So the last shooting I know of took place at Purdue University:
The U.S. keeps having incidents like this happen.
So my question is, does the U.S. need more gun laws or do we need tighter security?
For example, with the more gun laws option, a mentally ill guy or certain character would not be able to purchase a gun, weapons, and ammo to go and shoot up a university or high school.
With the tighter security choice, the guy would buy the guns and ammo but the police or security would meet him at the front gate and possibly stop him.
What do you guys think?
Results 1 to 25 of 174
Does the U.S. need more gun laws or tighter security?
We need neither.
Last edited by Vulgotha; 02-13-2014 at 00:02.
This is a good read and it analyzes both sides fairly (hint: anti-gun rhetoric doesn't come out ahead in this objective comparison)
"Guns" are not really the issue. There are other factors at play here as to why our society is the way it is.
Why is it the safer countries in the world have strict gun laws?
Japan is number 1 and they have strict gun laws:
I know the 2nd amendment states we have the right to bear arms, but here's a good question that I have not seen asked on PSU yet:
What happens when your rights put other people in danger or cause danger?
Secondly, Switzerland (along with several other european countries) contradicts the point you were trying to make.
Thirdly, that is not the case. Law abiding citizens exercising their rights are not the problem. Also, why don't you ask that question about the 1st amendment. (regarding freedom of speech) Not to mention this quote, "They who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
I know you only mentioned a single victim shooting, but:
according to James Alan Fox, author and criminology professor at Northeastern University, mass shootings have remained stagnant over 34 years, averaging 20 a year, and few were committed by the type of berserk psychos portrayed by the media.“Public discourse is grounded in myth and misunderstanding about the nature of the offense and those who perpetrate it,” he writes in the journal “Homicide Studies.” He added: “Without minimizing the pain and suffering of the hundreds of those who have been victimized in recent attacks, the facts clearly say that there has been no increase in mass shootings and certainly no epidemic.”They reviewed years of mass shootings and found that most shooters are not the crazed killers pictured on TV: Most are seeking revenge and practice their crime, like the two Columbine, Colo., killers.
Also, it wouldn't hurt if we legalized marijuana so we could free up a lot of prison room for those who are actually a danger to society (and I say this as someone with zero interest in marijuana).
i feel safer knowing people around me don't have guns
- Join Date
- May 2011
- where the sun don't shine
- PSN ID
- Rep Power
All I know is, the US tops ww. homicide statistics, and someone in your country is making a lot of profit out of it.
Saw this earlier today. Ticked my sarcasm bone.
shootings can be helpful in gaining support for gun laws, funding for security and more freedoms being stepped on in order to control the sheeples.
for this reason, i'm doubtful how real these events are.
there are some mysteries behind these events is all i'm saying.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- PSN ID
- Rep Power
lol i don't even keep my doors lock because i know no-one will break into my home
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)