After the Columbine shootings, when a couple of teenagers in black overcoats strolled through their school shooting people with guns, other schools took steps to prevent copycat incidents by banning guns black overcoats. (Really!)
This week a Korean boy in a combat vest made a video of himself and strolled though his school shooting students, and the big question is will other schools and colleges respond by banning combat vests, video cameras or Koreans?
They could always ban guns, but that would just be silly wouldn’t it?
“They could always ban guns, but that would just be silly wouldn’t it?”
Wat in the same way we did and then saw gun crime soar?
And yet, deaths through guns in the UK are going down, and are currently at about 50 per year.
A large proportion of UK ‘gun crime’ involved criminal damage, rather than personal damage. By far the largest category of gun-related ‘assaults’ result in minor harm, which includes threats.
None of this is GOOD, and ideally we would have zero gun crime. Of course, given that guns are highly restricted, a fair amount of gun ‘crime’ is related simply to the fact that they are illegal. Freeing up gun legislation would probably reduce gun crime, but increase gun deaths.
As a previous victim of a mugging at gunpoint, I’d far rather that I was alive and a little poorer than dead but had thwarted the criminal.
Odd, I know.
According to the National Rifle Association (of america), The death toll at Virginia Tech wouldn’t of been so high if other students and teachers were also able to take guns on to campus, thus enabling them to take out Cho Seung-Hui before he murdered too many people.
So there you go.
The NRA, a powerful organisation that apparently carries alot of political weight, thinks the problem isn’t that there are too many guns in america ,The problem is that there aren’t enough!!
OMG!
I’m sure it is true.
Might have been a few more deaths throughout the whole year (and every year) as a result of guns going off accidentally, arguments getting out of hand, and so on though.
But then 40 individual deaths at different times is not as shocking as 32 all at the same time is it?
These mass shootings in the US are endemic to a country with an incredibly poor track record of mental health care for its citizens as well as an “entitlement” to own firearms.
Owning a firearm should be considered a privilege and not a right. Greater respect should be held for guns and what damage they can inflict on flesh. The average Joe has no reason to own an AK-47.
Banning guns would be an impossible task, and an unrealistic endeavor. What Americans need is an effective and human way to deal with mental illness. Many families, even with decent medical cover, are forced to sell their houses to pay for a loved one in psychiatric care.
In many instances when personal finances are exhausted, the patient gets shifted around to various institutions in the state, depending on annual budgets allocated by the government.
I sometimes wonder where the next killing spree is going to occur and what the body count will be.
Guns hold a different place in American culture than they do in Europe and banning them is possibly not the answer.
I can’t understand why the NRA are against control though. Would they be as happy for possession of large amounts of poison or nerve gas to be in anyone’s possession?
(Maybe they would be – I don’t know that much about them)