King to introduce gun-restriction legislation in response to Tucson shooting

[james&olya 1,121]

Had there been someone else armed there, then perhaps less would have been killed and/or hurt.

Life is full of 'had theres' though, isn't it?

Maybe if everyone was armed we could have had sides and a really neat shoot-out! Maybe not at that rally but there have been many others recently where opposing factions have been in violent rhetorical opposition. If everyone involved came armed, locked and loaded, and a gun were discharged under those circumstances, how likely is it that the situation could deteriorate into mayhem?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Maybe if everyone was armed we could have had sides and a really neat shoot-out! Maybe not at that rally but there have been many others recently where opposing factions have been in violent rhetorical opposition. If everyone involved came armed, locked and loaded, and a gun were discharged under those circumstances, how likely is it that the situation could deteriorate into mayhem?

Despite what you may think, people are not violent unless they really have to be in those situations. Most people aren't going to pull out a gun and just start firing.

[natty bumppo 297]

Maybe if everyone was armed we could have had sides and a really neat shoot-out! Maybe not at that rally but there have been many others recently where opposing factions have been in violent rhetorical opposition. If everyone involved came armed, locked and loaded, and a gun were discharged under those circumstances, how likely is it that the situation could deteriorate into mayhem?

wow .... lots of hypothetical what if's .....

[james&olya 1,121]

Despite what you may think, people are not violent unless they really have to be in those situations. Most people aren't going to pull out a gun and just start firing.

In my line of work I often deal with people who have been involved in altercations, especially barroom fights. I have yet to meet someone involved who didn't think he was in the right and justified in his/her actions.

[Darnell 8,479]

I say legalize dueling, then let's check in again 3 years later, ah?

Winner gets loser's assets AND Debts.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

In my line of work I often deal with people who have been involved in altercations, especially barroom fights. I have yet to meet someone involved who didn't think he was in the right and justified in his/her actions.

Questions of 'fear' come into play when people feel justified. Whether it be fear for ones own life or fear for the life of one they love. We can justify a lot in the name of 'fear.' That includes absurd laws as well that get passed from time to time.

Spur of the moment actions rarely happen though because someone 'just wanted to' kick someone else's butt.

Defending one's honor is another one in addition to 'fear' that can be used legitimately as well in some cases.

[james&olya 1,121]

wow .... lots of hypothetical what if's .....

Only one if! IF everyone were armed. Isn't it the line on here by many that the more citizens armed, the better? Or do they just mean armed citizens that share their political views!

Spur of the moment actions rarely happen though because someone 'just wanted to' kick someone else's butt.

Absolutely, completely, utterly wrong!!

[Ban Hammer 13,475]

Only one if! IF everyone were armed. Isn't it the line on here by many that the more citizens armed, the better? Or do they just mean armed citizens that share their political views!

Maybe if everyone was armed

If everyone involved came armed,

[natty bumppo 297]

how likely is it that the situation could deteriorate into mayhem?

there is also this dangling question ...

what if the situation did not happen?

[james&olya 1,121]

there is also this dangling question ...

what if the situation did not happen?

And if you make the assumption that everyone were sane, level-headed, and un-impaired that should be the outcome. But how do you keep all the others away?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Absolutely, completely, utterly wrong!!

ok.

[james&olya 1,121]

I expected more from you Charles! Avoiding the issue by focusing on a meaningless technicality!

[Ban Hammer 13,475]

I expected more from you Charles! Avoiding the issue by focusing on a meaningless technicality!

just like i was expecting you to count accurately?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

No no, you don't get it. If there were different laws in place he would have thought twice about his actions! He wouldn't have dared to try such a stunt knowing that the law was there to stop him! I mean that ink on paper can really kick your butt sometimes!

Maybe they should write all future laws in large BOLD capital letters.

[Sgt. McGee 27]

And if you make the assumption that everyone were sane, level-headed, and un-impaired that should be the outcome. But how do you keep all the others away?

"If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns".

Along the same lines as "Locks only keep honest people out."

Do you think people are more likely to not do something because it's illegal, or because they think it's morally wrong? If they don't care if it's morally wrong, are they likely to care if it's illegal?