Another shooting rampage. 3 dead, multiple injured in Wisconsin.

[Mugicha]

Originally Posted by Freedom.

The killer was found dead from self-inflicted gunshots:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2...-shooting.html

Yes, I figured. Good to know. Much preferable to him still being on the loose.

[Mugicha]

On the other hand, you do always sort of hope that these guys are able to be interrogated, in order to see what can be gleaned. But, this guy was a danger to the public had he indeed been loose, so good news.

Also, there is the fact that these guys don't deserve any sympathy, like being kept intact. There are multiple sides to it.

[Russian Crushin]

We need more guns in the US

[Mugicha]

Originally Posted by Bronerobron

typical right wing gun nut coward.

I'm an extreme left winger personally, but is there any basis for this comment? Any reason to suggest he was a right wing nut?

[fight_professor]

There was one not even a month ago too. America needs to sort this out.

[arraamis]

Originally Posted by Nodogoshi

I made an ironic remark about gun laws, but "all guns should be banned" is not my position.

On a personal level though, I seriously don't understand why anyone would want to own a gun.

Unless they are a hunter, which is something I have absolutely no problem with, or a hobbyist target shooter. Or if they feel that they have a legitimate need for one for their own/their family's safety. Or if they happen to be a collector.

The above relates to the American situation.

I've lived in Japan for 3 years, so I can comment, the point being that a social commentary is also related to the relevant laws (hence the above comments relate to the US). In Japan, guns are only legal for hunting.

From a long time gun owner, I will answer that question, from my perspective.

I started out with firearms @14 when I used to hunt with my father and have been an avid and responsible gun enthusiast ever since. I no longer hunt, but I do participate in long range rifle shooting and short range pistol shooting. The challenge and goal for me is to ultimately be as accurate and effective as possible engaging targets at various distances out to 1K yards. I go to and am a member of several ranges, I shoot on average bi-weekly and I have passed several firearm training and tactical courses.
For me it is a SPORT ONLY, and as many like myself can attest to, a very challenging one especially when you're calculating wind, distance, trajectory, temp etc ... at distances.
I have yet to use the skill I have gained to harm\kill or even injure any living things -- with the exception of when and how I got my start.
!

Reading about horrible events like the one that happened recently is disturbing, especially when firearms were the tool used to cause harm.

As I have stated on many occasions, these incidents can be and in most cases are directly related to some form of mental instability. For, the agenda-based ignorant to constantly cry out for gun control whenever incidents such as this occurs is completely absurd. Because that mindset dismisses the fact that even without a gun, this person would have used some other tool to carry out his intentions.

We need more than anything, a more effective way of dealing with mental illness, because at the root of every one of these incidents, where an individual assaults in mass, there can be found a distortion of one's take on reality, and or some propensity for vengeance\violence.

The Tool is a means to an end, and banning the tool does nothing to address the root cause of the problem, and never will.

Exercising vague regulations under the guise of of gun control without considering the end user is ignorant and pointless, and will only cause a shift in the tools used by these mentally disturbed individuals.

Its not the tool, its the individual!!!

[arraamis]

Originally Posted by Miburo

Virtually every male I've known in the US is a serious gun enthusiast, and all of them (except a few purely historical collectors) view guns as expensive toys/status symbols, or in a handful of cases, items to bolster their tough guy image (which ironically is reliant entirely on firearms, none of them being worth a damn unarmed). Can't be purely generalized, but I've still always found it somewhat disturbing.

I've always hated weapons on the street, because they're drawn upon by cowards and make any confrontation potentially deadly. You can't even defend yourself in a fistfight without some dude's buddy pulling a knife and stabbing you in the back.

I cannot agree with how you classified the term "gun enthusiast", though I do agree that there are quite a few GUN OWNERS, that posses them to address a need or purpose. For example, the militia, the new zombie crazed gun owner, and those that own guns for what they believe is self-defense.

That stated, there is a very well defined difference between the gun owner, the gun enthusiast, and those that use firearms for sport and competition. And the classification is separated vastly by and related to agenda, or purpose.

Can someone who owns a car and uses it to drive back and forth to work be called an enthusiast? Absolutely not.

Can someone who owns a car and uses it to street race be called an enthusiast? Maybe.

The purpose of ownership and its use determines the classification.

[The Noose]

Originally Posted by arraamis

The Tool is a means to an end, and banning the tool does nothing to address the root cause of the problem, and never will.

Exercising vague regulations under the guise of of gun control without considering the end user is ignorant and pointless, and will only cause a shift in the tools used by these mentally disturbed individuals.

Its not the tool, its the individual!!!

The gun makes it very easy to shoot and kill multiple people. Thats why when there is a stabbing, you dont hear people saying all knives should be banned.

The reason why the gun is the focus of this story and not the individual is because the gun was used for the purpose it was invented for. The individual was obviously the cause, but sometimes, people have mental breakdowns, that cannot be changed. What we can change, is to limit the amount of deadly weapons this individual legally owns.

But i dont know enough about this argument. And i never get involved. I have been lucky enough to not live in an area where is there is a lot of gun crime. Or at least, when it got bad, i moved.
I have no problem with shooting as a sport. But maybe the guns could be rented out, rather than owned.
Its a problem when people are shot so frequently. Only last week a father killed his teenage son thinking he was a burglar. Couldnt of happened so instantly without a gun.
As far as home protection. Get better security? I dont know the answer. But IMO; more guns = more deaths.

[The_Bringer]

Straight outta 'Consin.

[Miburo]

Originally Posted by arraamis

I cannot agree with how you classified the term "gun enthusiast", though I do agree that there are quite a few GUN OWNERS, that posses them to address a need or purpose. For example, the militia, the new zombie crazed gun owner, and those that own guns for what they believe is self-defense.

That stated, there is a very well defined difference between the gun owner, the gun enthusiast, and those that use firearms for sport and competition. And the classification is separated vastly by and related to agenda, or purpose.

Can someone who owns a car and uses it to drive back and forth to work be called an enthusiast? Absolutely not.

Can someone who owns a car and uses it to street race be called an enthusiast? Maybe.

The purpose of ownership and its use determines the classification.

I'm only referring to those I know personally, as I clearly stated. You'll also note I said I wasn't trying to generalize purely off of that. Stop focusing down on semantics.