provide available access to sexual satisfaction.. thats my solution.. im no pimp but imo sexual frustration cannot be cured with ************masturbation.

"How to stop mass psyops..."
"How to stop false flags that end your rights to bear arms."

1. Turn off your TV and end all cable services.
2. Stop believing the liberal news.
3. Realize Hollywood travels and hires crisis actors in your town.
4. Open neutering and spaying programs to ultra left wing liberals.
5. Video yourself killing puppies and kittens with knives and clubs then upload it to You Tube.

Or, just stop being a gullible, emotionally driven sheepole....

you do realize that US has crazy amount of shooting compared to the rest of the world right?

One of the best solution is gun control, I find it stupid for one to believe that he/she needs a rifle to protect themselves, what are you protecting yourself against, the world army? I might understand one gun per person but definitely not more.

Giving somebody weapon to protect themselves is only adding oil to the fire.

The companies that make weapon are the only one that benefit...

The largest exchange of gun fire are from dissidents and factions among disarmed citizens of other countries.

Gun control means having the ability to hit your target.

- You're right, a rifle isn't always the best tool for the job, somtimes you need the semiautomatic Desert Eagle .45 or the .50 caliber Colt revolver. Personally, my home defense weapon is the pump action 12 gauge Defender that fires on the slide.

Well armed citizens ARE the army and stand ready in the moment when our government ever should become tyranical, which is actually increasing year by year.

"Weapon", as in "gun?"
So, you would simply feed innocent people to an outlaw, because that's how it actually works when you disarm the upright.

To which I gladly support.

All good points. As a right center Liberal, as well as a gun owner I'll tell you it's more complicated and simple then all of what was stated.
Big Al has the point that there are too many criminals and wack jobs out there to disarm the lawful citizen.
We have studied this and have found some common issues that fall on the governments responsibility.
1) Mental heath.
2) Control.
3) Resources meaning money!

Everybody knowing most of these offenders a wack jobs, but doing nothing?
Police claiming they don't have the money or man power to research every teen with a gun on facebook? They did get lots of money when the police officers were killed by one.

Control. A mentally challenged teenage child gets to keep his gun in a cabinet???
Mental illness. Give them a pill and hope it works?
Take the guns away from good people and don't be surprised with the bombs increase.
Next time the government wants to spend billions the question should be asked...for who?

Why not put metal detectors in every entrance to schools, or the full body scanners they use in airports, would just take 1 male, 1 female member of security manning them, then no knifes or guns could get in.

If we were allowed guns in the UK I would definitely have one.
I've no intentions of going on a mass random shooting spree, but If the worst came to the worst and I found myself in a life or death situation, I would be very glad to be armed and willing to fire.

We have a fair amount of gun crime considering guns are illegal here.

I would also be a lot happier if aĺl our police were armed.

We do have and the police are. I think proactive vs re-active. It's an civil arms race sometimes. I feel sometimes it just requires the same action as a plane crash. Start from the beginning and resolve every piece until the error of "system" malfunction is found. NOT the parents...no finger pointing. Like a safety value on a gas leak. A+B=Cops! Teenager + mental health + guns = death:(

Simple solution:

Raise the age of being able to buy a weapon to 21. I can't believe that some states don't allow drinking till 21 but its perfectly legal to buy a weapon.

I also believe assault rifles should be securely locked away, more responsibility needs to be placed on owning a weapon. You cannot tell me that a handgun is not sufficient to protect your home.

The problem is that bad guys don’t obey laws.

Making it unlawful to carry a gun only stops the good guys, which makes the good guys sitting ducks for the bad guy that broke the law to get a gun in the first place.

Weed is illegal in most places- but it’s quite easy to come by.
Alcohol is illegal for minors, but other than well behaved teens that wouldn’t touch it if it were legal anyway, I don’t know anybody that didn’t have alcohol before they were 21. Cigarettes same thing.

Laws only stop law-abiding citizens.

Well then the mass shootings continue. I hope its never gonna be your kid.

I hope so too. But if my kid is ever in that kind of situation, I hope an armed law abiding citizen is nearby to protect them.

A spree-killer is going to do it one way or another. He might buy a $7 machete from Wal Mart- which I think you can legally buy once you're 14- and he's going to do the same thing. Sure, the damage is going to be a little less and take a little longer, but the loss is the same for the victims and their families. It wasn't the gun that did the damage, is was the mentally unstable human that managed to get his hands on a gun. I'd be willing to bet that if he had no way to get a gun, he would have gone on a stabbing spree instead. Would that make it any better?

See thats the problem with American attitude, 'its not the guns its the people' But if they didn't have access to the guns then the people won't die. Most mass shooting guns are bought legally. School mass shooters are in most cases 18ish. Raise the age to 21 and I guarantee you will see far less shootings.

And I know that bad people will always get access to guns, but its really not a valid point. Its like saying we should legalize heroin because people still get a hold of it.

It just seems crazy that its easier to get guns than heathcare

The biggest problem with "stop access to guns" is that guns are already around. Guns are already so common that it's too late. All stopping access to them will do is make the black market thrive.

The Heroin point isn't relevant at all? Heroin physically only hurts the user. And un-regulated use of the drug has no benefit. Guns are meant for self-defense. Good people need legal access to guns in order to defend themselves from the bad people that will have guns regardless. Like Big Al said- why aren't there ever shootings in a gun range? Because everybody there is armed and the shooter wouldn't get 2 rounds off before he was dead himself.

Almost every shooting takes place in an area where guns aren't allowed. Wonder why? Because the shooter knows he's going to be able to get really far before he's stopped. That problem will only be multiplied if nobody is "allowed" to have a gun.

Raising the age to 21 might reduce school shootings. It won't stop them entirely though. Not even close. And even then- that only reduces school shootings from students.

The kid in this case had a LONG history of problems. Run ins with the cops, racial slurs, violent threats, you name it. The gun was just the tool he used. It could have been a knife or a bomb just as easily. He didn't need restricted access to a gun. He needed help. I think, like Sherlock mentioned in his post, that this kid should have had his name entered in a restricted directory of individuals not allowed to purchase guns. I honestly don't believe that would have done anything other than delay the inevitable though. If somebody has made up their mind to do something like this- removing guns from their reach is just slowing them down, but they will persist and they will figure out a way to get what they want.

Also, not that it has anything to do with this case at all- a year's worth of healthcare for a healthy individual is cheaper than the gun he used- and it's MUCH easier to enroll in healthcare than to buy a large semi-automatic rifle.

So it’s better to stop people hurting themselves than hurting other people?

But why would the gunman be restricted? He had no criminal record.

So I assume that the other answer to this problem would be to arm everyone. Allow everyone I’ve 18 to carry a weapon.

Americans must be the most paranoid bunch of people I have ever known.

Rather than being insulting, you should try to understand other perspectives. Try to figure out why people think the way they do. It's much more effective than just grouping an entire country and assuming they're lower than you for having a differing opinion. (And, for the record, many Americans are for the removal of guns - Likewise, many non-Americans want to arm every citizen because they believe it's safer.)

Guns make some people feel safe. Some people own dogs. They like big scary dogs that bark so they can put "Beware of dog" signs on their door and fence- that way, burglars will avoid their house, right? So that makes them safer, right? But hey- other people train dogs to kill. Should we ban dogs as well? And knives, while we're at it. Sure. You don't have a problem with dogs. But some people are terrified of dogs. I personally know people that can't handle being in the same room as dogs because they're so afraid of them.
"But they just don't understand dogs." "Not all dogs are like that." Tell that to the girl that got attacked by her neighbors dog when she was 6.
The people that want to put up laws against guns don't understand guns. Not all gun owners go on killing sprees. Dogs have killed people as well. So what's the difference? Honestly, the only difference is that some people like dogs and some people like guns. People that like something want to try to defend it and say it's harmless in the right hands. But again- the problem isn't the "right" hands. It's the wrong ones.

There were MANY signs that the kid was unstable. Including, but not limited to the fact that he literally posted on the internet that he was going to shoot up a school months prior.
There was no doubt at all that he was mentally unstable. But still- people want to blame the gun. The inanimate object. Because the tool planned the whole thing, drove the kid to the school, put itself in his hand, and shot all of the people. But no- if nobody had access to guns, that kid would have lived a long and happy life and wouldn't hurt anybody, right?

I just can't understand your point of view, it has no rationale.

31 U.S. dog bite-related fatalities occurred in 2016.

How many were killed by guns in 2016? 15,000 http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls

The difference with dogs is we are constantly challenging legislations to make dog ownership safer, as well as the welfare of the dogs. The US seem to have no interest in changing anything regarding guns

oops

I don't understand the rationale that an inanimate object can be blamed for the actions of a person.

The point isn't the stats or numbers. ANYTHING is dangerous if it's put in the wrong hands. Guns can SAVE lives in the right hands.

I also don't understand the reasoning behind thinking that taking guns away would have suddenly saved those people. Do you honestly believe that if that kid didn't have a gun, that nobody would have gotten hurt/killed when he finally went through with his threats?

Is there honestly doubt that if each of the teachers in that school were armed and trained that the kid would never have gotten as far as he did?

well yes! no guns= no death. Thats pretty obvious. The UK has very tight restrictions on guns, do you know how many mass killings we have had here? 0. why? because after Dunblane, we changed the law.

Its easier to run or defend yourself from a guy with a knife than a guy with an assault rifle and several magazines.

Teachers are there to teach, not enter a shootout with a mad man. Maybe y'all need bullet proof doors and windows in schools with panic buttons.

I wish we lived in a world where weapons didn't exist, but the fact is that we do. And if weapons exist, there will be people that abuse those weapons and hurt other people with them. That's unavoidable.

Taking away guns means no deaths?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5251268/knife-cri...

Then why are knife crimes and violent deaths on the rise in the UK?

Nowhere in the world is safe from other people, unfortunately. And the fact is- it's people that kill people. Not guns, knives, or whatever else. Those are just objects that would sit peacefully if people didn't use them to harm others.

you said in that situation, which there wouldlnt be. Of course knives can be used. But there wouldnt have been 17 deaths now would there?

Are you sure there wouldn't have been? There is no reload time, no ammo to worry about. Sure. Maybe not 17. Maybe there would have been more. We can't say for sure. We don't and can't know for sure.

But what we DO know is that if that kid was mentally stable and well taken care of, even if he had full access to every gun in the world- 0 deaths would have occurred.

Yes. When in doubt, blame mental health. Its all ifs and buts. The fact is, if he didnt have access to guns, he wouldn't have taken that many innocent lives.

I would agree if he didn't have access to any weapons, then yes. Less lives would have been lost.
But he could have easily built a bomb. Waited for the students to gather in an auditorium and probably kill and harm a LOT more than 17.

Even with a knife, in a dark auditorium he can cause a crazy amount of damage.

Luckily he didn't wait and plan his attack for a time when people were more grouped together.

To build a bomb you generally need internet access and the authorities pick it up pretty quick and are arrested before it happens when you purchase the materials, hence why there are very little bomb attacks.

And he did wait, he pulled the fire alarm and waited for everyone to go into the corridors.

He posted on the internet that he was going to shoot up his school. The FBI even saw that information and chose to do nothing with it, despite the fact that he bought a semi-automatic rifle the year before... But sure. If he looked up how to build a bomb they would have arrested him that night.

There are few bombings because there are easier methods of killing people, and more effective methods- like guns. Bombs are dangerous to build, and if you're not careful you could end up killing yourself. I'm not saying a gun isn't an easy and effective weapon for killing people. I'm just saying there are a million other ways of doing the job if you set your mind to it, which these types of people do.

Kids dont generally put that much effort into something. He used a gun because it was easy. If the method was harder, and a longer process, then theres greater chance of being caught by the FBI. We cant ignore that they failed miserably on this one.

Kids don't generally shoot up schools period, but there are exceptions.

The point is- there is no 1 cause. Sure, increase security at school- then he goes to the library instead. Try to help the ones with mental health problems- it's inevitable that a few crazy's will slip through the cracks. Ban guns- they'll buy it off the black market.

Killers are killers. Taking away a gun is just going to make them use something else. There aren't "gun killers" who, without access to a gun, would live completely peaceful lives until you put a gun in their hand and they go crazy. If a killer decides to kill, they're going to do it.

So yes- in my opinion, seeing as it's completely impossible to eradicate the world of all killers, just like it's impossible to eradicate the world of all guns, the best method is to allow people to defend themselves instead of leaving them helpless and sitting ducks when a bad guy eventually DOES get a gun or some other violent weapon. Because they will. No matter what laws are passed or how hard you make it to get a gun.

And I don't own a gun, but if I was told I wasn't allowed to defend myself- I'd be pretty angry.

For those that have the stomach, come see the reality of life without guns...
www.bestgore.com

USA has one of the most mass shooting in the world and gun are to blame. Most modern countries have a decent gun control law and all of them are doing way better than USA. Of course they mass shooting are still there, but the occurrence of them are very rare compared to USA. Gun control will not fix the problem completely, you can't find the problem completely, however with gun control you can decrease it dramatically!

It is not true that if somebody gona do harm, he is gona do it either way. There is a difference between giving a metal guy or angry guy a knife and an automatic rifle. With one he can kill hundreds while in another he can kill a few.

For the person who suggested that teacher carry weapons and then the shooter will worry about his life, please note that a lot of the shooters end up killing themselves afterwards.

Giving more people access to guns will never solve the problem, only make it worst. I honestly can't see how americans cant see that while everybody in the world can clearly see that, maybe its the culture or politics that has shaped the american view on gun, be sure it couldnt be more wrong.

If you start restricting guns then they are bound to decrease over time and the problem will relatively be better.

You know, I use to think that the gun companies actually had the politians in their pocket. Am very disapointed to see americans really believe that their gun controls are fine.

That is not related to gun control, you can't take humans worst behavior and consider it the norm. Very disapointed.

- it has everything to do with gun control because we are talking about humans at their worst behavior. I'm disappointed you didn't connect the dots.
The nature of humans don't change - there will always be the barbaric with the civil. Everyone has a right to protect themselves, more so if you have a family it's your duty. How would you suggest protecting them, powers of reasoning and harsh language? Just because advancements in technology increases the capability of a weapon doesn't merit regulating or restricting you from possessing that weapon....

Well, no, it just means the form of killing and agony you suffer will change, if someone really wanted you dead.
Now, I can take a quiver of 25 arrows into a mall, theatre, grocery store and account for 15 to 20 dead on my tyraid. Let's not underestimate the element of....(?surprise?) NO! Complete and utter silence. There's no "boom-boom" to alert you - so your argument that a "lesser weapon" will kill less people is....laying dead right next to you...
Okay, i understand, you would rather be shot with an arrow...well, of course not. Maybe a point blank shot in the head with a sling shot would be better?
Still not getting it?
Okay - lets outlaw guns, bow&arrows and sling shots. That leaves swords and knives as a stock standard of weapons. What about someone's bad behavior then?
The world has always been dangerous place to live in, perhaps you're more comfortable with getting ran through or slashed - but no, that's not a consideration, so....more dots.
The new polymorph, caveman? Because wearing animal furs is not acceptable? There's always someone in the family who gets a form of encephilititus and goes completely of the deep end.
Ever talk to one of those victims? No...because the dead at any point in history still don't talk...but i'm sure as they're being beat to death by clubs and stones, the hope of a clean and quick death from a bullet would be welcome...
I'm sorry, did you say I can't take humans at their worst behavior and consider it the norm? You need to explain to me; what is a "normal standard" for human behavior at it's worst...
The more archaic the weapon the more brutal and agonizing the death will be.

1. You can believe what ever propaganda you want, it doesn't make it any the more true.
2. Guns aren't to blame for anything, people are. To blame the tool and not the person is lazy accounting.
(And you're disappointed?)

Yes it is.
Yes people knew there was a concern and nothing done.
When the three police officers where hunted down and killed in Canada nobody that knew the guy was shocked. A charge under the labour code was filed and won for not supplying or training the officers with carbine weapons or training. They were in their cars! No weapon or training would have stop a bullet going through the windshield. Plus is the awarded money being directed to prevention? No.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and puts a picture of themselves looking like a duck...maybe it's a fuucking duck.

Here is a Maxism; they will use these terror events to justify limited freedom and internet use. Good people will be restricted and crazies will help them before they're shot.

I agree Big Al. I get disappointed when I hear stuff like the gun shop owner telling "me" he knew the guy was weird but took his money anyway. Plus we did have police in schools here in Canada but took them out due to not enough money! Facebook and welfare is off the hook here along with voids of empathy and disconnect.

You really can't base the sale of a gun on the "weirdness" factor, unless it's so blatantly obvious. All people have a quirk. If the seller is irresponsable, he assumes the liability - those are the terms you accept to be an authorized gun dealer.

There's nothing in the legal arena preventing me from buying a gun. I will be sent through "the system" to be "checked out." Everything will fly. I'll buy my gun and some ammo. Legally, that gun is tied to me and because of that, my responsibility is extended to make sure it doesn't fall into the wrong hands.
Honestly....I would rather buy a black market gun. It's not going to change one iota of my "being," if I did that.
Criminals don't register their weapons anymore than a carpenter registers his hammer - no one stops to ask the carpenter how many old lady heads were beat in, when he sells that hammer....
Gun are tools of adjustment. For the better or worse.
------------------

I've been thinking about this reply and the more I think about it Nact, I do believe this is a genius statement...

The propaganda of school shootings is not really about the shootings at all - I think it's a tactic to disarm the public at large by means of psychological warfare intended to subconsciously stir up "pedophile hysteria."

Think about it. "A gun, like a fancy car, is an extension of a mans...." So, the unleashing of a gun in a school becomes the equivalent of someone exposing themselves to a concentrated group of kids. Shooting those kids becomes a form of mole*station and grape. What better way to get people on your band wagon for increased gun control (because we already have gun control - it is now about eliminating gun ownership), than to use children for your cause....
This way, non gun owners can look at gun owners like they were pedos and black ops projects get away Scott free with their mission accomplished...
Yeah, Nact, I think we may need federally funded hoar houses after all.

The average age of attackers in 91 recorded US mass shootings, including the Las Vegas attack, was 34.
Stephen Paddock, the gunman who killed 58 concertgoers in Las Vegas, is one of three killers aged over 60. The others are: William D Baker, 66, who killed five people in Illinois in 2001; and Kurt Myers, 64, who killed five people in New York state in 2013.
The youngest killer is Andrew Douglas Golden, 11, who ambushed students and teachers as they left Westside Middle School in Arkansas, in 1998. He was jointly responsible with Mitchell Scott Johnson, 13, for five deaths and 10 injured.

Am supposing you are not getting attacked by 30 people every night, trying to steal your food. So you don't need a semi-automatic rifle or the modification that turns it into fully automatic rifle.

It is not the norm that you need to use your gun every time you leave the house to protect yourself. You cannot take human worst behavior and make it sound like its the norm, cause it is not. You don't need to carry a gun every time you leave the house.

There is no excuse on why would somebody own a semi-automatic rifle with like hundreds of ammos.

Restricting guns and increase the age to own a gun would decrease violence on the long run, nobody is saying it would totally wipe it out.

Las Vegas shooter had a modifier that turns the semi-automatic into automatic and he had like i dont know how many of them and hundreds of ammos... Give him a pistol or a shot gun with limited ammos, do you think he can kill as much?

Human are very complex creature, we still dont know tons ****shit about our bodies, consciousness, and the complexity of the brain...

Humans can be power hungry and violent, we want to restrict their tools to turn their impulses into mass shootings. Nobody is saying guns are good or evil, but in the wrong hands they can be deadly for society population. What we are saying is lets try to restrict it as much as possible to make it more difficult to get on a deadly weapon that might inflict mass casualties.

Well, if every kid and teacher in that school was carrying, he wouldn't have killed 17 people....

We aren't allowed to defend ourselves in our own home even without a gun.
If we do, we get prosecuted.

This is what the opposite of the right to defend yourself is like.

If someone breaks into my house, I'd rather be legally allowed to shoot them than get prosecuted for beating them with a rolling pin or whatever other pitiful object of defence I am allowed to own.

That's pretty much exactly how it is here in England too.

I used to have some replica knives from the film ' blade ' in my lounge.

The police came round in reference to something I may have witnessed, when they came in they informed me that even though they are being used as ornaments in my own home and displayed in ornamental holders, I am not legally allowed to have them there.

I could however hide them from site and access and that may be ok.

I also had a cricket bat by my door, but since that could be considered a weapon I bought a cricket ball to keep at the side of it.

Now I just need a 12 inch dining fork to accompany a huge knife in my bedroom......

Yes to all of the above.
You're right Big Al about the weird factor and the dealer.
I guess it boils down to the village thing where we try to take care of ourselves and I don't know what will happen to fake news. Even the CBC is turning out crap news now. I'm hoping the BBC doesn't follow.
Idea! Bring back the ham radios. One for every home. Nah..zombies are tricky. They'll screw with them too.

I was talking about school shootings. Unless you ban firearms theres no way of dealing with mass shootings in general.

But wouldnt a better way to protect your home to basically install fort knox style security? That would deter people from the outset.

The only winners from mass shootings are the NRA.

Fear drivers consumerism.

[https://vimeo.com/219338338]

while obviously exaggerated for comedic purposes he makes some good points and overall i agree.

There are no winners anywhere.
The FBI thing is completely crazy.
Disarming NRA won't work today. It's too late for that.
They're going to build a box...say bye to freedom. All it takes is a vote. Ask Trump.

Since people rush to buy guns as soon as something like this happens, due to fear of them being banned, the NRA are most definitely the winners.

And please note, I have never said ban them completely, all I said is raise the age to 21.

are you saying you can own a gun before you can drink in the US?!?!

Correct

You can get married, buy a gun or go to combat before you can drink.

Maybe Brits handle booze better than Americans....

hah yes we definitely do from all the experiences my friend and i have had! one did a semester over in minnesota and he would drink them under the table having a civilised tipple with a meal. we drink to drink in the UK, notdrink to playbeer pong.

I'm proud at the students standing up!
We just watched the WACO disaster...there must be a better way.

Students are always more liberal anyway. And are the most vocal.