• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California College involved in deadly shooting.

That's some impressive response time by the police huh? Did they have to have a committee meeting or something first? I think if you are going to make it as difficult as California has to defend yourself they should at least have a police department that can respond quickly enough to keep this sort of thing from happening. California has some of the highest taxes too, it's not like they don't have the budget.Where I live it is not likely he would have made it to the school. When he went out shooting at cars us armed citizens would have taken him down.
 
Wiseone said:
Can we please stop with this "the law didn't stop it therefore the law is worthless argument" there's laws against murder and theft which still occur but no one is going to say that its not worth having those laws on the books.
Click to expand...

No. The very point is that restricting gun ownership for millions of people will not keep this sort of this from happening, in fact it makes it more likely. According to the story this guy arrived at the campus after shooting two people in a house and shooting at several more on the way to the campus and nobody stopped him. The laws may very well be the reason those two were shot in the library.
 
Deuce said:
Can't even hold this crap for one post.
Click to expand...

What's there to hold, you support an agenda that's so full of **** it fails in front of your face..................and this post is your reply. What's your ****ing explanation for this killing that shouldn't possibly happen with major gun control in place? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?????
 
Wiseone said:
All the politics in this thread make me sick. Who sees a shooting and things the way the victims voted is somehow important? ****ing disgusting.
Click to expand...

That precisely the point, the law is bull****, and that's why you don't want it brought out and discussed in the light of day. Watch, you next post will try to bring up some other subject altogether, because you have NO sensible answer to this.
 
Wiseone said:
Can we please stop with this "the law didn't stop it therefore the law is worthless argument" there's laws against murder and theft which still occur but no one is going to say that its not worth having those laws on the books.
Click to expand...
Since criminals can have guns on campus why can't normal tax-payers? Why do you hate people defending themselves?
 
head of joaquin said:
Can't even wait till the bury the dead before you start your ugly NRA agitprop. That's what boomsticklovers do, I guess.

Meantime the gun nut had a ballistic vest. Of course the NRA is against banning those too.
Click to expand...
That's what the RIP tag is for.

This thread doesn't have an RIP tag.
 
head of joaquin said:
We haven't banned guns, that's the problem. The guy was probably from Texas.

But there you boomsticklovers go -- politicizing another mass shooting. It's what you guys do.
Click to expand...

And calling for gun control isn't politicizing it? That's a little hypocritical don't you think?
 
tech30528 said:
No. The very point is that restricting gun ownership for millions of people will not keep this sort of this from happening, in fact it makes it more likely. According to the story this guy arrived at the campus after shooting two people in a house and shooting at several more on the way to the campus and nobody stopped him. The laws may very well be the reason those two were shot in the library.
Click to expand...

Drugs are illegal, yet we have a drug problem...hmmmm..why would a gun ban be different?
 
American said:
That precisely the point, the law is bull****, and that's why you don't want it brought out and discussed in the light of day. Watch, you next post will try to bring up some other subject altogether, because you have NO sensible answer to this.
Click to expand...

tech30528 said:
No. The very point is that restricting gun ownership for millions of people will not keep this sort of this from happening, in fact it makes it more likely. According to the story this guy arrived at the campus after shooting two people in a house and shooting at several more on the way to the campus and nobody stopped him. The laws may very well be the reason those two were shot in the library.
Click to expand...

Firearm Homicide Rates, 2000 -2006
Smoothed, age-adjusted rates per 100,000 population
Untitled.jpg

http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/ficap/resourcebook/pdf/monograph.pdf
As you can see, firearm homicides are not just about ownership law, there's more to what affects homicide rates than gun laws. Talking about gun law as if its the only thing that affects homicides is just plain stupid, the facts don't support that view.

Jerry said:
Since criminals can have guns on campus why can't normal tax-payers? Why do you hate people defending themselves?
Click to expand...

Who said I don't support students carrying weapons on campus? You just made a completely wrong assumption.
 
Wiseone said:
Can we please stop with this "the law didn't stop it therefore the law is worthless argument" there's laws against murder and theft which still occur but no one is going to say that its not worth having those laws on the books.
Click to expand...

Those are good laws we want to continue to punish for, stop trying to conflate good laws and bad laws. That "if criminals ignore laws why have any" counter argument is retarded every time it is uttered when discussing things that effect the law abiding. In fact, just watch this:


head of joaquin said:
We haven't banned guns, that's the problem.
Click to expand...

You can't be real, the likes of Wiseone always tell us "no one is trying to ban all guns" and that we have nothing to worry about.
 
Lachean said:
Those are good laws we want to continue to punish for, stop trying to conflate good laws and bad laws. That "if criminals ignore laws why have any" counter argument is retarded every time it is uttered when discussing things that effect the law abiding. In fact, just watch this:


You can't be real, the likes of Wiseone always tell us "no one is trying to ban all guns" and that we have nothing to worry about.
Click to expand...


I can't watch youtube videos on my computer, and I've never said no one is trying to ban all guns, at least not in a literal context.

Do I need to repeat myself for the hundredth time that I don't support new gun laws, except for universal background checks, when it comes to consumers.
 
TurtleDude said:
the anti gun scum out there is having major orgasms over this given they are trying to pass even more idiotic gun laws in that sorry leftwing infected state
Click to expand...

Truly you are an ambassador to your cause.
 
Cardinal said:
Truly you are an ambassador to your cause.
Click to expand...

I am here to bash the idiocy of the anti gun left. I don't care if I offend low wattage gun haters, or sensitive girly men or male hating harpies. The fact is there are only two kinds of anti gun types

1) the ignorant-they think gun restrictions on law abiding people actually decreases crime

2) the dishonest-those who pretend that crime control is what motivates them
 
TurtleDude said:
I am here to bash the idiocy of the anti gun left. I don't care if I offend low wattage gun haters, or sensitive girly men or male hating harpies. The fact is there are only two kinds of anti gun types

1) the ignorant-they think gun restrictions on law abiding people actually decreases crime

2) the dishonest-those who pretend that crime control is what motivates them
Click to expand...

You're a fraud.
 
The shooter was hospitalized a couple of years ago with mental health issues... another psychiatric patient who should have been prevented from purchasing a firearm. I haven't been able to find out if his weapon was legally or illegally obtained.

The problem here, people, is not the weapon. It's the crazy man who was using it, who was out on the street when he should not have been.
 
DiAnna said:
The shooter was hospitalized a couple of years ago with mental health issues... another psychiatric patient who should have been prevented from purchasing a firearm. I haven't been able to find out if his weapon was legally or illegally obtained.

The problem here, people, is not the weapon. It's the crazy man who was using it, who was out on the street when he should not have been.
Click to expand...

The Va Tech shooter also had psychiatric problems.
 
Higgins86 said:
the shop is located on the street though which is what I was pointing out. No point banning guns when you can legally buy one across the street and walk into the campus and start shooting people. Don't really agree with the gun free zones seems kind of pointless, either you ban guns out right or you don't.
Click to expand...

The location of a gun shop is irrelevant. As you note, the campus was a "gun-free zone". As noted, CA also has some of the toughest gun-control laws in the Country:

Semi-automatic firearms that the state has classified as assault weapons, .50 BMG caliber rifles, and magazines that can hold more than ten rounds of ammunition may not be sold in California. Possession of automatic firearms, and of short-barreled shotguns and rifles, is generally prohibited.

read more: Gun laws in California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

The shooter had one assault-style weapon, and other handguns. He also had over 1000 rounds in higher-capacity (30 rd) banana clips or magazines.

Banning them "outright" is not going to happen in America. As we see over and over again, even new gun laws will not prevent criminal gun behavior, laws which only the law-abiding will obey, 7 of whom were gunned down with this incident in CA.
 
head of joaquin said:
We haven't banned guns, that's the problem. The guy was probably from Texas.

But there you boomsticklovers go -- politicizing another mass shooting. It's what you guys do.
Click to expand...
Really? You think that you and other 2nd amendment opponents have room to talk? Any time one of these mass shootings happen you people come out of the wood work like roaches to try to push some sort of ban, whine about civilian firearms, whine how we need more "common sense" gun control,pretend that mass shootings happen all the time, deliberately try to confuse civilian and military firearms, and so on. Its because of 2nd amendment opponents trying to **** all over the 2nd amendment why 2nd amendment advocates have to come out on defense.
 
Last edited:
jamesrage said:
Really? You think that you and other 2nd amendment opponents have room to talk? Any time one of these mass shootings happen you people come out of the wood work like roaches to try to push some sort of ban, whine about civilian firearms, whine how we need more "common sense" gun control,pretend that mass shootings happen all the time, deliberately try to confuse civilian and military firearms, and so on. Its because of 2nd amendment opponents trying to **** all over the 2nd amendment why 2nd amendment advocates have to come out on defense.
Click to expand...

what was the biggest round of ammunition available to civilians to use in firearms? and what is the biggest round available for use in their fire arms?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom