Taking guns away from American Terrorists it will cause more carnage not less!

The kind of people who use guns to commit mass murder in the US are often inspired by the great American fascination with guns so much that they don’t realize guns are a poor tool if mass murder is your goal.  Simply put, guns are relatively slow, inefficient and expensive compared to the alternatives.  In many countries where guns are easily obtained terrorist organizations rarely use them because they have studied the numbers and realize they can kill far more people with far less resources, in much less time with bombs. 

 

Stephen Paddock succeeded in killing more people with guns than any shooter on American soil.  Timothy McVeigh killed over three times that many with a bomb that cost less and was easier to procure than the Stephen’s guns and did its damage in seconds.

 

It’s rare for a single shooter to kill 50 people but bombers, and even arsonists frequently kill 2 or three times that many, using tools that are easy to obtain and assemble thanks to websites that gladly furnish all the necessary details.  Those tools are much harder to control than guns and if we succeeded in separating Americans from their guns, I have no doubt people wanting to commit mass murder will resort to those much more deadly tools and cause much more carnage as a result.

 

I am not pleased with the carnage cause by people who use guns but I’m not stupid, I know that taking away their guns will not end their quest for violence and know the unintended consequence will be that we will become responsible for having pushed them towards those alternatives

Comments

opher goodwin Added Oct 7, 2017 - 7:21pm
Don't agree Rusty. There is something in the mentality of thyese people that makes guns the chosen weapon. Psychologically bombs would not do.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Oct 7, 2017 - 7:38pm
Whether your pussy limey ass agrees or not is of zero consequence DOHpher.
John G Added Oct 7, 2017 - 7:46pm
Most murders are crimes of passion or situations gone wrong. taking guns out of the equation will substantially reduce the death rate.
opher goodwin Added Oct 7, 2017 - 7:48pm
Hey John Wayne - I knew you pseudo hard guy would show up with your misogynistic sexist posturing. Aye aye Skipper. Yo Ho Ho!
Ari Silverstein Added Oct 8, 2017 - 12:30am
I make it a point not to read any article with a grammatical error in the title. 
Leroy Added Oct 8, 2017 - 7:37am
"I make it a point not to read any article with a grammatical error in the title."
 
I'll ensure that I always have more than one so that you will read my articles.
Leroy Added Oct 8, 2017 - 7:42am
You're right, Rusty; guns are not needed to create terror.  However, terror is not about the numbers.  It is about creating fear.  In China, knives are the weapons of choice.  The terror is perpetrated against school children to create fear in the minds of parents.  I'm sure Opher would say a few slashed throats is acceptable in the scheme of things.
Dino Manalis Added Oct 8, 2017 - 7:58am
That's why terror suspects should be monitored constantly online and off and prevented from traveling to terror zones to stop barbarism against humanity!
opher goodwin Added Oct 8, 2017 - 10:07am
Leroy - LOL - yes what's the problem with a few thousand slit children's throats?
As Jeffry might say - we wouldn't want them growing up as pussies would we?
Rusty Smith Added Oct 8, 2017 - 11:39am
opher goodwin  yes, in America we have been lucky that our gun culture has caused most American terrorists who don't get coached by people who know better, to reach for guns when they want to create carnage.
 
We aren't lucky that they want to kill people but we are lucky that they often reach for their guns instead of building bombs because the resulting number of dead people is smaller that way.
 
That is especially important when it comes to collateral damage deaths where murders involving things like bombs and even arson usually kill many more people who weren't targets, than people who were actually targeted.
 
My forum premise is that if these people were somehow deprived of their access to guns, they would not give up, they would resort to other means that happen to be much more deadly.
Rusty Smith Added Oct 8, 2017 - 11:42am
John G  taking guns away will not substantially reduce the violence, it will just involve things like knives, machete's and poison because they are easy to get and what people resort to when they can't get guns.
 
There are plenty of other very violent places in the world, including many parts of Mexico where non gun violence abounds among those who don't have easy access to guns.  They don't give up because they can't get a gun.
opher goodwin Added Oct 8, 2017 - 1:58pm
Rusty - except the problem in America isn't really terrorists is it?
Rusty Smith Added Oct 8, 2017 - 2:42pm
Ari Silverstein tell me, how does it work when you ignore the opinions of everyone who doesn't meet your English proficiency standards?
 
Do you ever feel like you might be poorly informed about issues that are important to them that do effect you?   
Rusty Smith Added Oct 8, 2017 - 2:49pm
opher goodwin , very astute, terrorists with guns, and even all the combined terrorism in America is tiny compared to other avoidable violence and carnage.
 
We could save many times more lives than are lost to guns and terrorism if we did very simple things like banned Alcoholic Beverages or reduced our speed limit to 25 mph.  
 
Most people focus on guns because they have been led by the nose by the media, who focus on gun violence as though it's something we all need to live in perpetual fear of all the time when it fact statically it's a tiny portion of what we should really be afraid of.
 
I know lots of people who get upset if their neighbor has guns but don't think twice if they get a pool even though on average their own children are 10 times more likely to die in their neighbor's pool than from the gun they own.
 
A kid drowns and it only makes the local paper, but if one gets shot, it's national news, so the public is afraid of guns and doesn't even think about pools.
Rusty Smith Added Oct 8, 2017 - 2:59pm
John G  I have bad news for you, guns are only tools of convenience, crimes including crimes of passion and even suicide do not increase when guns are present.  
 
Crimes of passion, and even most gun violence tend to occur the most in poor communities where despair is rampant and it's been that way since long before guns were invented.  
 
Most criminals who use guns are in poor communities in cities, and they rarely own many guns.  Rural communities where hunting is a way of life and most people own many guns, have relatively low gun violence rates, because the people aren't generally violent.  
 
Even suicides can't be correlated to the availability of guns, as the statistics from places like Japan, where they aren't available at all, proves.  Where there is a will there will be a way, and as this form topic points out, those with a will always use the best AVAILABLE tool.
John G Added Oct 8, 2017 - 4:01pm
John G  I have bad news for you, guns are only tools of convenience, crimes including crimes of passion and even suicide do not increase when guns are present.  
I find that extremely difficult to believe.
Rusty Smith Added Oct 8, 2017 - 8:55pm
John G  if guns are a necessary element for criminal crimes including those of passion and even suicide, then how you explain man's pre-gun history of violence?
 
How do you explain all the people even today who commit murder and mayhem with other tools ranging from knives to bombs?
John G Added Oct 8, 2017 - 9:03pm
They are not a necessary element. But they are certainly a convenient way to kill someone and with access, not much thinking time required.
opher goodwin Added Oct 9, 2017 - 9:43am
Rusty - I guess for me it is something to do with intent. Accidental death is sorrowful but deliberate killing is in a different category.
Jeff Michka Added Oct 9, 2017 - 7:36pm
I'm surprised ol Rusted hasn't employed the rightist chestnut: "If any more gun laws are enacted, the 2nd amendment won't exist."  He has...sorta.
Rusty Smith Added Oct 10, 2017 - 8:49pm
Jeff Michka  interestingly the Supreme court might take on that question pretty soon.  They are examining the proposition that it's possible for governing entities to violate the 2nd amendment right by making it impossible for people to exercise that right with laws that effectively make it impossible.
 
At issue is the right to bear arms, and communities that say you can't carry them in public view, and also refusing to issue permits people would need to carry them out of view.  
 
In many places the laws are so convoluted it's pretty much impossible for the average citizen to go hunting, if they own vehicles like open pickup trucks or jeeps because there is no real legal way to carry guns in those vehicles.  
 
I've worked in several companies that say it's illegal for an employee to have a gun in their vehicle.  If you are going shooting or out of town after work you are supposed to go home first.  Yea right.
 
I bet those rules are strictly observed and that is why there are so few shootings at work.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Oct 11, 2017 - 1:25am
When bombs are outlawed only outlaws will have bombs!
Jeffry Gilbert Added Oct 11, 2017 - 1:28am
Doesn't/Didn't Texas have a ridiculous law that if you had a gun in the car parked in front of a bar it was an automatic jail sentence? WTF is that about?
Jeff Michka Added Oct 11, 2017 - 9:02pm
Rusted Smith sez: I've worked in several companies that say it's illegal for an employee to have a gun in their vehicle.-one union local had a prohibition of firearms on site and in factory.  Only one person I was aware of ran afoul by pulling a pistol on his super and some fellow workers at a job site.  Union refused to stand with him.  He was fired.
Rusty Smith Added Oct 12, 2017 - 9:07pm
Jeffry Gilbert where the heck did you hear that one?  In Texas any sane person without a criminal record can get a concealed weapons permit and carry the gun right into a bar or bank.  I can live in another state and apply for a concealed weapons permit that will be honored if if visit Texas
Rusty Smith Added Oct 12, 2017 - 9:10pm
Jeff Michka I have to ask, if one of your companies workers had a screw loose and decided to go postal, do you think that rule about no guns in their vehicle, would slow them down on their way into the building to do their suicide killing spree?
Jeff Michka Added Oct 13, 2017 - 6:42pm
Rusted Smith whines: I have to ask, if one of your companies workers had a screw loose and decided to go postal, do you think that rule about no guns in their vehicle, would slow them down on their way into the building to do their suicide killing spree? -I gave an example, but never said a firearm prohibition would have changed shit.  It was another reason listed for hid dismissal.  But aren't you terribly upset by calls to ensure crazy people aren't sold firearms?  End of 2nd Amendment right, Zippy?
Rusty Smith Added Oct 14, 2017 - 12:12pm
Jeff Michka Id like to find a way to keep guns, and knives, and bombs, and gasoline that can be used for arson, and all the things you can use to poison someone, out of the hands of crazy people, but haven't found a way to cast a net around people like our Las Vegas shooter without also pulling in millions of people who would never dream of doing something like that.
 
I'd also like to find a way to stop people from driving who are about to have a fatal accident, but don't wear armbands.
 
Wendy Adams in the Adams family movie said it well when asked what she was on Halloween, "I'm a homicidal maniac, they look just like everyone else."
Jeff Michka Added Oct 14, 2017 - 1:19pm
Rusted Smith doesn't want to deprive those poor mentally ill people their 2nd amendment rights.  If crazy people don't have guns, then they'll just be crazy, right? You mindless conservs never have any ideas about anything unless you are told to think something.  If 100 crazy people don't get firearms, then maybe someone will take yours away, Rusted, and give those weapons to them. It's that or having the firearm disposal squad pry them from your cold, dead fingers.
Rusty Smith Added Oct 14, 2017 - 6:42pm
Jeff Michka  Please tell me, do you think the Vegas shooter was crazy?
 
How could you tell before he shot up Vegas?
 
Presuming you've listed the "sure signs", how many innocent people who would never dream of doing what he did, do you think you'd have to label "crazy" and deny the right to own guns, in order to prevent another Vegas?
 
And if you think they might be that crazy and take all their guns, because you know they might go postal, shouldn't you also put it on their background check records so that companies know they shouldn't hire them?  After all no one wants to knowingly hire someone who it the type of person who might shoot up the place if they get disgruntled.
Jeff Michka Added Oct 15, 2017 - 1:16pm
Rusted Smith creaks: Please tell me, do you think the Vegas shooter was crazy?-I don't know if he was or not.  Maybe just didn't like country music or country music fans, for that matter.  I'm not going to play along with all your rightist "what ifs."  What if we had more gun control laws?  What if they stopped selling semi-auto weapons in the US?  What if? What if? What if?  Yeah, that's it Rusted, a firearm "black mark" should stop the person with the black mark from ever having a job.  Get real with your rightist whining.  Do firearm black marks keep you outta the work place?  Probably should, right?  You don't even want firearms to not be put in the hands of crazy people.  That's okay with you, because you could shoot them if they ever tried something?  What a delusion...
Jeff Michka Added Oct 15, 2017 - 1:18pm
Keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of crazy people.  "When nuclear weapons are outlawed, only nuclear armed states will have nuclear weapons..."  Oh geezus, there goes the 2nd Amendment, eh?
Rusty Smith Added Oct 15, 2017 - 9:13pm
Jeff Michka you are the one who took this in the direction of crazy people as though we could have some kind of test that would have prevented Las Vegas, so I thought it would be nice to see if you could envision qualifications that might have prevented Vegas and obviously you can't.  
 
If we can't spot the crazies I guess all we can do is put an end to hunting, target shooting and self defense guns, and perhaps in a few hundred years even the criminals will give their up too.
Jeff Michka Added Oct 16, 2017 - 6:37pm
Rusted Smith, new ace WB "limbaughist" SEZ: this in the direction of crazy people as though we could have some kind of test that would have prevented Las Vegas, so I thought it would be nice to see if you could envision qualifications that might-You, Rusted didn't like my answer and obviously has no comeback.  YOU ALSO CAME UP WITH THIS LAME EXPLANATION, NOT I.  You seem to always want other people's words in other mouths, Rusted.  Again, you can't do a Limpjaub, so why try.  When it's time, I'll makre sure they get to pry guns out of your cold, dead fingers first.  End the 2ND AMENDMENT!!!
Rusty Smith Added Oct 16, 2017 - 11:21pm
Jeff Michka well I must admit you are very good at name calling and insults even if you can't or won't engage in meaningful debates.  
 
I am sure that you have good reasons for your opinions, and would like to see if I could follow and understand your logic but your own behavior does a pretty good job obscuring anything that I might consider logical arguments.
 
Tell me, how do you ever expect to enlighten others if all you do is insult them?  Don't you think you'd do your own causes more good if you acted a bit more civil?  Or are you only participating in forums because you like to insult people from a safe distance and don't really care about sharing your opinions or possibly enlightening others?
 
Even bystanders who may agree with you are probably embarrassed by your behavior.
Jeff Michka Added Oct 18, 2017 - 5:55pm
 well I must admit you are very good at name calling and insults even if you can't or won't engage in meaningful debates.-I won't compliment you on your last "Limpjaub" comeback I'm supposed to get all in knots about.  Hey, Rusted...think most here can see you never have any intent to "discuss" anything, or "be influenced.  As other have noted, rightists like yourself always get "offended" when their insulting crap get handed back to them.AND Even bystanders who may agree with you are probably embarrassed by your behavior.-Probably not as embarassed as they are about you and your total lack of intellectual honesty that simply makes you another, cheap "Flush Limpjaub," and an intellectual fraud. Why not be like your hero, FLUSH AND SWALLOW A LARGE DOSE OF OXYCONTIN.  It always make me laugh how rightist clown car occupants like yourself get into tone policing AS their sole argument for or against anything that doesn't agree with their rightist premise.  You just did with the above, so why deny it?
Jeff Michka Added Oct 30, 2017 - 7:03pm
Rusted Smith chest thumps: Or are you only participating in forums because you like to insult people from a safe distance and don't really care about sharing your opinions or possibly enlightening others?-I have no problem telling you what I have to your face, rightist scumbag.  You've got your new clown car occupant, Roy Moore, so why not you waving a gun around?  Results would not be what your rightist mind tells you.