[Neo Emolga]

Originally Posted by Kenny_C.002

Most of them do use other methods, and are far more easily subdued because of that fact as well. But I digress; I think that there should be an assault weapons ban (because they really don't have much use even in self defense compared to say a normal pistol) and tighter regulations on guns so it becomes less likely to fall into the wrong hands. This isn't to "restrict" your 2nd amendment rights, of which you are so eager to pounce on, but rather to ensure that we do have at least some safety net in place.

I agree, civilians really don't need automatics (guns that are rapid-fire like AK-47 rifles and Uzis). That's overkill, but in the meantime, it seems even black-market firearms like these still get in circulation.

Originally Posted by Kenny_C.002

They have been happening something like once a month though. Since the Batman shooting there's been at least 5-6 more shootings between then and now. The problem with the "gun as defense" argument, though, is that Sandy Hook actually did have a trained gunman on scene with a gun as one of the adult victims, so it didn't work in this example.

School and public shootings tend to spike in trends. I really blame the media for that, as you'll get plenty of imitators who wish to become infamous as well by doing something destructive and murderous. Some people feel doing the right thing will never get the noticed, while doing something wicked and evil like in the case of the Batman shooting and Sandy Hook will get them all over the news. A similar incident occurred when an arsonist set a house on fire and killed two of the firemen that arrived. Again, his face and name got all over the news. We've got to stop giving these kinds of murderers attention and a taste of "dark glory" as I like to call it. It only encourages imitators to do it also.

Originally Posted by Kenny_C.002

Now as for gun incidents and accidents, that happens on a daily basis. Just the other day a child was shot and killed because his father misfired his gun. The father might be the most responsible adult in the world, but a momentary lapse of cognition is all it took to take, essentially, that very man's life away.

The question to ask is what he was doing with the gun during the misfire. Why did he have the safety off, why was it loaded, did he acknowledge where the gun was pointing, and did he take precautions to avoid touching the trigger? And why was the kid in the same room as him? He should have been making these kinds of checks. When you use a powerful and potentially dangerous tool like a chainsaw, yes, you need to make the same kinds of checks and use common sense. I have a feeling this father was still thinking carelessly. If he was handling a gun, it's common sense that child shouldn't have been in the same room, and he should have been careful with the firearm in question. So yes, I blame the father in this situation, not the gun.

Originally Posted by Kenny_C.002

America in the past also had no FOX news then and was not as big of a corportist slave as it is now. Second of all, you're missing the point of the debate in the first place. There is a serious issue and flaw in the system that needs to be addressed here, and brushing it all under the rug under the pretense of patriotism is not doing anybody a service.

In truth, I simply detested the way Steak presented his debate without structure and logical association paired with ignorance and reckless assumption. He was asking for that.

Originally Posted by Kenny_C.002

Gun regulation does nothing to affect this. So why argue using this specific point?

Once you start imposing regulations on one thing, it can potentially trickle down to the finer aspects. The other point was to draw upon the fact that not everyone uses guns to commit crimes and murder. And the fact that there are times when a gun can fulfill a role that other tools cannot in certain situations. And not all those roles are for nefarious purposes.

Originally Posted by Kenny_C.002

Again, to criticize a flaw in the system doesn't mean anything outside of that. It is a duty of a citizen to criticize aspects of the country that they don't like and strive for a solution.

There's a difference between legitimately questioning national policy and regulatory action from calling America just plain "dumb." Steak did the later, paired with atrocious structure, grammar, and presentation.

Originally Posted by Kenny_C.002

To be fair, the US has something akin to a giant moat. Infantry combat is almost automatically excluded as it would take stupidly long amount of time to send them in from either the Pacific or the Atlantic. Should there be a war against the US, airborne combat would be the norm. Ground-based weaponry like guns is much less likely going to be useful. The exception is if there is a civil war in the US, of course.

That depends on the tactics the invading country used. Air would probably be the most predominant front of assault, but I doubt it would be limited to only that. Sooner or later ground forces would have to be moved in to occupy areas. And as war has proven in the past, it can be brutal on the civilian population. God forbid something like that happen, but if it did, it's nice knowing American civilians would still have means to impose at least some resistance in the form of a final stand with weapons that would at least hold some combative value against whatever invading forces are trying to occupy American territory. Think for a moment how much harder it would be for an invading country to try and occupy Texas as opposed to southern California.

Originally Posted by Kenny_C.002

But why are you even afraid of said "other countries" to begin with? Who's gonna even bother to attack you? The only two countries that can attack you by land are Canada and Mexico. Seriously, neither of these two countries will ever pose a threat to the US.

Russia and China say hello. China has an army of over a million soldiers and is currently building up their army and military resources. Why they're doing that is a great question to ask, because I can't think of a good answer to that and still feel secure about it. As for Russia, their defense spending has increased as the US has been imposing cuts (source). Not to mention they've overtaken both the UK and France in terms of global arms spending (source). Now given, they don't spend nearly as much as the U.S. does, but I have a feeling that the U.S. may not be able to keep up this kind of military spending for long, especially with the debt rising. All it takes is one corrupt leader and/or a severe misunderstanding and you've got problems.

Again, let's hope it never gets to that.