3.4). They were also at greater risk of dying from a firearm homicide, but risk varied by age and whether the person was living with others at the time of death. The risk of dying from a suicide in the home was greater for males in homes with guns than for males without guns in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 10.4, 95% confidence interval: 5.8, 18.9). Persons with guns in the home were also more likely to have died from suicide committed with a firearm than from one committed by using a different method (adjusted odds ratio = 31.1, 95% confidence interval: 19.5, 49.6). Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home.
We place a greater emphasis on individual rights than any other developed nation on earth. We don't suppress Nazism by banning people from speaking out in favor of Nazism, we trust that the marketplace of ideas will operate to keep those ideas on the fringe. We don't allow police to search people and their possessions with impunity, we say that what a person chooses to keep private can't be probed by the state without probable cause. This flies in the face of what countries around the world, from first world democracies to third world dictatorships, allow. We also take an individual rather than collective approach to gun ownership. Practically, I don't think our nation would fall apart if no one could go to the gun range to shoot at targets tomorrow. But if changes are going to be made, I don't think it can come from the top down. You can't just ban recreational guns and say "WELL OTHER COUNTRIES DO IT." Our tolerance for individual gun rights that other countries shun goes hand in hand with our constitutional enshrinement of individual speech, assembly, and privacy rights that other countries shun. I don't think one can be so easily separated from the others when it comes to our culture.
The link only speaks to one side of the question. I see no mention at all of crimes prevented. Nice try.
Isn't it possible you're increasing the likelihood of preventing a crime in your home AS WELL as the chances of a violent gun incident?
Unless you think you face an imminent threat and having the gun is the only way you will be able to stop it, I don't understand why a parent would take the risk of having one in the house.
Getting to the root of why Americans feel its so necessary to own a gun and eliminating those reasons will do far more to stop our gun culture than any watered down laws.
I'd say that once we transition over to lightsabers this would all be solved, but we saw what that asshole Anakin did in Star Wars III, so we're just pretty much fucked as a species I guess.
"And I try to har-mo-nize with songs the lonesome sparrow sings...
There are no kings inside the Gates of Eden."
A recommended read for you:
Gun Violence: The Real Costs (Studies in Crime and Public Policy) [Philip J. Cook, Jens Ludwig] on Amazon.com. *FREE* super saver shipping on qualifying offers. 100 billion dollars. That is the annual cost of gun violence in America according to the authors of this landmark study
This post was edited by NOD6216 19 months ago
someone really made this wtf?
I'm gonna just assume 4chan until proven otherwise, as they have cornered the market on Internet asshole-ery at a Standard Oil caliber.
This is salient to the original purpose of the amendment, the security of the free state against the government. And it was a logical right to protect considering we had just revolted from an oppressive government.
That situation is very much out dated.
lol at changing gun laws in this country causing a lot of pain and suffering. Nice hanging curve ball.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports