But they told me if everyone had gunz this could never happen!

Fully automatic assault knife.

Man, my college grades weren't always the best but I didn't get all stabby when I shiat all over a test.  My anger management was the local tavern just off campus.

/not sure that's why they got stabby

The NKA has issued a statement, "If everybody was armed with a knife, this wouldn't be a problem. The right to bear arms is not limited to guns".

jehovahs witness protection: We are working on a new assault knife ban, citizens.

ban all assault knives with bayonet lugs, retractable stocks and pistol grips!

/problem solved
//am im doing this rite?

We need to ban Blade now?

Only way to take down a Lone Star College stabber is to give him a Shiner.

must be a strawberry spring in texas

Englebert Slaptyback: Stabbings reported at Lone Star College in Texas


An unnamed individual allegedly gave him the raspberry and jammed his radar.

kaimaru: This is a college.  How is it possible that many people were stabbed?  Was he a sprinter or something?  HOW ABOUT RUNNING AWAY IDIOTS?

What is the old saying about getting away from a bear? I don't have to run faster than the bear, just have to run faster than you.

The slow got stabbed.

/Would have gotten stabbed.

BE DIALIN PEOPLE. BE DIALIN

James!: [brain.pan.e-merchant.com image 600x532]
Fully automatic assault knife.

Beat me to it, good show.

How did so many get stabbed? Were they sleeping or something? Were all the chairs and tables bolted down? Knife vs table. Table generally wins.

Gyrfalcon: But they told me if everyone had gunz this could never happen!

It's Texas. They have very very strict gun laws.

Waiting for a response from the National Cutlery Association.

The Lone Star system of colleagues has 90,000 students in all.

DAMN YOU AUTOCORRECT SPELL CHECK DAMMIT...

BigBooper: Gyrfalcon: But they told me if everyone had gunz this could never happen!

I'm sure that the college was a gun free zone. I'm sure glad that no one had a way to defend themselves, or the assailant could have gotten hurt!

Think of what a target-rich environment it would have been if everyone was armed. Like shooting fish in a barrel!

BigBooper: vudutek: The NKA has issued a statement, "If everybody was armed with a knife, this wouldn't be a problem. The right to bear arms is not limited to guns".

You know, you don't hear much from the National Knife Association. Do they protect your rights to own a sword as well? Or do they limit there protections to smaller blades? Is there a NSA?

I have questions, QUESTIONS THAT NEED ANSWERS!

/and gas, but that's from a bad choice I made at lunch

If you want to use a guillotine to chop your broccoli, the NKA has got your back. The gas, you're on your own.

PC LOAD LETTER: How did so many get stabbed? Were they sleeping or something? Were all the chairs and tables bolted down? Knife vs table. Table generally wins.

It's Texas.  They aren't the brightest.  I'm sure their first reaction was "Huh, sum guy's got hisself some braght shiny thang and he's a-pokin at folks widdit fur sum reezun.  Ah wunder wha?  And whut should ah doo bout it?"

*reads thread*

Hmmm, I think some people fail to grasp how traumatic wounds and bullets actually work...

Fissile: I'm guessing subby is being ironic, unfortunately, this is exactly the the kind of  "logic" employed by the NRA and Tea-Party types.  To wit, "People will kill each other with knives, hammers, chainsaws or beanbag chairs, so there's no reason to ban guns."

I know. This drives me nuts--if you ramp up the weapon just a little bit--say, to a tank--and ask, should we allow people who are clinically insane operate tanks?

The level of damage the object can inflict is important in these issues. I'm less worried about a psychopath with a wad of newspaper than I am of one with an assault rife. Stop playing the "it's only the psychopath" card. That argument is horrible.

Hey, you know, f### you, man. Any moron with a semi-automatic can cause a mass murder. Mass stabbing is like an endurance trial, man. It's the most exhausting activity one can engage in, next to soccer.

TimonC346: Fissile: I'm guessing subby is being ironic, unfortunately, this is exactly the the kind of  "logic" employed by the NRA and Tea-Party types.  To wit, "People will kill each other with knives, hammers, chainsaws or beanbag chairs, so there's no reason to ban guns."

I know. This drives me nuts--if you ramp up the weapon just a little bit--say, to a tank--and ask, should we allow people who are clinically insane operate tanks?

The level of damage the object can inflict is important in these issues. I'm less worried about a psychopath with a wad of newspaper than I am of one with an assault rife. Stop playing the "it's only the psychopath" card. That argument is horrible.

A recognized class of mental illness drives individuals to be violent, with whatever means they can get ahold of.
People who wish to commit crimes will use whatever means are expedient to their ends.

Why is it so hard to understand that while you may reduce the body count by restricting the objects USED, you'll reduce the actual incidents of crime by seeking to stop the individual, and thus effort made to resolve the issues of people are of greater import than attempts to pass laws that do little to affect the types of changes you're arguing we need them for?

Mikey1969: mbillips: Weird, nobody was killed? I thought it was just as easy to go on a murderous rampage with a knife or baseball bat as with a semi-automatic .223 rifle.

More killed by knives than all rifles, smei-auto, "assault", etc. Included...

Rifles: 323
Edged weapons: 1,694

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in- th e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

But hey, believe what you want, I guess. You've obviously been on 'selective filter' mode, anyway.

This.

WTF Indeed: It's a good thing gun control advocates have been pushing a massive mental health overhaul instead of banning weapons rarely used in gun crimes.

I know!

busy chillin': hugram: kaimaru: This is a college.  How is it possible that many people were stabbed?  Was he a sprinter or something?  HOW ABOUT RUNNING AWAY IDIOTS?

One of the college victims that did not run away fast enough...
[cdn.ebaumsworld.com image 497x575]

That guy's not the sharpest knife in the gauged nose.

What message do you suppose he is trying to send society?

You know, besides "I'm unemployable."

Isn't this the same college there was a thread on when there was a shooting? About a year ago? Anyone?

CarnySaur: And here's an actual update from FOX News:
Update, 2:25p ET: A local FOX Houston reporter spoke to a student who was in the building at the time of the stabbing. Students huddled into a classroom in order to flee the scene. The student said, "We wish we could have protected ourselves with guns and stuff. We wish that the law would let us carry guns because we're legal adults, and carry guns on campus to protect ourselves. But so far what we have to rely on is God. We'd love to have God and the law on our side."

But all you need is God on your side. The Bible Says you can do all things through Christ Who Strenthens you!

Be strong in your faith, Christian Soldier!

Bravo Two: TimonC346: Fissile: I'm guessing subby is being ironic, unfortunately, this is exactly the the kind of  "logic" employed by the NRA and Tea-Party types.  To wit, "People will kill each other with knives, hammers, chainsaws or beanbag chairs, so there's no reason to ban guns."

I know. This drives me nuts--if you ramp up the weapon just a little bit--say, to a tank--and ask, should we allow people who are clinically insane operate tanks?

The level of damage the object can inflict is important in these issues. I'm less worried about a psychopath with a wad of newspaper than I am of one with an assault rife. Stop playing the "it's only the psychopath" card. That argument is horrible.

A recognized class of mental illness drives individuals to be violent, with whatever means they can get ahold of.
People who wish to commit crimes will use whatever means are expedient to their ends.

Why is it so hard to understand that while you may reduce the body count by restricting the objects USED, you'll reduce the actual incidents of crime by seeking to stop the individual, and thus effort made to resolve the issues of people are of greater import than attempts to pass laws that do little to affect the types of changes you're arguing we need them for?

I don't think no one should have the right--I think arseholes like the NRA need to man up and admit that background checks don't violate the second amendment.

Publikwerks: Mikey1969: mbillips: Weird, nobody was killed? I thought it was just as easy to go on a murderous rampage with a knife or baseball bat as with a semi-automatic .223 rifle.

More killed by knives than all rifles, smei-auto, "assault", etc. Included...

Rifles: 323
Edged weapons: 1,694

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in- th e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

But hey, believe what you want, I guess. You've obviously been on 'selective filter' mode, anyway.

Lets add a third category there:

Rifles:                       323
Edged weapons:      1,694
Handguns                        7,398

So, you must obviously not have any issue with a handgun ban then?

Now subtract roughly 60% of that number which are suicides...

According to this, it's 14 people injured by an exacto knife. A friggin' exacto knife.

TimonC346: Bravo Two: TimonC346: Fissile: I'm guessing subby is being ironic, unfortunately, this is exactly the the kind of  "logic" employed by the NRA and Tea-Party types.  To wit, "People will kill each other with knives, hammers, chainsaws or beanbag chairs, so there's no reason to ban guns."

I know. This drives me nuts--if you ramp up the weapon just a little bit--say, to a tank--and ask, should we allow people who are clinically insane operate tanks?

The level of damage the object can inflict is important in these issues. I'm less worried about a psychopath with a wad of newspaper than I am of one with an assault rife. Stop playing the "it's only the psychopath" card. That argument is horrible.

A recognized class of mental illness drives individuals to be violent, with whatever means they can get ahold of.
People who wish to commit crimes will use whatever means are expedient to their ends.

Why is it so hard to understand that while you may reduce the body count by restricting the objects USED, you'll reduce the actual incidents of crime by seeking to stop the individual, and thus effort made to resolve the issues of people are of greater import than attempts to pass laws that do little to affect the types of changes you're arguing we need them for?

I don't think no one should have the right--I think arseholes like the NRA need to man up and admit that background checks don't violate the second amendment.

No, background checks don't violate the 2nd Amendment. Attempting to pass federal law to regulate in-state commerce which clearly violates the constitution and the commerce clause is.

I would almost guarantee you that if the NRA said "WE support background checks as long as they don't include mandatory registration or submission of records to federal agencies", people would find some other reason to biatch.

/I support background checks as long as that doesn't involve mandatory registration, and doesn't add a burden of making me use an FFL or pay some exorbitant sum to sell my private property...

IamSoSmart_S_M_R_T: Red Shirt Blues: Isn't this the same college there was a thread on when there was a shooting? About a year ago? Anyone?

http://www.fark.com/comments/7690633/83515151#c83515151

My bad.

TimonC346: Fissile: I'm guessing subby is being ironic, unfortunately, this is exactly the the kind of  "logic" employed by the NRA and Tea-Party types.  To wit, "People will kill each other with knives, hammers, chainsaws or beanbag chairs, so there's no reason to ban guns."

I know. This drives me nuts--if you ramp up the weapon just a little bit--say, to a tank--and ask, should we allow people who are clinically insane operate tanks?

The level of damage the object can inflict is important in these issues. I'm less worried about a psychopath with a wad of newspaper than I am of one with an assault rife. Stop playing the "it's only the psychopath" card. That argument is horrible.

He was a nut case who carried a stuffed monkey around. Current background checks worked and he couldn't buy a gun.

bikerbob59: This is Texas. Isn't everyone armed?

I'm not.

Publikwerks:
Lets add a third category there:

Rifles:                       323
Edged weapons:      1,694
Handguns                        7,398

So, you must obviously not have any issue with a handgun ban then?

The point is that since December the huge push has been assault rifles, those big scary rifles that are infrequently used to do horrible things, even though millions of them are owned by millions of citizens across the nation.  The push should be to keep violent and mentally unstable people from committing violent acts against one or many innocent individuals.  The problem is that is a really really damned hard job, and people are generally lazy and want to do as little work as possible - so banning shiat is the easy but ineffective answer.

mbillips: Mikey1969: mbillips: Weird, nobody was killed? I thought it was just as easy to go on a murderous rampage with a knife or baseball bat as with a semi-automatic .223 rifle.

More killed by knives than all rifles, smei-auto, "assault", etc. Included...

Rifles: 323
Edged weapons: 1,694

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in- th e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

But hey, believe what you want, I guess. You've obviously been on 'selective filter' mode, anyway.

Shifting the goal posts. It's not a matter of what weapons are used in the most crimes. It's a matter of what weapons are used in the crimes that people lose their shiat over, which are mass shootings by loonies. And rifles are really a lot more useful for that, especially rifles that you can shoot really quickly.

Personally, I'm against assault weapons bans, because there's no way to really effectively ban them, just window-dressing laws about how new guns can be manufactured and sold. Without total confiscation, there are plenty of high-capacity mags and semi-auto rifles to shoot them in, and there's no way we're ever going to get to confiscation in this country.

You don't have to be in favor of assault weapons bans, though, to be annoyed by the blatant lying by their defenders. Face it, idiots want .223 ARs so that they can pretend to be ready for guerilla warfare, and their proliferation makes the lone nut gunman that seems increasingly prevalent a bit more dangerous. There are much better guns for hunting and target shooting. Admit that it's a toy that you don't want taken away because you like your toy, and quit claiming there's any compelling reason for people to own semi-auto versions of military rifles, chambered in a varmint cartridge.

1. Depends on the type of target shooting.

2. I use my AR-15 to hunt varmints. Are you suggesting that a semi-auto rifle chambered in a varmint cartridge is unsuitable for use against varmints?

3. Many people enjoy the fact that the AR-15 and AR-10 platforms can be made to shoot a variety of cartridges that are excellent for target and hunting purposes, and use them for such.  Just because it was originally a military design, does that mean it cannot be adapted for and accepted for civilian use?

mbillips: Bravo Two: Publikwerks: Mikey1969: mbillips: Weird, nobody was killed? I thought it was just as easy to go on a murderous rampage with a knife or baseball bat as with a semi-automatic .223 rifle.

More killed by knives than all rifles, smei-auto, "assault", etc. Included...

Rifles: 323
Edged weapons: 1,694

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in- th e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

But hey, believe what you want, I guess. You've obviously been on 'selective filter' mode, anyway.

Lets add a third category there:

Rifles:                       323
Edged weapons:      1,694
Handguns                        7,398

So, you must obviously not have any issue with a handgun ban then?

Now subtract roughly 60% of that number which are suicides...

No, those are homicide numbers. About 15,000 people commit suicide each year with guns.

Which points out that there are 15,000 people a year who need mental healthcare...

mbillips: You don't have to be in favor of assault weapons bans, though, to be annoyed by the blatant lying by their defenders. Face it, idiots want .223 ARs so that they can pretend to be ready for guerilla warfare, and their proliferation makes the lone nut gunman that seems increasingly prevalent a bit more dangerous. There are much better guns for hunting and target shooting. Admit that it's a toy that you don't want taken away because you like your toy, and quit claiming there's any compelling reason for people to own semi-auto versions of military rifles, chambered in a varmint cartridge.

Please identify rifle models chambered in .223 Remington better suited for hunting and target shooting than the AR platform. Please explain why, if I wish to "pretend to be ready for guerrilla warfare", that I have modified my AR rifle to fire .22LR caliber ammunition and explain why I own no .223 Remington caliber ammunition.

MassAsster: Honestly - it's just proof that banning crap doesn't work

Because this wacko couldn't , or didn't get a hold of a gun, he found another weapon to use..  Crazy is crazy, doesn't matter what you ban or restrict, how about fixing the god damn crazy...

Not sure if stupid or retarded...

Bravo Two: WTF Indeed: It's a good thing gun control advocates have been pushing a massive mental health overhaul instead of banning weapons rarely used in gun crimes.

I know!

We're waiting for that massive mental health overhaul plan. Lay it on us whenever you think we're ready for it. Be sure to explain where the funding comes from as well, can't wait to hear your response on that.

lostcat: Yes, a knife of some kind.

Until someone pulls an NYPD and shoots 9 people in the crowd while missing the guy with the knife.

All you need is Christ, son, didn't you hear Fox News? ACTIVATE BOOTS OF THE GOSPEL!!!

Barracuda: Publikwerks:
Lets add a third category there:

Rifles:                       323
Edged weapons:      1,694
Handguns                        7,398

So, you must obviously not have any issue with a handgun ban then?

The point is that since December the huge push has been assault rifles, those big scary rifles that are infrequently used to do horrible things, even though millions of them are owned by millions of citizens across the nation.  The push should be to keep violent and mentally unstable people from committing violent acts against one or many innocent individuals.  The problem is that is a really really damned hard job, and people are generally lazy and want to do as little work as possible - so banning shiat is the easy but ineffective answer.

So then why do you not do a valid comparison?

What's the ratio of rifle deaths to handgun deaths relative to the ratio of rifles (or assault rifles) to handguns?

Because the facts aren't nearly as intentionally misleading. (not a question)

Publikwerks: Listen, you can try and make this out to be an Obama joke, or try and make out knives to be more dangerous than a gun somehow, but the fact of the matter is that this is what Sandy Hook would  have been like had we had no second amendment and all firearms were banned or highly regulated.

Kepp making your jokes. Obviously, it's not too high a price.

And you're clearly living in a magical, fantasy world where savagery meets sorcery, but we'll just keep making fun of both sides in this without your permission, mister.

mbillips: Registration doesn't violate the 2nd Amendment, either. Registration is actually pretty sensible, because it allows cops to trace guns used in crimes. Unobtrusive, too; all they'd have to do is not throw away the background check info. The only argument against it is herpaderp paranoia about the gun grabbers coming for your guns if they know where they are. Personally, I'd kind of like to see the cops take guns away from lunatics, convicted felons and domestic batterers. Probably save a fair number of lives.

Concerns that registration will lead to confiscation would be paranoia, had registration not previously and demonstrably led to firearm confiscation.

lostcat: justtray: MassAsster: Honestly - it's just proof that banning crap doesn't work

Because this wacko couldn't , or didn't get a hold of a gun, he found another weapon to use..  Crazy is crazy, doesn't matter what you ban or restrict, how about fixing the god damn crazy...

Not sure if stupid or retarded...

Bravo Two: WTF Indeed: It's a good thing gun control advocates have been pushing a massive mental health overhaul instead of banning weapons rarely used in gun crimes.

I know!

We're waiting for that massive mental health overhaul plan. Lay it on us whenever you think we're ready for it. Be sure to explain where the funding comes from as well, can't wait to hear your response on that.

Come on...The Replublican-controlled congress is clearly motivated to increase funding for programs that would aid those with mental health issues. Haven't they made that clear by all of their historic votes?

I just love how exactly 0 of the people who make the better mental health argument have proposed even a single mental health solution. Biggest deflection ever.

Hey guys whats going on in this thread?

Marine1: FWIW, the article has a picture of someone being carted out of a helicopter. That usually doesn't happen unless it's bad and they need to get someone in surgery right farking now.

In all seriousness, this isn't true. You'd be surprised how abused and misused helicopter EMS is on a daily basis.

phenn: mbillips: About 15,000 people commit suicide each year with guns.

Citation needed.

The statistic is roughly accurate.

Obviously, banning rifles that feature handgrips, collapsing stocks and threaded barrels will substantially reduce that number.

Alphakronik: So apparently the perp used a box-cutter?  What kind of men do they have down in Texas that they can't take down a crazy person with a box-cutter?

I suppose the same type that let a bunch of men with box cutters hijack a plane and fly it into a building.

Mikey1969: Publikwerks: Mikey1969: mbillips: Weird, nobody was killed? I thought it was just as easy to go on a murderous rampage with a knife or baseball bat as with a semi-automatic .223 rifle.

More killed by knives than all rifles, smei-auto, "assault", etc. Included...

Rifles: 323
Edged weapons: 1,694

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in- th e-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

But hey, believe what you want, I guess. You've obviously been on 'selective filter' mode, anyway.

Lets add a third category there:

Rifles:                       323
Edged weapons:      1,694
Handguns                        7,398

So, you must obviously not have any issue with a handgun ban then?

Handguns haven't been the focus of the derp-fest. Just "assault rifles", over and over and over and over. It's actually a great way to tell that the people fueling the fire don't give two shiats about learning the facts, which is the point that I am trying to make, and what annoys most people on the pro-gun side here.

As someone on the pro-gun side, I get your point, and I think all of us agree with you to some extent. WE know that "ASsault Rifles" aren't, and haven't been, the problem.  We even know that *handguns* aren't really the problem.

The PROBLEM is that there are lots of people out there that fall into one of these categories:

- Mentally ill and in need of therapy/hospitalization
- Suffering from extreme poverty or a substance addiction and turning to a force multiplier in order to try and get money quickly
- Participants in another criminal enterprise, such as drugs, attempting to protect their enterprise
- Individuals living in areas with little community infrastructure and few Positive role models, allowing the development of "Social organizations" that center around criminal activities, and behave in violent ways (Gangs).
- Individuals who do not have the tools to deal with abuse, anger, etc.

Unfortunately, we have yet to develop a means of combating poverty, social decline, mental health issues, personal development issues that doesn't in some way involve large amounts of time, energy, and capital to address, and very little remaining drive to support private entities that once worked in these areas to drive improvement, combined with generations of people that only care as long as it's favorable to do so, or only as long as it's in the collective consciousness of the community. Once it falls from the lime light, no one continues to pay attention to the problem.

We as a society have, unfortunately, grown short-sighted and reactionist, leading to the continued failure of social programs and other measures intended to rebuild and shore up our nation's foundations.

To whit, compared to the "new deal", the stimulus was a joke and did nothing to put resources into long-term improvement projects of infrastructure, which both creates jobs and improves the resources available that people rely on.

We've passed a "health care overhaul" which did little to address a lot of the burgeoning issues of the health care industry and almost nothing to address less obvious points like mental health, and leave us in a position where we aren't really much better off than we were, except on paper.

Continued attempts to pass weapons bans and gun control measures that will not affect crime rates or actual incidents of death in this country.

Also as much as I'm all for the free, individual American spirit, as many have come to know I cherish very deeply, I'm more a believer now in the social contract to the point that I think that in some ways, the government should act as a tool of the people to take a little from everyone to see to it that the root causes of violence, disease, famine, and other basic ills of society are addressed.

Likewise, I'm inclined to believe that private industry should operate in such a manner as to balance their responsibility to shareholders and their responsibility to the communities they operate in.

stonicus: Not a doctor?  Shut up about your broken leg!

POSSIBLE broken leg. You cannot say that, because you are NOT a doctor, Sir. You are not qualified to say what that bone sticking out actually is.

justtray: We're waiting for that massive mental health overhaul plan. Lay it on us whenever you think we're ready for it. Be sure to explain where the funding comes from as well, can't wait to hear your response on that.

I've been a proponent of imposing a 5% tax on guns and ammunition sales in this country specifically to fund mental health care initiatives. Further, a percentage of a nominal (sub-$50) fee on background checks from everyone could be used as well.

I've also been telling my general practitioner that I would like to see him have a resident psychiatrist or a psych to whom he sends people with mental issues and concerns to for evaluation, and a much clearer system of psychologists being published/available with ratings in some form of standard directory along with all medical professionals.

mbillips: Dimensio: mbillips: You don't have to be in favor of assault weapons bans, though, to be annoyed by the blatant lying by their defenders. Face it, idiots want .223 ARs so that they can pretend to be ready for guerilla warfare, and their proliferation makes the lone nut gunman that seems increasingly prevalent a bit more dangerous. There are much better guns for hunting and target shooting. Admit that it's a toy that you don't want taken away because you like your toy, and quit claiming there's any compelling reason for people to own semi-auto versions of military rifles, chambered in a varmint cartridge.

Please identify rifle models chambered in .223 Remington better suited for hunting and target shooting than the AR platform. Please explain why, if I wish to "pretend to be ready for guerrilla warfare", that I have modified my AR rifle to fire .22LR caliber ammunition and explain why I own no .223 Remington caliber ammunition.

Here's 44 of them. Most states limit the number of rounds you can have in the magazine when hunting, so the AR is particularly ill-suited for sporting use. And the fact that you modified an AR, rather than buying a Ruger 1022 in the first place, pretty much proves the "pretend" appeal of that platform. I didn't say you were actually prepping for guerilla warfare.

How do those firearms differ, functionally, from an AR-15 platform rifle, assuming identical magazine capacity? Are you unaware that magazines of capacities of ten or fewer rounds of ammunition are available for AR-15 pattern rifles?

I modified an AR-15, rather than purchase a Ruger 1022, because I already owned the AR-15 (intending to use it for outdoor target shooting) and a 22LR conversion kit was less expensive than was purchase of a new firearm.

Marine1: Huh. Generally, I only see them coming in and out of University Hospital on my campus. Then again, Mizzou's in an area where there are some places only reachable by helicopter, at least in a reasonable amount of time. Guess that's where I got the idea.

It's actually one of the big problems in the US right now involving medical transport is the overuse and abuse of the Helicopter transport system based on the appearance or mechanism of an injury rather than the actual injury it's self, which we have studies proving that approach is flawed.

Brian Bledsoe, back in 2008, wrote an angry article about it after a HEMS Crash.

CrazyCracka420: If only the victims had knives this would have never happened

Deep Contact: There wasn't one good guy with a knife around?

Satanic_Hamster: This would never have happened in a more gun friendly state.

fireclown: The only way to stop this is with more guns and knives.

/getting a kick

Lonestar: Hey guys whats going on in this thread?

/LOL

See, libtards?  You can kill just as many people with a knife!!

^{What...nobody died?}
Whatever...gun control unconstamatutional!!1!

udhq: Bravo Two: Now subtract roughly 60% of that number which are suicides...

Why?

Are we supposed to ignore the well-established fact that gun bans significant cut suicide rates?

Why should we draw an artificial distinction between a behavioral disease violently attacking others versus it's own host body?

Honestly? because if someone wants to commit suicide, they will commit suicide, and for those who choose to do so because they are suffering from a physical condition that they have no way to cure, they should be allowed to do so. Further, I absolutely believe that if you wish to end your life, that is your choice as an adult, but you should attend counseling with your family members first so you understand the implications of the decision.

Why should we stigmatize suicide when there are legitimate reasons to do it, to the point of using it as a strawman to inflate gun-related death rates to argue for gun control, when it's an issue that hardly involves guns and is more about the problems the person is suffering from?

Gosling: And how many deaths are reported due to this knife attack? So far, it appears nobody. Everyone's still alive.

Which would not be the case if the suspect had a gun.

Because on the TeeVee when a guy gets shot in the belly he immediately closes his eyes and drops his head meaning he's dead.

Lionel Mandrake: Whatever...gun control unconstamatutional!!1!

It's not, depending on your definition of/proposed type of gun control.

/Background checks are not.
//Registration violates right to privacy, since I did not consent to register by buying a firearm that did not require registration
///Really, at this point, is 50/50 on registration anyway...handguns in MI are required to be registered with the state, and doesn't do jack shiat to prevent crime, but also hasn't been used to confiscate firearms, unlike in NY.

tom baker's scarf: stonicus: mbillips: Weird, nobody was killed? I thought it was just as easy to go on a murderous rampage with a knife or baseball bat as with a semi-automatic .223 rifle.

People kill people, not guns or knives.  If he had a gun, he would just wounded them like he did with the knife.

I'm not sure you understand how guns work. If knife=gun then why would the military bother making guns? why not just make really mean knives?

Because as America gets fatter, the ability to use a sword in battle is diminished, and firearms allow people to be really really lazy when fighting each other, using science to do the work for us.

stonicus: Bad analogies and deflections...

lostcat: OK, here's my proposal, let's do more stuff that we already do (that I'm complaining about not working)and ask people their opinions and stuff.

Great thoughts guys. Here's what a valid proposal and argument looks like, which is why I'm allowed to speak on gun control; (not all necessarily, just various options)

Taxation on transfers
Registration requirement on all guns
No more private sale loopholes (via registration)
Property taxes on guns (to limit the super nuts)
Liability insurance
Expanded mental health screenings to cover immediate family
Licensing and training requirements updated annually (or every x years)

These proposals will reduce gun related crime and homicide by increasing liability, reducing sales to criminals, reducing supply, and setting increased monetary penalties on marginal increase in guns per person.

Now if you want to come back with why mental health should be the focus, list SPECIFIC resolutions on what you would change to help alleviate the problem, and how it would work.

Good day.