what is really happening is corporate/government has become "father" too so many Americans now they don't even think about how to do things themselves, let father take care of it for them, let father catch the thieves for you and replace your items. Let father screen you at airports, let father decide what's good for you to eat. it's not just about people(gun) control.
It's equal in the sense that I don't think I should be prevented from owning a baseball bat because someone else might use it to kill the shit out of people. The same argument applies to drugs or cars or anything else that might be risky. That argument only stops when you get into the realm of things that basicallycan'tbe used without fucking with/harming other people (like nukes). Prior to that, yes, they are absolutely in the same ethical class with regards to this specific question (and no amount of ridiculous, sarcastic bluster on your part will change that).
What facts could you possibly hope to pull from google to settle the fundamentally aesthetic argument that whatever the delta in violence is for having semi-widely available doesn't justify banning them? You're so fucking stupid you can't even grasp the fundamentals of the argument you're acting like an obnoxious twat about.
You're so stupid it's painful to watch. I was making fun of your retarded trolling in this thread, and you couldn't even tell.
Honestly I didn't even understand what you were saying. My wat was pretty genuine. "Dangerous to the public" is an extremely loaded insinuation to level when it comes to guns. They're not some kind of toxin. Most of the time (and by "most of the time" I mean "so close to always as to be rhetorically unimportant") guns are not used in a dangerous manner and certainly not a manner that is dangerous to the public. As a standard, I don't think that even remotely suffices to make your point.
Why are you trying to pick a fight with me?
Giving up that easy? I'm disappointed son. Still haven't given an argument worth debating, except that maybe compound recurve bows should be banned. Loooool.
Clearly this is what we should all do.
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, I was merely pointing out how you made a retarded post. Nothing more, nothing less. You then said that you thought opinions shouldn't be criticized and I'm here to tell you that you're going to be continually disappointed if the quality of your ideas remain the same as the posts I've criticized with regard to this event. This isn't personal.
How were my points "retarded"?
I think it is a mistake to weigh the cost of these events by counting dead bodies. There is a social cost too. Fear, trauma, anxiety produced in people from the affected community, and the anxiety easily becomes national. Not to mention, how many kids and adults at that school are going to have PTSD?
How about we treatBOTH?!?!?!?The how is not irrelevant. Would you rather be hit by a car or a bicycle? You have to be a special kind of stupid or biased to insist that there are no degrees in forms of weaponry.