Shooting at CT Elementary School. WTF AMERICA?!

[AFK]

There certainly isn't any upside, or need really, for people to own hand held rapid fire death machines.  Simly put, it this asshole didn't have an assault rifle, he would have killed less people.  There is absolutely no need for someone to own that kind of weaponry.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING?

AN ASSAULT RIFLE

ESPECIALLY THE KIND THAT WAS USED IS JUST A FUCKING SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE WITH A PISTOL GRIP!!!

HUNTERS USE SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES TO HUNT!!!!

THE ONLY REASON IT IS AN "ASSAULT" RIFLE IS THE PRESENCE OF A FUCKING PISTOL GRIP!!!!!

People don't need semi-automatic weapons.

You don't need an automobile.  They kill way more people.  Get your ass on the bus.

There is no valid comparison between the utility of an automobile and the utility of a gun, for the average American.  Yes, automobiles kill but that is not their purpose.  The purpose of a gun is to kill.

Now this is an interesting one, because automobile death is outrageously high and isn't going to improve because the only way to improve it is restrict the vehicles or make the drivers more responsible which of course will never happen.
What makes it more acceptable?... Not much. Only that modern civilisation has its transport integrally linked to automobiles, without guns it doesn't really bring anything to a standstill.

Light rail.
Bus.
Urban transit in other forms.

Or better yet, go back to horses.  Nobody needs a car.

That sounds awesome, I'm all for it. Lets do that.

Sounds good to me too.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

That's your purpose, unfortunately there are those who use it to put 11 rounds in a 5 year old.  Sorry if it makes me a bad person but I'm perfectly willing to restrict your access to automatic weapons if it means less dead 5 year olds.

Sure.  Come take a walk with me in the Santa Ritas or the Catalinas.  Or hell, on the South end.  We can carry breech-loaders.  When a pack of javalinas decide they don't like our faces, we can shoot them really slowly.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

There certainly isn't any upside, or need really, for people to own hand held rapid fire death machines.  Simly put, it this asshole didn't have an assault rifle, he would have killed less people.  There is absolutely no need for someone to own that kind of weaponry.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING?

AN ASSAULT RIFLE

ESPECIALLY THE KIND THAT WAS USED IS JUST A FUCKING SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE WITH A PISTOL GRIP!!!

HUNTERS USE SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES TO HUNT!!!!

THE ONLY REASON IT IS AN "ASSAULT" RIFLE IS THE PRESENCE OF A FUCKING PISTOL GRIP!!!!!

People don't need semi-automatic weapons.

You don't need an automobile.  They kill way more people.  Get your ass on the bus.

There is no valid comparison between the utility of an automobile and the utility of a gun, for the average American.  Yes, automobiles kill but that is not their purpose.  The purpose of a gun is to kill.

Now this is an interesting one, because automobile death is outrageously high and isn't going to improve because the only way to improve it is restrict the vehicles or make the drivers more responsible which of course will never happen.
What makes it more acceptable?... Not much. Only that modern civilisation has its transport integrally linked to automobiles, without guns it doesn't really bring anything to a standstill.

Light rail.
Bus.
Urban transit in other forms.

Or better yet, go back to horses.  Nobody needs a car.

That sounds awesome, I'm all for it. Lets do that.

Sounds good to me too.

So, you'll be leading by example, then?

[Cain]

All automobile deaths in the USA, 2011:  34,485 (includes involvement by law enforcement)
All Firearm deaths in the USA, 2011:  31,347 (includes involvement by law enforcement)

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

To be honest, that's a hell of a lot closer than I thought it would be.

For non-Americans, for comparison, the 2008 road death toll in the UK was 2538.

The UK has a population of 60 million, the USA, 311 million.

[Don Coyote]

There certainly isn't any upside, or need really, for people to own hand held rapid fire death machines.  Simly put, it this asshole didn't have an assault rifle, he would have killed less people.  There is absolutely no need for someone to own that kind of weaponry.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING?

AN ASSAULT RIFLE

ESPECIALLY THE KIND THAT WAS USED IS JUST A FUCKING SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE WITH A PISTOL GRIP!!!

HUNTERS USE SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES TO HUNT!!!!

THE ONLY REASON IT IS AN "ASSAULT" RIFLE IS THE PRESENCE OF A FUCKING PISTOL GRIP!!!!!

People don't need semi-automatic weapons.

You don't need an automobile.  They kill way more people.  Get your ass on the bus.

There is no valid comparison between the utility of an automobile and the utility of a gun, for the average American.  Yes, automobiles kill but that is not their purpose.  The purpose of a gun is to kill.

Now this is an interesting one, because automobile death is outrageously high and isn't going to improve because the only way to improve it is restrict the vehicles or make the drivers more responsible which of course will never happen.
What makes it more acceptable?... Not much. Only that modern civilisation has its transport integrally linked to automobiles, without guns it doesn't really bring anything to a standstill.

Light rail.
Bus.
Urban transit in other forms.

Or better yet, go back to horses.  Nobody needs a car.

I suspect that things might be greatly improved if people did not have cars. We could use more of the land in cities that is wasted on streets. There would be less urban air pollution. People would not be dumping oil and other fluids into the storm drains that drain out into the ocean. Children could play in the streets more freely.

Also RWHN, automatic.
You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.

To wit, an automatic firearm is one that will continuously discharge while the trigger is held down. Which is not what is commonly available to the citizens of the US, nor is it the type that that majority of "assault" rifles are. This includes military rifles.

[Pæs]

There certainly isn't any upside, or need really, for people to own hand held rapid fire death machines.  Simly put, it this asshole didn't have an assault rifle, he would have killed less people.  There is absolutely no need for someone to own that kind of weaponry.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING?

AN ASSAULT RIFLE

ESPECIALLY THE KIND THAT WAS USED IS JUST A FUCKING SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE WITH A PISTOL GRIP!!!

HUNTERS USE SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES TO HUNT!!!!

THE ONLY REASON IT IS AN "ASSAULT" RIFLE IS THE PRESENCE OF A FUCKING PISTOL GRIP!!!!!

People don't need semi-automatic weapons.

You don't need an automobile.  They kill way more people.  Get your ass on the bus.

There is no valid comparison between the utility of an automobile and the utility of a gun, for the average American.  Yes, automobiles kill but that is not their purpose.  The purpose of a gun is to kill.

Tell that to your average drunken driver.  Or the dumbfuck texting while driving.  Or better yet, explain it to the families of the victims.

And the purpose of a gun is to walk up into Reddington Pass and blow the hell out of a bag of tin cans.  Or to enjoy the Santa Ritas without worrying about crazy fucking bears or even crazier javalina packs.

But what do I know?

That's your purpose, unfortunately there are those who use it to put 11 rounds in a 5 year old.  Sorry if it makes me a bad person but I'm perfectly willing to restrict your access to automatic weapons if it means less dead 5 year olds.

So we make better guns that don't do that.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

All automobile deaths in the USA, 2011:  34,485 (includes involvement by law enforcement)
All Firearm deaths in the USA, 2011:  31,347 (includes involvement by law enforcement)

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

To be honest, that's a hell of a lot closer than I thought it would be.

For non-Americans, for comparison, the 2008 road death toll in the UK was 2538.

The UK has a population of 60 million, the USA, 311 million.

Cars beat guns, despite the oft-repeated assertion here that the only use of guns is to shoot 5 year olds.

And we're really shitty drivers.  Comes from each of us thinking we own the road.

[Faust]

1) Guns are vulgarscary, people are terrible I don't like them.
2) Get rid of guns and people will stop killing each other as much. Reduce peoples access to weapons that make killing easier, reduce killing. Without guns people would politely slap each other when they became cross with one another.

Yes, I don't like guns, I'm sorry if I gave an impression to the contrary (all the guns for Faust, none for anyone else all for me).
Without guns people would stab, punch or club, or bomb each other. Some of those result in less deaths because of the speed and ease, others more but require more preperation..

Oh no. It's rather apparent that you don't like guns, but to me that speaks of "stop liking what i don't like" or "that is scary and not fun for me, so you can't do it either"

Oh and guess in magical no guns land, there is no way to make explosives.

I don't like guns but that's not why I don't support the law allowing sale of them but if you are going to insult me that way that is fair enough, I can appreciate you took insult with my earlier response to you and I am sorry about that. But I would not support any legislation needlessly.

I don't support legal sale of them because I see no necessity of use for them, and believe the few cases such as hunting and the like do not outweigh the deaths caused by them.
I already addressed the explosives comment in the post you quoted. Though a real and genuine risk it one I feel eliminates action on impulsion.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Also RWHN, automatic.
You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.

To wit, an automatic firearm is one that will continuously discharge while the trigger is held down. Which is not what is commonly available to the citizens of the US, nor is it the type that that majority of "assault" rifles are. This includes military rifles.

Shoosh.  He's an expert on this.  Fully automatic, semi automatic, what's the difference?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I don't support legal sale of them because I see no necessity of use for them, and believe the few cases such as hunting and the like do not outweigh the deaths caused by them.

By that standard, we should outlaw ladders, too.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

There certainly isn't any upside, or need really, for people to own hand held rapid fire death machines.  Simly put, it this asshole didn't have an assault rifle, he would have killed less people.  There is absolutely no need for someone to own that kind of weaponry.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING?

AN ASSAULT RIFLE

ESPECIALLY THE KIND THAT WAS USED IS JUST A FUCKING SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE WITH A PISTOL GRIP!!!

HUNTERS USE SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES TO HUNT!!!!

THE ONLY REASON IT IS AN "ASSAULT" RIFLE IS THE PRESENCE OF A FUCKING PISTOL GRIP!!!!!

People don't need semi-automatic weapons.

You don't need an automobile.  They kill way more people.  Get your ass on the bus.

There is no valid comparison between the utility of an automobile and the utility of a gun, for the average American.  Yes, automobiles kill but that is not their purpose.  The purpose of a gun is to kill.

Tell that to your average drunken driver.  Or the dumbfuck texting while driving.  Or better yet, explain it to the families of the victims.

And the purpose of a gun is to walk up into Reddington Pass and blow the hell out of a bag of tin cans.  Or to enjoy the Santa Ritas without worrying about crazy fucking bears or even crazier javalina packs.

But what do I know?

That's your purpose, unfortunately there are those who use it to put 11 rounds in a 5 year old.  Sorry if it makes me a bad person but I'm perfectly willing to restrict your access to automatic weapons if it means less dead 5 year olds.

How about swimming pools? What's your stance on those?

[Pæs]

That's your purpose, unfortunately there are those who use it to put 11 rounds in a 5 year old.  Sorry if it makes me a bad person but I'm perfectly willing to restrict your access to automatic weapons if it means less dead 5 year olds.

Sure.  Come take a walk with me in the Santa Ritas or the Catalinas.  Or hell, on the South end.  We can carry breech-loaders.  When a pack of javalinas decide they don't like our faces, we can shoot them really slowly.

I am against the sale of guns for defence against javalinas because technology is cheating at natural selection.

[Don Coyote]

The world would be better off if we all lived as nomadic hunter-gatherers and only wore badly tanned hides of the beasts we killed with our hands.

[AFK]

There certainly isn't any upside, or need really, for people to own hand held rapid fire death machines.  Simly put, it this asshole didn't have an assault rifle, he would have killed less people.  There is absolutely no need for someone to own that kind of weaponry.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING?

AN ASSAULT RIFLE

ESPECIALLY THE KIND THAT WAS USED IS JUST A FUCKING SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE WITH A PISTOL GRIP!!!

HUNTERS USE SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES TO HUNT!!!!

THE ONLY REASON IT IS AN "ASSAULT" RIFLE IS THE PRESENCE OF A FUCKING PISTOL GRIP!!!!!

People don't need semi-automatic weapons.

You don't need an automobile.  They kill way more people.  Get your ass on the bus.

There is no valid comparison between the utility of an automobile and the utility of a gun, for the average American.  Yes, automobiles kill but that is not their purpose.  The purpose of a gun is to kill.

Tell that to your average drunken driver.  Or the dumbfuck texting while driving.  Or better yet, explain it to the families of the victims.

And the purpose of a gun is to walk up into Reddington Pass and blow the hell out of a bag of tin cans.  Or to enjoy the Santa Ritas without worrying about crazy fucking bears or even crazier javalina packs.

But what do I know?

That's your purpose, unfortunately there are those who use it to put 11 rounds in a 5 year old.  Sorry if it makes me a bad person but I'm perfectly willing to restrict your access to automatic weapons if it means less dead 5 year olds.

So we make better guns that don't do that.

Sorry, I should've been more clear and said that I DON'T want to outlaw bubble guns.

[Don Coyote]

I don't approve of bubble guns, squirt guns, nerf guns, or any other toy guns that are marketed as toys for children.

Coyote, being serious