Summations Only

No.

Maybe I should be getting government assistance towards increasing my arsenal!But "arming a militia to fight the government" is just part of the justification, its not exclusively the sole purpose of owning guns.Personally, I just like to go to the outdoor range and shoot fruit or paper.

Huh?What, and why, is wrong with regards to guns in America that causes far more mass shootings in America?

Then why are you even asking for evidence?You feel armed, untrained people walking around carrying out deadly force is a-ok-USA when clearly the evidence shows how poorly people are at judging high pressured situations, much less when they have to hold a gun and shoot. Nor are you looking at the evidence that shows, any lunatic can buy a gun and shoot up any place they like. Does this not sound like something that shouldn't be taking place in a civilized country?The death penalty I guess is ok then, so long as you're a dude holding a gun in the middle of the night pointing at a figure of a person in your home, right?- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

Well, if you're not trying to connect that to any particular policy or prescription - who cares? The topic of this thread is "gun control", not "attitudes about the United States as held by foreigners." What's the relevance of what you or anyone else considers "insane"? Many of us in the US believe that it's "insane" to leave one's own defense and the defense of the people in the hands of corrupt cops and a distant government. But that's not true, now is it? The truth is that those countries disarmed because they were safe, not because disarming in the face of armed threats somehow made them safer. And yet you can't explain why. Inchoate fear.

Me thinks it may have something to do with the guns in America.In every country there are lunatics willing to kill a massive amount of people. But, in most countries they don't have guns to carry it out.- Oni

It's the sole purpose of the Second Amendment. So use pellet guns. There are plenty out there for target shooting.- Oni

Jon writes: This has already occurred. All the home-owned tanks and rocket launchers you & your neighbors have in your backyards cannot protect you from a government that owns the Hydrogen Bomb.This aint 1776 any more.

It's illegal in the US for psychopaths to own firearms. It's illegal to use them to murder people, even to murder a great deal of people. It's illegal to plan to use them to murder people. It's illegal to buy them for the purpose of murdering people.What else do you want? Does nothing that is against Belgium's laws happen in Belgium? Somehow I think that even in Belgium they have murders, even murders with firearms, even though I'm sure both of those things are against your laws. And again, we have something you don't - a constitutional amendment that prevents the government from making laws that would make it a lot harder for law-abiding citizens to purchase firearms. Yeah, they saw it as soon as he entered the theater. Since it was a movie with SWAT team gun battles, they thought it was part of the movie, or a promotion by the theater. Because the number of Americans murdered by any means is so wildly out of proportion compared to the rest of the world. We have a lot more murderers in our population than you do. I believe that justifies widespread ownership of handguns for personal defense, since they have significant defensive utility. (That's why they're carried by police and military, even in Belgium.) The opposing position that it's the presence of the guns that makes people into murderers, and there's been no evidence put forward for that view. You're obviously wrong about that, since our rate of stabbings and clubbings is disproportionately higher as well. We have more murderers in our midst than you do, that's just objective fact. Yes, I'm sure it does. It was a direct response to the efforts of the British government to disarm American colonists to ensure that they could be subjugated by the British military, even in contravention of British law. No, of course not. But the guns would still exist. That's the point - by preventing the legitimate government from disarming US citizens, US citizens preserve the material capacity to defend themselves from an illegitimate government. Sure. Frequently, the way they disallow you is by allowing the government that didn't deserve to be overthrown to disarm the populace. The Second Amendment prevents an illegitimate, dictatorial government from enjoying a populace disarmed by a legitimate government. How easy do you think it is? How hard do you think it should be? "Easy" and "hard" are meaningless. I need to know what kind of policy you're promoting. We have a system of background checks before you can buy a gun here, as well. Many states collect ballistics fingerprints for all guns registered in the state.But not even the Belgian system would prevent someone with no criminal record from purchasing a firearm and then using it to murder as many people as they could. Because guns are a fear-totem for you. Why would you be afraid of an "arsenal"? How many guns do you think your neighbor can fire at once?

What is it about guns in America that the prevalence of mass shootings is evidence that there is something wrong there and why is that? So? Do you think removing guns would help against mass murder? But it doesn't limit gun use to that. No thanks, firearms are more fun.

Crash writes: The citizenry is already unable to defend themselves. The Amendment is toothless.

I'm asking for you to support your contention that it is worth it to have a completely disarmed populace. You know, with evidence. Or basically anything beyond "I'm afraid of people who own guns." Yeah, absolutely, if they've broken in to commit a crime. People have a right to be safe in their homes, and criminals who violate that security and put people at risk deserve to be the ones who shoulder that risk. Can you explain why you think criminals have a right to expect perfect physical safety as they damage, destroy, and pilfer other people's property?

It's usually the same one's that believe Jesus is returning to save us, feel gays shouldn't marry, and the same who are quite uncomfortable with "the black guy" in the White House...who is probably a secret Muslim. You know, rational thinking bigots who need dem guns!- Oni

We are charged to "fight the good fight" but success is not assured.

As we know it's a hugely complicated matter. I'm not an expert but I'll pretend I am for a minute...

• Owning arms is enshrined in the Constitution.
• It's relatively easy to purchase guns in America.
• Gun manufacture and distribution is big business.
• As a result of the above, proliferation is huge.
• In American culture, guns seem to be widely accepted, and in the extreme cases, glamourised and glorified.
• We've all agreed that there are always going to be crazy people, and you can't always pre-empt them, or identify the threat before it is too late. Despite that, we put them smack in the middle of the above described environment and expect things to just go okay (or in the extreme case seem resigned to these killing sprees as acceptable collateral damage in exchange for the recreational use of guns).

Having said all that...I hope if you read any part of this post, it will be this part, where I apologise for accusations of a "pro-violence" attitude towards any of you. It's a passionate topic, but that was out of line. Clearly none of you approves of what happened in Colorado.