So far the death toll for the killings at the Washington Navy Yard stands at 13, including the shooter. This is more proof that gun control does not work. Had all of the 60,000 workers at the installation carried guns, this number of deaths would have been significantly different. Imagine, at the first shot, men and women packing heat could have drawn their trusty weapons and run towards the sounds of gunfire, cutting down anyone they saw shooting innocent workers. Obviously, this would have dropped the killer in his tracks, and brought about a much happier ending. How can any patriotic American oppose allowing average citizens to carry firearms? In fact, in light of the many mass killings plaguing this nation, carrying concealed weapons should be a federal requirement for all citizens who have reached 16 years-of-age, the same age drivers licenses can be issued in many states. This would greatly decrease gun violence in the U.S. However, just like in some states that prohibit talking on the cell phone and texting while driving, this same law should pertain when a citizen(s) is involved in a neighborhood-wide firefight subduing a potential mass murderer. We must always remember, safety first. http://news.yahoo.com/shots-fired-at-washington-navy-yard--u-s--navy-confirms-130407614.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/16/washington-navy-yard-shooting_n_3934027.html
You must remember, all right-wingers are self-proclaimed experts on the U.S. Constitution, especially the Second Amendment. Here on these message boards they have repeatedly stated gun violence would be curbed if all gun control was abolished. They profess this most loudly whenever a mass murder is committed.
The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ry-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html OOO look Canada has a violent crime rate more than twice that of the U.S. They must like getting their asses kicked while getting robbed.
Many of those countries calculate violent crime differently. And the fact that you posted The Daily Fail proves you didn't know that because neither did they. - - - Updated - - - I for see a spike of friendly fire, petty murders and murders of rage.
I don't suppose you read the whole article? But criminologists say crime figures can be affected by many factors, including different criminal justice systems and differences in how crime is reported and measured. In Britain, an affray is considered a violent crime, while in other countries it will only be logged if a person is physically injured.
What, end gun control? That's crazy talk. Why shouldn't I have gun control if I want it? You want to flood my liberal streets with guns, but that never stopped gun violence either. Perhaps, since the shooter was from Texas, we should consider the possibility of not hiring potentially dangerous gun toters from the southern states of the USA. That's about the same level of sensibility as suggesting that I loose my gun control laws so you can open the gun closet.
Dude what I seriously doubt that we'd be able to get all 60,000 workers at the Navy yard to carry a firearm. I also think it would have serious security implications if we allowed civilian workers in an installation working on military equipment to carry guns. I'm against gun control in general, but there are better arguments to be made. Mass shootings are mostly irrelevant, or should be, to the larger debate. Yes, they are tragic, but policy SHOULD NOT be made off of tragedy. Policy should be made off of STATISTICS. I care much more about the people that die every day from gang violence, home invasions, murders, and other everyday incidents of violence than I do about mass shootings, rare as they are.
12 of the worst mass shootings in US history have occured in the last 6 years. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/16/us/20-deadliest-mass-shootings-in-u-s-history-fast-facts/ Are you saying that isn't alarming enough for change?
Requiring all Americans to be armed would halt gang violence, home invasions, and other everyday incidents of violence. Haven't you been listening to the right-wingers and other Second Amendment experts? Federal requirements that all Americans be armed would create a militia over 300 million persons strong, and would guarantee the end of Obamacare. Instead it would make all Americans eligable for free military medical coverage.
I don't think that we would be significantly safer if more law abiding citizens began carrying. I also don't think we would be significantly safer if fewer law abiding citizens began carrying. I just don't see it making a difference one way or the other. So I err on the side of personal choice.
You have to be kidding me! There would have been bullets flying in all directions and a lot more people would have been injured or killed.
You are mistaken. According to the right-wingers, and other Second Amendment fanatics, strapping on a gun immediately gives any true American patriot the wisdom, skill, and the courage to step into any dangerous situation. They can then instantly decide the best course of action, instinctively determine the attacker from the intended victim(s), and understand which others are patriots who have also charged in to save the day. This is why teachers must carry firearms, and any other courageous citizen who believes in truth, justice, and the American way. Anyone who disagrees is giving aide to al Qaeda.
