Business as usual then, eh? But I agree; little point in debating with someone who continually ducks all my questions.

I’d suggest your guns are part of the problem because there is always the potential for them to fall into the wrong hands, as happened in Connecticut. Yes, it may seem very remote, absurd even, to you, but can you deny it happens? What if you yourself have some kind of mental breakdown in the future; or are you saying that only happens to other people? As I’ve already said, if it happens just once, surely it suggests something needs to be done, unless you don’t consider mass murder of 6 year old children a partuicularly important issue in the overall scheme of things? Please answer. And yes, I have a suggestion for a new law; catch up with the rest of the civilised world where gun crime is way lower and make it so that you have to have a damn good reason to even have a gun in the first place, instead of a damn good reason not to have one. All this stuff about cars and swimming pools (:confused:) is completely irellevant and just ducking the simple, inescapable fact that more gun ownership inevitably results in more gun misuse and more carnage. Do you deny that? Or shall we just go on pretending everything is fine and wait for the next school shooting?

Shall I take your ducking of this question too as tacit acceptance?

As I’ve said here before (and no one has yet contradicted me) it seems America as a whole accepts these continual massacres as a price worth paying for keeping their lethal toys.

I’m sure Adam Lanza’s mother used to say pretty much the same thing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/nyregion/friends-of-gunmans-mother-his-first-victim-recall-her-as-generous.html?_r=0

As long as there are way, way too many guns in public ownership this kind of thing will go on happening again and again. Yes, most gun owners are perfectly sane people, and yes, the number of guns used this way may be infinitessimaly small, but when even a single case results in 20 innocent kids and 6 teachers murdered in cold blood in their own school, surely that’s just not acceptable and something needs to be done? Unless, as I’ve said before, you regard it as not greatly important in the overall scheme of things, as long as people like you can keep their guns?

Thankfully, at least some US citizens are facing up to the problem-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20851532

And I’m still waiting for someone to refute this-

As I’ve said here before (and no one has yet contradicted me) it seems America as a whole accepts these continual massacres as a price worth paying for keeping their lethal toys.

So explain to me how passing laws to restrict gun ownership by the 0.00066% who don’t commit crimes with guns is going to stop ONE nutter from doing something along the lines of Newtown again?

Simple. Drastically fewer guns in circulation would inevitably lessen the chances of one falling into the hands of a nutter. As I’ve said before, no one seriously doubts that the overwhelming majority of gun owners are good, law abiding citizens, but can you honestly look at those pictures Moggy has posted and tell me their lives are worth less than the rights of others to keep a gun? Maybe you can tell us your solution, or do you think these ongoing massacres of innocent kids are not such a big deal anyway, and that nothing needs to be done?

Still waiting-

As I’ve said here before (and no one has yet contradicted me) it seems America as a whole accepts these continual massacres as a price worth paying for keeping their lethal toys.

Oh, that’s all right then. And if no one is actually hit in a drive-by shooting, why worry? I guess we could extend that argument to things like drink-driving, ie it doesn’t really matter how dangerous someone drives; as long as they don’t actually kill anyone, what’s the problem? Forgive me, but your bottom line here seems to be that things like the massacre of 20 children are blown up out of all proportion, and certainly not worth taking people’s precious guns away to reduce the risk of it happening again.

Still waiting-

As I’ve said here before (and no one has yet contradicted me) it seems America as a whole accepts these continual massacres as a price worth paying for keeping their lethal toys.

Swimming pools are also *lethal toys*.

:confused:

Still waiting for someone to refute this-

As I’ve said here before (and no one has yet contradicted me) it seems America as a whole accepts these continual massacres as a price worth paying for keeping their lethal toys.

For those of you asking about gun control etc, have a read of this:

http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/why-not-renew-the-assault-weapons-ban-well-ill-tell-you/

The gist of that seems to be “Oh, don’t exaggerate, gun crime isn’t such a big problem as, say, poisonings or drownings” But whereas any sane society does all it can to minimise those risks, all the gun lobby seems to do is duck the issue or advocate even more use of guns in society, ie putting them in schools for God’s sake. As I’ve said here before (and no one has yet contradicted me) it seems America as a whole accepts these continual massacres as a price worth paying for keeping their lethal toys.

Mass shootings are a tiny, tiny problem. Which isn’t to say that they aren’t utterly horrifying in more than one way. People’s lives are destroyed, both literally and figuratively. What I mean to say is that if we were to prioritize our political attention to topics according to how many lives were at stake, mass shootings wouldn’t even be on the radar.

The one thing that truly pleases me is the knowledge that there is not one thing you can do to change the situation.:D

A “lib”? 😀 Hardly. The one thing that truly pleases me is that we don’t have the God-awful mess you do, and the one thing that baffles me is that the good people of America just seem to accept it.