:At 8/1/12 06:33 PM, JaY11 wrote:
You seriously think that the situation would have been better if the majority of the audience was armed? This psychopath who breaks into a cinema would just stop and leave because everyone in the cinema would have a gun out in the open?
You've yet to explain why he wouldn't; therefore this is not a counterargument, this is straw man argument.
I can, however, explain why he would; he surrendered to the cops without confrontation when he was caught despite the fact he was still armed and loaded. If he kills indiscriminately, without rhyme or reason, then why would he care to surrender to the cops as opposed to opening fire on them? It couldn't have been because he had buyers remorse after the fact, he announced to the cops that he was the Joker when they caught him. It can't be because he premeditated his glory moment, because prior to being caught he tried to escape by means of blending in with the S.W.A.T. team that arrived, additionally his plan was botched by the fact he intended to stall the cops and their arrival to the theater by blowing up his own apartment building and it didn't happen; his intentions were to continue his killing spree after massacring the audience at the theater.
Or do you think that turning this shooting into a full on gun fight in a crowded theatre between him and the audience would have been better?
He was able to injure more than fifty people and killed twelve of them because they were boxed in and defenseless. Do you think he would have had as high of a body count if people started firing back at him?
At 7/31/12 11:24 PM, JaY11 wrote:
It's not even good in the UK, but gun crime is in a different league to any other violent crime. I'd rather be at risk of getting beaten in the street than shot.That sounds like a horrible and humiliating way to die, at least when you're shot in the head the death is instantaneous and the shooter will look like a coward for not challenging you on equal ground.
This is just dumb, first of all you are much more likely to survive a physical beating than a gunshot or multiple gunshot wounds, I wasn't just talking about death, I was talking about violent crimes in general.
Who's to say that the assailant in question won't try to beat you to death? Why would you open fire on someone unless it was intended as a kill shot? Why can't you use guns as melee weapons?
Secondly not all deaths due to guns are headshots.
I never said otherwise; giving one example =/= listing a method to imply it's the one and only. Again, you're using a straw man argument.
Thirdly who gives a fuck how the criminal looks after he kills you.
Believe it or not, people actually give a shit about how they'll be viewed after they're dead. Pacifists are, one and all, retarded.
Okay then, guns are bad
No they aren't, they have no inherent moral value to them at all. Extreme pacifists are fucking retarded.
but you can't escape them, I am sorry for "how the Earth is shaped" if that's what you see as the problem here.
Does this mean that you concede that we should keep our gun rights? It sounds like you just admitted that legally owning firearms is a necessary evil.