12 people dead, 25 injured in england after shooting rampage

[SMOKE 1,426]

i thought citizens couldn't own guns in the UK. how'd this guy get one?

[ziia 9]

You seem to be contradicting yourself. How can you say that you believe people should be allowed to carry guns after the appropriate checks after casually stating that shootings happen all the time in Chicago? Doesn't that seem kind of backwards to you?

Not at all. If you'd be living in Chicago you'd realize that the only people with guns here are the bad guys(drug dealers, gang bangers etc)and the cops. Once in a while you get a coo coo person yanking a gun and start shooting in the crowd, being cuz he's high on drugs or simply insane. Now, you have a pile of pedestrians facing this nut case with a gun, with no defense what's so ever other than a cell phone to call the police. By the time the police arrives...hence the article. If me, grandma from across the street, Joe the plumber and you had a concealed weapon and saw the loon shooting in the crowd we'd be able to stop him from hurting 20 other people. In Chicago the crime is so high because the only thing legal to carry is peper spray. Put that infront of a thug with a gun and a case of mental disorder and you get the "statistics" and the helpless citizens relying that that 911 call would be fast enough so other 20 extra innocents won't get shot too. Crime in Chicago is high because those thugs carrying guns don't have to guess weather or not the pedestrian he plans to rob has a weapon too.

You never know who is going to go nuts. You never know what someone is capable of by simply giving them a background check.

Anyone could go nuts true but there would be other 4 around to stop him. People diagnosed with mental disorders would not be given a gun permit anyway...never, EVER. Also beckground checks and criminal checks matter because that sais a lot about a person. DUI's and such? Assaults? Caught with ilelgal drugs? Jailed for some reason? Then no gun for you

If you did a criminal background check on me right now, you'd find nothing. Give me a psychological test, and I would come back sound. But no one can guarantee that I won't hit a moment in life where I either develop some kind of psychosis or just decide that problems aren't worth it anymore and I'll take everyone down with me.

Like I said, there would be 4 or more others around to stop ya in case you go nuts and start shooting at people. this way you'd not manage to kill 20 because you'd be down before you get to point somewhere else. After a thing like that, you'd not be allowd to have a gun ever again. There should be strict laws but people should be granted the 2nd amendment from the Constitution.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

i thought citizens couldn't own guns in the UK. how'd this guy get one?

You can if you meet certain criteria, typically only shotguns or rifles though.

Edited June 2, 2010 by Sousuke

[SMOKE 1,426]

You can if you meet certain criteria, typically only shotguns or rifles though.

i might have over looked it in the article. what did this shooter use?

[Sock Puppet 14]

Your logic is confusing. If I understnd you correctly people with lung cancer are smoking and flying airplanes at the same time? Are they having surgery for lung cancer while they are flying the plane? To cite deaths by handguns without further explanation is dissembling, nothing more, nothing less. The point is that there was a tragedy, that is the point of this story.

My point was that John Galt's statistic that more people die in railway accidents than in these "mass shootings" is disingenuous and misleading. Sorry that the anecdote was lost on you.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

i might have over looked it in the article. what did this shooter use?

I thought I read rifle in another article.

My point was that John Galt's statistic that more people die in railway accidents than in these "mass shootings" is disingenuous and misleading. Sorry that the anecdote was lost on you.

IE "mass shooting" is a subcategory like "getting run over by train"

[Sock Puppet 14]

IE "mass shooting" is a subcategory like "getting run over by train"

Still useless.

[Nagishkaw 510]

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Personal attacks and insults are a violation of TOS. A number of posts containing such insults - or quoting same - have been removed. Please do not repeat this behaviour.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

They need gun control

[Amby 490]

I just heard this on the radio about the guy who did it

It is being reported he may have been involved in a dispute over a will, and police have confirmed solicitor Kevin Commons is among the dead.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10222188.stm

[Peikko 1,575]

The guns were legally owned to end further speculation down that blind alley.

[Gemmie 142]

Not at all. If you'd be living in Chicago you'd realize that the only people with guns here are the bad guys(drug dealers, gang bangers etc)and the cops. Once in a while you get a coo coo person yanking a gun and start shooting in the crowd, being cuz he's high on drugs or simply insane. Now, you have a pile of pedestrians facing this nut case with a gun, with no defense what's so ever other than a cell phone to call the police. By the time the police arrives...hence the article. If me, grandma from across the street, Joe the plumber and you had a concealed weapon and saw the loon shooting in the crowd we'd be able to stop him from hurting 20 other people. In Chicago the crime is so high because the only thing legal to carry is peper spray. Put that infront of a thug with a gun and a case of mental disorder and you get the "statistics" and the helpless citizens relying that that 911 call would be fast enough so other 20 extra innocents won't get shot too. Crime in Chicago is high because those thugs carrying guns don't have to guess weather or not the pedestrian he plans to rob has a weapon too.

So you think the solution is to let everyone own a gun... not just own, but also carry firearms around with them just in case someone goes nuts. I can't even describe how backwards it would be for society if everyone were to carry firearms. What if someone were shooting animals? Would it be OK if people around decided it was reason to kill that person? What if someone were to shoot a friend? Would a bystander be allowed to shoot down that person? Then what would be the point in the police force? You're basically giving citizens the right to decide when a threat is enough to end a life. You're taking away the entire notion of self-defense and letting people decide when it's appropriate to kill based on their own assessment of the situation.

Anyone could go nuts true but there would be other 4 around to stop him. People diagnosed with mental disorders would not be given a gun permit anyway...never, EVER. Also beckground checks and criminal checks matter because that sais a lot about a person. DUI's and such? Assaults? Caught with ilelgal drugs? Jailed for some reason? Then no gun for you

It's not that black and white, otherwise we wouldn't have these situations to begin with. Doesn't America already GIVE background checks? Mental disorders aren't something that come with a label on the forehead, they often go unnoticed and undetected by everyone, both officials/professionals and loved ones. Hence why when someone goes on a rampage, everyone says how shocked and normal they seemed. I can guarantee you that a "background check" will never detect an underlying mental disorder. And who says it has to be a mental disorder anyway? What about suicidal people that decide to get revenge before they end it? You can sure as h3ll never tell when that's going to happen.

Plus, the point is that no matter who has these firearms, someone else will always get hold of them. Yes they're often illegally owned but putting 900 of them among 1000 Americans (statistic I read yesterday) raises the chances.

Like I said, there would be 4 or more others around to stop ya in case you go nuts and start shooting at people. this way you'd not manage to kill 20 because you'd be down before you get to point somewhere else. After a thing like that, you'd not be allowd to have a gun ever again. There should be strict laws but people should be granted the 2nd amendment from the Constitution.

After that, if I'm not dead or in jail, I could easily get hold of a gun that everybody else around me has.

It is being reported he may have been involved in a dispute over a will, and police have confirmed solicitor Kevin Commons is among the dead.

Wow. I feel for his family right now.

Personal attacks and insults are a violation of TOS. A number of posts containing such insults - or quoting same - have been removed. Please do not repeat this behaviour.

Who's making personal attacks? Unless something was deleted...

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Who's making personal attacks? Unless something was deleted...

They were. A certain user came in and went on a rampage for no reason at all. Oh the irony.

[Amby 490]

The guns were legally owned to end further speculation down that blind alley.

something else I read today said he's had his permits for more than 10yrs