SultanOfSwing

Oh, it's certainly nothing to be proud of whatever way you slice it.

Oakvillian

I genuinely don't understand how you can take this stance. For sure, there's no doubt that the "authorities" dropped the ball as regards this shooter. But he simply wouldn't have been a shooter if he hadn't had a gun. There is absolutely no way, ever, under any circumstances, that a person without a gun can shoot and kill seventeen other people.

This is about guns, and regulating/controlling access to them in a more carefully thought-through way than America has done to date. Note, not banning them, or confiscating them, or anything else, but regulating their ownership and controlling access.

Guns, in the wrong hands, are dangerous. I fail to see how any rational argument can be constructed that suggests making it less likely that the "wrong" person will have access to a gun is not a sensible ambition.

Genuinely responsible gun owners (and I'm quite sure you're one of those) should be jumping up and down with enthusiasm to say "yes, please. Let me apply for a license. Certify my competence. Add my gun(s) to a registry. Make it more difficult for bad people to have guns, so that good people like me can continue to enjoy the privilege [note the term] of owning and shooting those we own."

BenK91

I don't have a problem with you for opposing them, more power to you - I've stated numerous times I have no care for politics. I don't oppose either party, I just quite frankly don't care. I oppose you because you are quite possibly the biggest tool I've come across on this forum. You're being deliberately obtuse, narrow-minded and you still haven't address the fact you called me racist when my wife is black. Instead you choose to hide behind absolute garbage you continue to type by wearing your tin-foil hat.

Read OF's post again, maybe get someone to help you read it since you're clearly incapable. It hit's the nail on the head.

BenK91

I've not once on this thread opposed tighter gun control. To an earlier post (I can't be bothered to find it) I even stated I'd be more than happy to turn my guns over if there was a blanket ban/confiscation.

I'd be more than happy to see immense reform on the gun control front. I just think blaming gun owners, which the majority of people on this thread have done is the wrong way to go about it.

Found it #411:

Originally Posted by N1cky
Thank you for answering.

I can't wrap my head around the argument so many pro-gun people have of 'if it wasn't a gun it would have been a knife, or a car...' There is a need for those other items, and their main purpose isn't as a weapon, there is no need for automatic weapons to be in the public domain. Presumably if they were banned, you would hand yours in, and continue to go to the range and fire a pistol (or whatever), so no real impact on you?
I really wouldn't care. I don't own it to defend myself or my home, it's literally used at the gun range and that's it.

I have house insurance, I have car insurance and I have health insurance. If someone wants to steal my truck and my possessions then go ahead - I'm not going to end someones life over it. If someone had a gun to my wife's head then obviously that's different and in any case I wouldn't use the AR-15, I'd use a 9mm handgun I own - which is also locked away.

I feel like the main issue is Americans see guns as a right and not a privilege - where as in England we seem them as a privilege that needs to be respected and handled properly. Until the majority of people learn the simple steps of ownership and respect for their firearms then gun control in essence won't change a massive amount apart from making it slightly more difficult to get a weapon. If someone wants something bad enough, generally they'll find ways and means to make it happen.

Oakvillian

I disagree that the majority of people on this thread have blamed gun-owners.

I don't think responsible gun owners help their cause, in any way whatsoever, but repeating any of the talking-points put forth by the NRA, which IMO is an organization that has probably done more than any other to poison the politics of the USA over the last 30 years.

Many people (including me) are pointing a finger of responsibility at the bizarre disconnect between rights and responsibilities that seems to have paralyzed the US legislatures at State and Federal level, and in particular the slavish adherence to a specific (and very bizarre) interpretation of a constitutional amendment written two and a half centuries ago.

BenK91

I think we'll have to agree to disagree in regards to the majority of people blaming gun owners.

The long and short of it is - Take my guns away: I don't care. Make guns extensively harder to obtain: Fantastic, they shouldn't be so easy to purchase. That's pretty much my stance. As long as I'm legally able to own them and I remain capable of owning them responsibly then I'll continue to do so.

Oakvillian

In which case, apart from the bit where we agree to disagree, there's nothing I disagree with in what you have said here

Leslie

But Trump most definitely is. Unfortunately, he's dragging the party further down into the gutter than any fringe group ever did.

Octang Frye

I think we all agree, Leslie, this kid shouldn't have been able to buy a gun.
He has depression, ADHD, OCD and is on the spectrum. Baker Act wasn't followed.

SultanOfSwing

OK, one person called you that. You still need to get a grip, TBH.

Also, I don't care what other people called Republicans, save that for someone else.

Jingsamichty

One of the common defences given when a cop shoots an unarmed person is that the cop was "in fear for his life".

On that basis it seems pretty sensible to me that a lone cop armed with a pistol might not decide to charge into a building filled with an unknown number of people firing semi-automatic weapons.

Giantaxe

The Baker Act most probably would have allowed involuntary detention for 72 hours. I don't see how he would have been stopped buying a gun, under current laws in Florida. Do we know when his weapons were purchased? Also, only five states have "red flag" laws, apparently:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/23/u...T.nav=top-news

chawkins99

Well, he apparently bought seven rifles in the last year.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/florida...-seven-rifles/

I wondered how a teenager could afford seven rifles until I read this:

https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/s...ce-reports-say

robin1234

Odd statement to make with such confidence, because it's so clearly inaccurate. A proportion of posters are pro-gun. Of the others, the great majority seem to be "blaming" the NRA or the dysfunctional government, not gun owners.

scrubbedexpat099

I have yet to come across anybody personally with such a view.