Newtown Massacre

Here’s 10 reasons why guns, including semi-autos, shouldn’t be banned or even regulated.

  1. The kid who shot up this school wasn’t legally supposed to have firearms anyway, so regulation did nothing to prevent this incident from occurring. More regulation isn’t the answer.

  2. Mororns prefer to focus solely on guns as the only contributing factor to the occurrence of this incident, but if that was the case, everyone in possession of guns would be massacring people. The truth is, it was a coalescing and convergence of multiple particular and peculiar factors that lead to the occurrence of this incident, one being he had aspergers (an autistic spectrum disorder), and though I’m not suggesting aspergers alone was responsible, children with aspergers are more likely to be bullied in school, as they have trouble relating and interacting with their peers and society at large, as they lack cognitive and emotive empathy (not necessarily sympathy), and are usually targets for bullies. This kid was your classic nerd, he was very intelligent in mathematics and the sciences, but borderline retarded when it came to knowing, understanding, communicating and socializing with people. Although we can’t be sure as to what the motive was, assuming he was coherent enough to have one, it probably involved taking revenge on school children for the years of traumatic abuse he endured and suffered from. Autistic people often feel alienated and isolated from society due to their condition, a fact only compounded by the hostility they’re often subjected to at school.

Another probable factor, he had adhd, in addition he had a whole host of other mental disorders and complications. He was struggling with depression and feelings of rage and hostility toward his mother, he probably had anti-social personality disorder and avoidant personality disorder, from what I gather. He had been subjected to psychotropic drugs on and off throughout his life, anit-depressants and they’re ilk. These drugs are known to actually cause depression (often due to withdrawl) and zombie like behavior, suicidal tendencies and yes, homicidal tendencies in certain cases, as many mass murderers, if not all of them from my studies, turn out to be medications in and around the time they commit these heinous acts. The boy wasn’t suffering from lack of medications but being over-medicated, his brain chemistry was probably severely compromised, mangled and rearranged. When you add all these factors together, and then you add an incompetent mother who took her severely mentally imbalanced son target practicing, teaching him how to use guns and leaving her guns lying around the house unchecked and unguarded, you have a recipe for disaster.

You can’t blame guns alone, as it’s relatively easy to kill school children. Today I could go out and kill 20 children with a knife and fork. Funny this, the very same day this incident occurred, a Chinese man killed 15 some odd children in China and injurded dozens more with a knife (should we ban knives too, should we ban cars because a few drunken imbeciles spoil it for the rest of us, perhaps we should be discussing whether or not we ought to ban or restrict anti-depressants and other psychotropic drugs?), so you can’t blame guns alone for mass murder, it’s fucking assinine.

  1. Why should millions of Americans, who use their guns in a responsible, safe fashion, who don’t teach their mentally disabled children to use firearms, who keep them under lock and key, who use them merely as a tool, to hunt and protect their families from burglars, be punished for his misdeeds? it’s grossly unfair to punish hundreds of millions of capable and competent, honourable and just people, because a very few decide to go out and do something like this.

  2. Although mass murders seem to be more common since the Columbine massacre in the late 1990s (or was in the early 2000s, I can’t remember now), gun violence as a whole and violence in general has actually been declining for the last several decades (since it peaked in the late 1970s early 80s if I remember correctly). Is that what we do, crack down on freedom as crime continues to decline? Violence as a whole, has been dramatically declining in the Western world and the world at large for the last several centuries, due to the ideas of the enlightenment, freedom and republicanism, growing in popularity. See Steven Pinker’s a history of violence on YT. You have more chance of being struck by lightning than being caught in a shooting spree or a terrorist attack. This is all just media-hype and government propaganda we’re being subjected to on a daily basis now.

  3. If I were a mass murderer, a robber or a burglar, would I want to commit crimes in a state where conceal and carry is the norm, where most of the citizens are armed? Or would I rather commit it in a state where most people are unarmed and made vulnerable as a result, like in the state this incident occured? The answer isn’t less guns, it’s more guns. People who kill people are going to get guns one way or the other, like this incident proves, this kid did not legally own these firearms in the first place. Take a look at the statistics, guns are banned by the Mexican government, yet gun violence is several orders of magnitude higher there than it is the United States per capita. This is because - like prohibition was unable to stop alcohol consumption, prohibiting guns will merely drive them underground on the black market, especially in a gun toting culture like the United States. Imagine if teachers were allowed to carry firearms and defend their students like they do in Israel, this mentally deranged 20 year old would have been put out of his misery and many of the kids who perished could have been saved. Instead, crimes like this are always punished after the fact, after the crime has already been committed. Like so many things in life, prvention is the key. Violent crime is significantly greater in disarmed populations in the United States like Chicago or New York, than it is in places like Texas.

  4. Switzerland has an even stronger gun culture and more gun freedom than the United States, yet it has one of the lowest murder rates in the world, right alongside Japan, where guns are completely banned. In fact, Swiss citizens are permitted to possess bombs and tanks, yet you don’t seem them massacring one another, do you? Again, guns are not the problem here, there’s a deeper and presently inexplicable reason why the United States leads the WESTERN world (not the whole world) in gun violence and violence in general.

  5. Banning guns or semi-autos could lead to a civil war, do you really think millions of Americans will give up their guns without a fight?

  6. Who is the government to tell us what we can and can’t purchase and possess? Governments like to target their populations, curtail their freedoms and point out their flaws, but maybe it’s government that should have its freedoms curtailed. As Barack Obama cries crocodile tears on national television, his predator drones and armies massacre hundreds of people in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Lybia a week. He and his administration have killed thousands of innocents in order to get a few “terrorists” (aka freedom fighters), bombing schools and blowing little childrens heads to bits on a consistent and regular basis.

It’s government that has a history of grossly abusing its power, not the American people, if anything, the government should be decreased and disarmed and the people should become more armed, their freedoms increased. It’s government, that is the number one casuse of death next to senescence on the earth. Governments like Hitler’s Nazi Germany, Lenin and Stalin’s Russia, and Mao’s Communist China that have killed hundreds of millions of people in the 20th century. The government of the United States is no exception, it kills thousands of people a year unnecessarily and occupies a third of the world, yet we trust them over our own selves, and want to give more power to them who would further restrict our freedoms? They’ve already done so much damage to the constitution and the bill of rights with advent of the patriot act and other bills and acts, and have a psychopathic, sociopathic track record of lying to, cheating and stealing from the American people. Government is what we should all be real affraid of right now, not our fellow citizens, we should be arming ourselves to protect ourselves from them, like the founders warned us.

  1. It’s unconstitutional! If that doesn’t mean something to you, than you’re not a real American, and perhaps you should move to Britain, China or Japan, rather than voting to restrict our freedoms and our heritage. The constitution may not be perfect, nothing in this world is, but it gave us freedom of religion, freedom of speech and due process, and for that it deserves our utmost respect, it is the document that most other constitutions the world over are based on.

  2. Because most gun owners in the United States are White, middle class Americans, any law passed to restrict gun ownership and use is arguably racist.

  1. It may have been a false flag, inacted as a pretext to take our freedoms. I wouldn’t put it past our government, it’s committed (inter)national war crimes, and false flags in the past (pearl harbour, gulf of tonkin incident, arguably the Oklahoma city bombing and 9/11),. We can’t trust the msm, which is owned and controlled by Corporate America and Government., and which has lied to us in the past, to be objective.

Hey I love guns and agree with everything you said, but there’s something insanely funny about when someone calls someone a moron and then spells moron wrong. I know it’s just a typo I’m not trying to say you can’t spell for real, but it’s just funny when the word is moron.

But yeah pretty much anything you do at any time could in one way or another be construed as illegal already. We’ve got such a massive web of criminal law here that there’s literally nothing you can do to be safe from it for sure. The idea is that it’s all so broad that they can just kinda pick up the undesirables and they’ll all fit in to the laws and get prosecuted, and the desirable types are just the ones who they happen to miss. Pretty common shit really.

In the end what I’m saying is that no matter what kinda laws you pass, you aren’t going to stop people from doing what they want to do. It’s already illegal for the kid to have the gun. Even if he was an adult and could have it, it’d be illegal for him to do what he did. The biggest problem I see is that there was no security in the school to stop the kid.

I mean, wouldn’t it be easier to clean up the schools than to try and clean the whole country up so the schools can be safe? I’m not asking which would be better. I’m asking which is more likely to even be possible.

That was obviously a typo, now if I spelled it morrons, then I could see someone thinking I actually believed it was spelled like that.

At first I thought it said mormons.

Anyway yeah. Most people who want guns to be taken away either a) wanna still keep thiers or b) have never had any use for one and just don’t understand why someone else might or c) have suffered in a situation where a gun was involved and are having an emotional reaction.

Right, maybe there needs to be more security in schools, perhaps they could hire security guards, or teachers could carry guns, but I don’t think the federal government should get involved. People are going to do whatever they please and see fit in any case, same thing with marijuana and other illicit medicinal and recreational substances.

Most of the schools near where I live have police patrolling campus all day and those guys are armed. There’s one that’s particularly bad that actually has a police substation in it and it’s even got a holding cell for the students who get arrested. I mean it’s not concrete and metal bars but just a little room.

I think it should be left up to each school to decide, how much and what kind of security they require. Obviously jails and gun towers would be a little excessive for a rural elemntary school, but perhaps an armed guard or two, or teachers being allowed to arm themselves, would be appropriate.

Have you met any teachers lately? I don’t know if they’re qualified to be armed or if that’d even be safe. I don’t think schools should be able to choose to let kids be unsafe. The government should enforce some kind of security standard.

Incidents like this are very rare to say the least, the odds of your child being murdered in a shooting spree are astronomically low, I’d be much, much more concerned about lightning bolts, peanut allergies and bee stings. I don’t think we can do anything about it, violence will always be a part of human nature, we do what we can, but we don’t need armed guards in each and every school. Perhaps it’s necessary in some inner city ghetto schools, though.

I’m not necessarily speaking for all teachers, but some may be willing and able to arm themselves.

All citizens have the right to conceal and carry firearms.

Just not in schools, airports or government buildings. I got my concealed carry permit almost 13 years ago.

More power to you.

I only read the start of what the OP.

If there were no guns being circulated, the guy wouldn’t be able to find one, legally or not.

If some guys running around with a knife and fork, all it takes is three or four adults to restrain him. Children can run away from a knife. It’s not so easy to run away from a bullet, let alone 10.

Will removing guns stop all violence? No. Will it lower the scale of violence? Yes.

Will it cause more oppression? Yes.
Will that oppression create more enslavement and slaughter? Yes.

The freedom to carry a gun act was solely about the right to defend oneself against oppression from a government.

Americans wanting to own guns has nothing to do with freedom, defending themselves, the constitution, fighting oppression or anything of the sort. That is literally all just bullshit rhetoric used by the gun manufacturers and the political Right.

As I keep pointing out, the government can poison you from a hundred miles away, fry your brain with microwaves from outside of the range of any gun you could ever get your hands on. It is utterly stupid to think you can win an arms race with your own government. That NEVER works.

No, the reason Americans want to own guns is the same reason they want to own everything else - because TV makes it look cool.

If there are far less guns in circulation then this kid would not have been able to illegally acquire said guns.

Not as asinine as equating banning cars (mostly used in peaceful ways for useful things) with banning guns (things that are only really used for killing).

People get shot by accident or on purpose all the time in the US. I would contest your claim that most US gun owners use them in a responsible fashion.

Violence hasn’t been dramatically declining, and for all it has declined in the West it has increased hugely overseas, often as a direct result of Western foreign policy (and often not). Of course, the perception of violence, driven by mass media and governments, is unreal but those people who were killed were still killed, and the US is still the most violent developed nation on earth.

Plus I don’t think that you should be allowed to kill someone for breaking into your house. To me, that’s still murder.

If you were a mass murderer where would you commit your crimes? In a country where guns are readily available, both legally and illegally, or a place where it’s really hard to get hold of a gun?

In the country where there are lots of guns, obviously.

And one of those deeper reasons is that every time there’s a mass shooting there’s a huge lobby of people like you saying ‘this only proves that we should have more guns’…

No, I don’t. I think they’ll be so stupid and fetishistic about their guns that they’ll wind up dead. On the bright side that does mean I won’t have to listen to them banging on about how owning a gun is the answer to all of society’s problems, when in reality what they mean is that it makes them feel cool and powerful.

And a huge number of your so-called responsible gun owners supported all that violence, making them complicit in it.

Your hypocrisy is just as great as that of the government.

And yet, your logic is that people fearing their fellow citizens and arming themselves against what those citizens might do is perfectly reasonable, and in fact should be openly encouraged.

The contradictions in your argument are extreme.

It’s a piece of paper written by a bunch of slave-owning freemasons looking to protect what they had. Accusations of not being a ‘real American’ are just patriotic gobshite, and utterly contradict your own objections to the US government.

This is so moronic that I can’t even be bothered to show you how it is moronic. You are just repeating the same tired old contradictory arguments, with this last one being a notable exception. I’ve never heard this before, but it doesn’t really surprise me. Gotta believe you’re protecting yourself against the darkies, yeah, that’s why you have guns. It’s not because EVERY film and EVERY TV show you watch makes gun-owners and -users look cool and handsome and powerful and sexy. No, it’s all about protecting yourself against the government. Who paid for the construction of the guns you’re now buying. And has far more guns than you could ever own. And who clearly wants you to own guns, since it subsidises the companies who make them.

In short, you haven’t a clue what’s going on and are just repeating stuff you’ve heard elsewhere without reflection or criticism. This is a joke of a post.

It’s actually an expensive inconvenience. Cost of gun and ammo, training, practice. Then you have to lug it around. You have to make sure some little kid doesn’t get his hands on it.

Right, so you admit regulation does little to stop gun violence (case in point newtown). However, you think all guns should be banned. Guns are virtually (admittedly not entirely) banned in Mexico (they have extremely strict gun laws), yet gun violence is significantly higher there than it is the United States. Because there are already so many guns in circulation, guns could and probably would go underground in the United States. If the federal government threatened to abolish gun ownership, and it has, millions of more guns would be purchased and they would simply wind up underground and on the black market, especially in a gun toting culture like the United States. So really, you can’t stop the circulation of guns (or at least it would be exceedingly difficult, but you can try), nor can you stop the ensuing corruption - rogue elements (not affiliated with the new world order) within government may even attempt to sell guns to Americans and import them from other countries, like they do with narcotics.

In practical terms, it doesn’t matter whether the deaths are accidental or intentional, it doesn’t matter whether junior winds up dead with gun shot wounds to the head, or with his brains splattered all over the window shield, a death is a death, and cars kill far more people anually than do guns.

And those fools should be punished, intelligent people shouldn’t be punished for their mistakes, that would be a manifestation of authoritarianism, something you’re against, right, like you wouldn’t advocate the banning of alcohol, eating or skiing because a few/some individuals spoil it for the rest of us, would you? The fact is - most people aren’t idiots, or far more guns would end up in the hands of children than they do. It’s apparent that the vast majority of adults manage to keep their guns away from children, or there would be dead kids as a result of gun abuse/misuse all over the place. For someone who supposedly is an advocate for liberty and democracy, you sure lack faith in your fellow citizens.

This is plain crap here, or outright lying, it HAS been declining, have you examined the statistics at all?
See Steven Pinkers A History Of Violence on YT, or read a book.

Even if the perpetrator had a gun?
Right, that’s your opinion.
Many people aren’t prepared to take that chance/risk, of being raped or murdered, or having their loved ones raped or murdered before their eyes. In that situation, you don’t know what the perp. is capable of, at the very least he has little or no regard for your privacy, safety and security, and is almost certainly there to rob you blind, or worse.
It’s simple, if you don’t want to jeopardize your life, don’t break into peoples homes in the middle of the night.

No, I’d want to murder people in a country where one state is passing out guns like cotton candy, and the state next door has entirely forbidden their use.
How many people could you kill, in a country where each and every adult citizen is armed to the teeth?

Why are they doing that, is it because they’re all a bunch of “gun nuts”, or is it because - the federal government in conjunction with the msm, tries to exploit tragedies like newtown in order to disarm the American people, each and everytime they occur.

I can’t believe this cretin, on the one hand he seems to be promoting conspiracism, on the other, he thinks the government could easily round us up if it wanted to. Well, since according to you, the government is comprised largely of malevolent people and useful idiots (and I’d have to whole-heartedly concur), why doesn’t it simply do that now, what’s stopping them from treating us all like cattle now, hmmm?

This is a silly argument (they all are, yawn), most Americans and most gun owners are opposed to the war crimes commited by the Bush and Obama administrations/regimes, the American people are waking up and gun ownership is an important aspect of that awakening. It’s true some gun advocates supported the neocons (only because they’d been CONNED, duped, swindled, if they had all the facts, they would’ve retracted their support and extended it to someone like Ron Paul, or Gary Johnson), but more and more are supporting libertarian principles and the constitution, despite what all the election fraud would have you believe.

It’s not the entire citizenry we have to worry about, it’s a minority in government and a minority of citizens.
Some of these arguments seem more like knee jerk responses or a smear campaign, what’s your real agenda here, siat?

The government is primarily we the people, the bill of rights and the constitution, and secondly that thing in Washington that has long since been bought and payed for by wealthy internationalists.

Oh sure, that’s why the media and the gov. are desperately attempting to disarm us, and that’s why the Obama administration is desperately trying to bypass congress and ban guns. That’s why every despot in history has tried to disarm its host population. You’re either a complete retard or a disinfo agent. Either way, your objections are inane, and I suggest you acquire a different hobbie, like smoking crack, sky diving without a parachute, or some other high risk activity.

Where did I say all guns should be banned?

The fact that there are lots of illegal guns in circulation is not a reason to make more guns and put them into circulation. Your conclusion simply does not follow from your premises.

Most cars, most of the time, are harmless and can be used to do perfectly peaceful things (albeit consuming energy resources in a selfish and tremendously inefficient way). The same cannot be said for guns. Their purpose is force and the threat of force.

But since logic clearly isn’t your forte, let’s try this: quote for me the last decade of death statistics for the US for both car accidents and guns.

Who said anything about me being an advocate for liberty or democracy? I have no faith in US citizens. I also didn’t say that gun ownership should be banned. You’re arguing against all kinds of things I never said, because that’s the only position you know how to argue against. It’s a great example of how someone who thinks in pure left-right terms can’t figure out how to compute anything that lies outside of that extremely limited debate.

Any book? And you claimed it was ‘dramatically declining’, which is what I was contesting. You’re really limited, intellectually speaking. I’m guessing you’re an American, probably a former Ron Paul supporter… am I close?

If you banned all the guns then the burglar wouldn’t have a gun.

A ‘perp.’ - ? You’re not a cop, are you? And there are other means of defending oneself and ones family aside from killing people. It’s not like it’s a choice between owning a gun and selling your family into sex slavery. Security is a relative concept, you know…

You do realise that there are countries with governments and gun laws and things that don’t fit into this category, right?

Loads, because if everyone was armed to the teeth then one shooting would probably cause a massive shoot-out. Or I’d get a tank or some bombs or something, since there’s absolutely no restriction on the arms market because you think that will make you safer.

There have been 16 mass shootings in the US this year. How many new restrictions have been imposed on US gun ownership as a result?

It isn’t gun ownership, that’s for sure.

Most countries don’t have anything like the gun ownership that there is in the US. Most countries have smaller governments in the US. Most people in most countries are treated less like cattle than in the US. Hence, if anything, the more guns you own, the more government control you are subjected to. I know that doesn’t fit in with your politics and your national mythology and your constitutional obsession, but it’s true nonetheless.

Keep trumping out those lines, regardless of whether they are true. Ron Paul voted for the Afghan war. His biggest supporters were defence contractors, and a CIA-affiliated facebook investor who is on the steering committee for Bilderberg. He’s a complete sell out. You’ve been duped.

To demonstrate that your repetition of the same old right-wing constitution-sucking gun-loving American twaddle is a load of horseshit. The US government wants people to have lots of guns because the US is massively overpopulated relative to its energy production. The easiest thing is just to have everyone kill each other.

Do you say anything that doesn’t come straight from the John Birch society?

Good god you’re boring. I’ve had enough of this. If you want to blather on some more, be my guest.

He coulda made chlorine gas out of household shit.