# seattle shootings



## ehanes7612 (May 30, 2012)

even before this happened , the city realized this was a problem soley with guns..however, you feel about right to bear arms issue, many of the people (several killed by stray bullets in recent weeks) killed would still be alive had the perps not had access to guns..its a systemic problem in the US 
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/30/us/washington-cafe-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1


----------



## SlipperFan (May 30, 2012)

And the more people die from gun wounds, the harder the NRA pushes for fewer controls.


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (May 30, 2012)

A lot of people I know who are into guns say that if everyone had a gun, nobody would be shot. Somehow I feel that if everybody had a gun, a lot of people would be shot in the back.


----------



## KyushuCalanthe (May 30, 2012)

Eric Muehlbauer said:


> Somehow I feel that if everybody had a gun, a lot of people would be shot in the back.



At least you wouldn't see it coming. Here in the land of "pacifists" there are something like 20 gun deaths per year, all by law enforcement...officially anyway. Not sure how many die via the Japanese Yakuza or the Korean and Chinese mafia. From what I hear plenty, but almost all within their organizations.

I do miss the old days in Florida walking up to largest mall in town and reading the "no firearms beyond this point" sign. Yahoo!


----------



## Candace (May 31, 2012)

I want a pink, Hello Kitty Uzi. Just saying. It's on my wish list.


----------



## Stone (May 31, 2012)

Eric Muehlbauer said:


> > A lot of people I know who are into guns say that if everyone had a gun, nobody would be shot.
> 
> 
> Eric, why don't you suggest to them that if no one had a gun, nobody would get shot. Or is that beyond their comprehension?
> When I hear the NRA people speaking I just sit there with my mouth open in disbelief. What is with this wild-west menatily??


----------



## NYEric (May 31, 2012)

Kennisaw, Georgia; Virgin, Utah - 2 towns where gun possesion is manditory and crime is non-existent!


----------



## cnycharles (Jun 1, 2012)

I've been told that there is a country in europe where it is mandatory to have a firearm, and since everyone knows it, there is much less crime. They are discovering that where guns are completely outlawed, only outlaws have guns and are not afraid to use them or break into your car or homes. People who have guns illegally most likely don't have 'safety training' or care about safety, while someone who gets a permit has to have safety training, i'm assuming.



> Eric, why don't you suggest to them that if no one had a gun, nobody would get shot. Or is that beyond their comprehension?


if you could 'outlaw' all guns, and that meant that everyone did not have a gun, then i might go for that, as long as i was allowed to have hunting firearm to procure venison each year. if citizens don't have a gun, the outlaws know they have free shot and will be more brazen. many random shootings are with illegally possessed firearms. remove all illegal weapons and then there would be no need for others to have weapons. many assume that 'making firearms illegal' will remove weapons and everyone will be safe; then the thugs who have no problem getting firearms would be the only ones who would have weapons, and their 'job' of stealing/mayhem/murder would be that much easier because they would not have opposition. if you want to prevent crime around your home, you put up lights, remove blind areas, lock windows (you make it harder and less palatable for criminal to want to head towards your home). if you want to invite criminal, make it easy for them to get to your house and inside undetected (examples). also they will feel more comfortable knowing that you 'don't' have a weapon to resist them... another prime example is national security; if a country has no standing army, no guns and things like that, then if they have aggressive neighbors they are asking the neighbor to cross the border and take whatever they want - no opposition. though nuclear weapons are ghastly, if a country has them then they are less likely to be attacked by another country, whether or not that other country has nuclear weapons themselves. it is the same with guns, sticks, knives or whatever. only if you are able to remove the aggressor's weapons can you then remove protective weapons from your own population. just because you wish for a peaceful world and want to blindly pass laws that 'seem to protect everyone by removing weapons', it doesn't make it so.. criminals/aggressors do not want peace and they can get all the weapons they want. 

think about it... if you knew that everyone had a gun (in their home.. i would not suggest vehicles have guns that's just asking for trouble) you most likely would not break into that home, and you would be more polite. again, i only agree with having one secured in the home, not in car or public; just asking for trouble. ... can you imagine what would happen the next time people were clogging the aisles at walmart, or there is a rush for the door at a black friday shopping event? (shudder) or the last tickle me elmo doll on the shelf the day before christmas, and three people heading for it at the same time


----------



## NYEric (Jun 1, 2012)

cnycharles said:


> ... can you imagine what would happen the next time people were clogging the aisles at walmart, or there is a rush for the door at a black friday shopping event? (shudder) or the last tickle me elmo doll on the shelf the day before christmas, and three people heading for it at the same time




What a great scene in a movie!


----------



## Shiva (Jun 1, 2012)

Looking from where I stand in my little village of Saint-Barthélemy, Québec, having people going about the town with guns in their pockets or gunbelts is as crazy as believing that the moon is made of swiss cheese. And so has been the authorities response for many years which has been to build ever more prisons.
Simply put : build more prisons and you'll have more prisonners, with all the expanses implied and no financial return for your money. However, build more schools and hire more teachers and you'll most certainly get more students graduating to productive lives. Seems simple to me, but then I'm (not a bleeding heart) a liberal.
As for guns, I see no way to turn the tide back. It's far too deep in your culture and their possession is also garanteed by your constitution. So you'll keep shooting at each other forever if not everybody else. oke:

Still, Americans manage to surprise us (the rest of the world) from time to time, like electing a black president, and a very good one at that. Who could have believed such a thing only 20 years before. Too bad so many people are looking backward while they should look ahead. The future is not the past, and the past is not the future.


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Jun 1, 2012)

Believe it or not, that line about everyone having guns didn't just come from NRA types...it also came from hard-line communists.
I'm actually not against gun ownership....while I am not a hunter, and probably never will be, I do believe in the right of hunters to be able to do so (assuming their prey population is healthy), and face it....in the case of deer in the northeast, its a necessity. I also feel that if one believes that they have the right to protect their homes with a gun, they should be able to do so. Not my schtick....I enjoy target shooting, but I am the last person I would trust with a gun in the home. Which is why I don't own one. Assault weapons are so over the top that I have even met NRA members who (privately) believe they should be restricted. What I don't get is handguns. You can protect your home as well with a rifle, so there's no point. If you feel you must have a handgun to protect yourself (really bad neighborhood, job that attracts thieves) then DISPLAY it! I think these regulations that allow for hidden handguns are truly sick.


----------



## Clark (Jun 1, 2012)

Bullseye.
Many widows sleep with a loaded gun close by.


----------



## ehanes7612 (Jun 1, 2012)

the shooter in seattle had permits for six guns ....home ownership is a different thing...burglars just wait till you arent home to come in (in the US anyway, in Great Britain they go in the house anytime) ...so yeah , for home protection , there is a valid argument for having guns.


----------



## cnycharles (Jun 2, 2012)

hmm, sounds like he had a strong black powder fetish, which is the other extreme; no easy answers at all.


----------



## KyushuCalanthe (Jun 2, 2012)

Any gun is perilous, especially if you looking into the dangerous end. However, I think Eric nailed it - why allow handguns to be legal? They entire point of a handgun is to conceal it. Hard to walk into a shopping mall with a rile without somebody noticing.

I think Lynyard Skynyard got it right in their song "Saturday Night Special":

"Handguns were made for killin'
Ain't no good for nothin' else
And if you like your whisky
You might even shoot yourself
So why don't we dump 'em people
To the bottom of the sea
Before some fool come round here
Wanna shoot either you or me"


----------



## Ozpaph (Jun 2, 2012)

Eric Muehlbauer said:


> A lot of people I know who are into guns say that if everyone had a gun, nobody would be shot.



So by that logic everyone (country) should have nuclear weapons...............


----------



## Lanmark (Jun 2, 2012)

As far as hunting goes, why not just go out into the woods barehanded to hunt? Break off a tree branch with which to beat down your prey, or gather rocks to pelt your intended target into submission. Put yourself one on one with a big grizzly bear. Just think how much better your bragging rights will be after you've taken down a bear with your bare hands and maybe a stick or a rock or two! This smacks much more of sportsmanship to me than going into the woods with a high power rifle and picking off some magnificent, unsuspecting creature from a blind in the trees.



Ozpaph said:


> So by that logic everyone (country) should have nuclear weapons...............



Indeed, and electronic, biological and chemical weapons too! Surely we can all agree that mutually assured destruction is the only humane way of achieving lasting and meaningful world peace.

We should each carry an assortment of clubs, tasers, firearms, knives, flame throwers and IEDs as we go about our daily routines. How else can we possibly hope to maintain law and order from one moment to the next? Peace must be beaten into the skulls of our fellow citizens. There is no other way.

We might as well hand out guns on the street corners to every passerby too. While we're at it, let's abolish all taxes except a single national sales tax to support the military industrial complex which rules us all. Then we can end all social welfare programs and all other evil governmental programs, rules and regulations. Allow unregulated, untaxed capitalist and religious organizations (the "job creators" and our "moral compasses") to have free reign over us all. Then sit back and watch the "peace and prosperity" ensue. :rollhappy:

Why doesn't it surprise me that some who seemingly support the arming of every citizen with firearms as a means of ensuring civil peace are the same who also warn against the danger of acts of free speech such as public protest and civil demonstration of dissent.


----------



## Marc (Jun 2, 2012)

Ozpaph said:


> So by that logic everyone (country) should have nuclear weapons...............



And that was the foundation of the MAD principle during the cold war.


----------



## Clark (Jun 2, 2012)

I don't think bear tastes as good as venison or turkey.
Could be wrong.
Plus the cost...


----------



## NYEric (Jun 2, 2012)

A club is not really an effective hunting tool!


----------



## Candace (Jun 3, 2012)

:rollhappy:You've all neglected to realize the most important part of gun ownership. Those with guns will have a leg up when the zombies come. Bet you wish you had a gun then.


----------



## SlipperFan (Jun 3, 2012)

I don't think I'll be worried about zombies. But I do worry about the crazies out there toting guns.


----------



## cnycharles (Jun 3, 2012)

candace, you're logic just lights up this forum :rollhappy: 

it's far easier to quickly bring down an animal with the least pain and suffering with a gun than knives, sticks spears or clubs  (and arrows, by the way, which some people think is more 'sporting'). I hunt to be outside and I love eating venison, and so do others when I make venison spiedies  . unfortunately, having to buy a gun, licence and all that is the only way to get venison. if there was another way (not with my vehicle) then I wouldn't be hunting.

just think what a field day PETA would have had with all of those cave men who would surround an animal and stick about forty pointed sticks into it until it bled to death about three or four miles away. and, I would suggest that nobody go hunting unless they full well expect to be eating it, or giving it to someone who is short of food so that they can eat it


----------



## Candace (Jun 4, 2012)

O.K. Charles, now you've made me go to google to search on 'spiedies'. Off I go.


----------



## cnycharles (Jun 4, 2012)

state fair and lupo's spiedie sauces are two of the best! .. you might have to have some shipped to you. .. you know, if you ended up shooting a deer with your ak-47, the small pieces left over might be just about the right size to make spiedies (sorry, maybe not very good humor)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiedie

mmmm, man.. now i'm starving. I can almost taste the fresh italian bread and vinegar/spices :drool:


----------

