Ohio school gunman kills self, wounds 4

[Peikko 1,575]

Who said the drunk driver isn't responsible for the deaths of anyone he might run over? The courts take a very dim view of it.

The point isn't about responsibility, it's about the extent of carnage that a crazed individual can meet out when he runs on the rampage.

If cars really where as effective in wreaking havoc when used deliberately in the attempt to take life then I think it's quite conceivable that there would be legitimate arguments to crack down on their use. The fact is, they aren't because they were never designed to be weapons. Guns were designed to be efficient life takers and they are pretty darned good at it.

No one anywhere has tried to argue that the gun, or for that matter the car are the responsible parties when death is the result of in the case of the gun, use, and in the case of the car misuse.

[Ban Hammer 13,349]

Who said the drunk driver isn't responsible for the deaths of anyone he might run over? The courts take a very dim view of it.

The point isn't about responsibility, it's about the extent of carnage that a crazed individual can meet out when he runs on the rampage.

If cars really where as effective in wreaking havoc when used deliberately in the attempt to take life then I think it's quite conceivable that there would be legitimate arguments to crack down on their use. The fact is, they aren't because they were never designed to be weapons. Guns were designed to be efficient life takers and they are pretty darned good at it.

No one anywhere has tried to argue that the gun, or for that matter the car are the responsible parties when death is the result of in the case of the gun, use, and in the case of the car misuse.

why don't you just admit you hate guns? i'm also certain you've never fired one nor have any education regarding them other than "omg they are dangerous"

[Fandango 1,439]

Guns don't kill people, rappers do...i seen it on a documentary on BBC2

[Peikko 1,575]

why don't you just admit you hate guns

Why? It's not true. I do think they are inherently dangerous though, and so should everyone. They were designed to kill, that's the only reason they exist and that's why it is important to me that people who want to own guns are quite open with what a gun is and what it's for. I am very uncomfortable with people comparing guns and cars as if they are talking about equally lethal entities.

I have no problem with anyone who wants to practice sport shooting but of course it should be regulated. Gun clubs are a good idea. Legitimate hunting is fine, but I do have a problem with people shooting wildlife just because they like to see things die.

I was brought up in a country where civilians are not allowed to just buy guns in the store and keep them lying around the house, so it is hardly surprising that I am rather skeptical of the need for them in day to day life, or the perception that they are helpful in deterring crimes.

However, it seems to me that unless I can prove some gun owning/handling credentials, my opinion on the matter is invalid. What hogwash.

[Ban Hammer 13,349]

why don't you just admit you hate guns

Why? It's not true. I do think they are inherently dangerous though, and so should everyone. They were designed to kill, that's the only reason they exist and that's why it is important to me that people who want to own guns are quite open with what a gun is and what it's for. I am very uncomfortable with people comparing guns and cars as if they are talking about equally lethal entities.

I have no problem with anyone who wants to practice sport shooting but of course it should be regulated. Gun clubs are a good idea. Legitimate hunting is fine, but I do have a problem with people shooting wildlife just because they like to see things die.

I was brought up in a country where civilians are not allowed to just buy guns in the store and keep them lying around the house, so it is hardly surprising that I am rather skeptical of the need for them in day to day life, or the perception that they are helpful in deterring crimes.

However, it seems to me that unless I can prove some gun owning/handling credentials, my opinion on the matter is invalid. What hogwash.

you've got a pretty good idea how some of us take your opinion now and why you've met with such resistance: because you've got no experience on this topic yet you intend to lecture gun owners about the dangers of guns. what's next on your agenda, you gonna go teach rocket science at nasa?

[Peikko 1,575]

Lecture? All I have said is that it would be a good thing if gun owners were honest as to what a gun is and quit this totally disingenuous, "oh, guns are no more dangerous than a car." rubbish.

I personally would respect anyone who was willing to argue something on its merits, call a gun a weapon and a car a means of transportation. They are not interchangeable.

If you want to deflect this into a 'you're not worthy' thing, so be it.

Edited October 12, 2007 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Wait, wait. If cars are like guns, and we need licenses for cars....

Hey, they're the ones spinning in circles over whether cars ARE TOO just like guns!, not me.

back to your corner, no need to throw more gas on the fire

Why not, we could toast marshmallows.

Natty Bumpo, if they're exactly the same, then either the second amendment is talking about cars, or it's NOT talking about guns.

we are talking about people and responsibility ... doesn't matter the tool (vehicle if you will) used to kill. dead is dead when someone intentionally kills you

You're talking about "responsibility" in a situation where it is completely irrelevant. Do you think this kid's crime can be boiled down to simply being irresponsible, as much as being psychopathic and insane?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'd rather run away from a car being driven at 25mph. I think my survival chances would be pretty darned good. I wouldn't think much of my chances running away from a bullet.

No one is arguing death isn't death.

guess it depends on the shooter ... and driver. bad shooter ... good driver can quickly change the equation. either case is not a good option.

it's the responsibility factor thats missing. it's been said a drunk driver is not responsible (no intent) yet essentially straps themselves into a vehicle that can very quickly become a death delivering device .... just like a gun.

responsibility ? where is it ? who is responsilbe ? the individual? friends? others? to prevent either example from happening (gun/ murderous drunk driver)

I never said the drunk driver isn't responsible, quite the opposite in fact. I did say that there is a very big difference of behaviour between someone who is negligent through the use of alcohol or drugs, and a crazy guy who psychs himself up to commit deliberate murder.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Lecture? All I have said is that it would be a good thing if gun owners were honest as to what a gun is and quit this totally disingenuous, "oh, guns are no more dangerous than a car." rubbish.

I personally would respect anyone who was willing to argue something on its merits, call a gun a weapon and a car a means of transportation. They are not interchangeable.

If you want to deflect this into a 'you're not worthy' thing, so be it.

Again a person might reasonably wonder why we send soldiers to war with guns - instead of screwdrivers, pitchforks and hammers.

I guess the Soviets had the right idea when they sent their soldiers to war in WW2 armed with wooden clubs. I guess the appalling casualties they sustained trying to storm machine gun nests had nothing to do with the fact that they were woefully underequipped for the task.

[derekkj 0]

why don't you just admit you hate guns

Why? It's not true. I do think they are inherently dangerous though, and so should everyone. They were designed to kill, that's the only reason they exist and that's why it is important to me that people who want to own guns are quite open with what a gun is and what it's for. I am very uncomfortable with people comparing guns and cars as if they are talking about equally lethal entities.

I have no problem with anyone who wants to practice sport shooting but of course it should be regulated. Gun clubs are a good idea. Legitimate hunting is fine, but I do have a problem with people shooting wildlife just because they like to see things die.

I was brought up in a country where civilians are not allowed to just buy guns in the store and keep them lying around the house, so it is hardly surprising that I am rather skeptical of the need for them in day to day life, or the perception that they are helpful in deterring crimes.

However, it seems to me that unless I can prove some gun owning/handling credentials, my opinion on the matter is invalid. What hogwash.

Again, I will say that not all guns are designed to kill humans and that the vast majority of guns/owners out there have never done so. And unfortunately many of the other sporting activities that I do are also inherently dangerous. But honestly, I am probably safer on the gun range than going horseback riding, skiing, biking, or so of the other things that I like to do. Why is it that the more fun something is, the more likely you are to die?

And while, I would never say anyone's opinion is invalid, I would say that many people who are unfamiliar with firearms either are afraid of them or have misconceptions about their capabilities or lack thereof.

Not going to get into the whole gun vs. car thing.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

why don't you just admit you hate guns

Why? It's not true. I do think they are inherently dangerous though, and so should everyone. They were designed to kill, that's the only reason they exist and that's why it is important to me that people who want to own guns are quite open with what a gun is and what it's for. I am very uncomfortable with people comparing guns and cars as if they are talking about equally lethal entities.

I have no problem with anyone who wants to practice sport shooting but of course it should be regulated. Gun clubs are a good idea. Legitimate hunting is fine, but I do have a problem with people shooting wildlife just because they like to see things die.

I was brought up in a country where civilians are not allowed to just buy guns in the store and keep them lying around the house, so it is hardly surprising that I am rather skeptical of the need for them in day to day life, or the perception that they are helpful in deterring crimes.

However, it seems to me that unless I can prove some gun owning/handling credentials, my opinion on the matter is invalid. What hogwash.

Again, I will say that not all guns are designed to kill humans and that the vast majority of guns/owners out there have never done so. And unfortunately many of the other sporting activities that I do are also inherently dangerous. But honestly, I am probably safer on the gun range than going horseback riding, skiing, biking, or so of the other things that I like to do. Why is it that the more fun something is, the more likely you are to die?

And while, I would never say anyone's opinion is invalid, I would say that many people who are unfamiliar with firearms either are afraid of them or have misconceptions about their capabilities or lack thereof.

Not going to get into the whole gun vs. car thing.

Or the deranged psychopath / drink driver thing.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Guns don't kill people, rappers do...i seen it on a documentary on BBC2

[DeadPoolX 9]

Why is it so difficult to understand the concept here?

No one -- I repeat no one -- is debating the fact that both guns and cars can kill. Far too many people, every day, are killed in motor vehicle accidents. This is a fact and one that cannot be intelligently disputed. However, a firearm and a car were also designed (there's the key word: designed) for distinctly different uses.

A gun, no matter how you slice it, was created to injure or kill another live target -- unless you're skeet shooting or merely "practicing," in which you'll be firing at inanimate paper screens. The usual target, however, is either an animal or a human being. Both are living, breathing creatures and the objective of the gun is (as stated before) to wound or kill them.

A car, on the other hand, is designed to transport people, animals, or objects from one place to another. That doesn't mean it can't be used as a deadly weapon (it can and has been many times), but that was not why it was created. The sole purpose of the car was "quick and easy" transportation, since the main avenues before it were horses (with or without carriages) or trains.

As I stated before, nearly any object could be used as a weapon, given the opportunity. Regardless, that doesn't mean the object was created with that intention in mind. A plastic bag, for all intents and purposes, is designed to carry items (usually those bought at a store), but it could also be used to suffocate someone. Is that a weapon? Depending on the circumstance, it could very be one. But that was not why it was created -- when the designer of the plastic bag rolled it out, he didn't think to himself, "I'll bet I could kill a whole lot of kids with this puppy! If only I could get it mass produced... oh, I know! I'll have every store use plastic bags and then hopefully, children will begin suffocating themselves and each other!"

No, that didn't happen. The same is true with the invention of the car. The invention of the gun, however, was quite different. It was designed for no other purpose but to cause damage (and possibly kill), so I can't see the logical comparison between a firearm and something such as a car. It makes no sense whatsoever.

[SteveLaura 0]

For those here who fail to comprehend the difference between a car and gun, maybe they should go to sleep tonight with a full gassed-up Honda under their pillow.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

For those here who fail to comprehend the difference between a car and gun, maybe they should go to sleep tonight with a full gassed-up Honda under their pillow.

Worth a try.