Norwegian Retailer Pulls Violent Games in Wake of Attack

ASIA911 said:
Oh really? So guns aren't the problem? If he didn't have access to these guns you think this would happen? You have a lunatic that have access to dangerous weapons.
Click to expand...

If he didn't use guns, wouldn't he just have made more bombs that would have possibly killed more people? Are the guns cursed, do they whisper evil thoughts to their owners? Didn't he have illegal guns, too? Isn't it perfectly easy to get black market guns, fully automatic? Wasn't the guy who killed all the people the problem?
 
ASIA911 said:
Oh really? So guns aren't the problem? If he didn't have access to these guns you think this would happen? You have a lunatic that have access to dangerous weapons.
Click to expand...

Ever hear of the black market? Those who are criminally inclined actually have an easier time obtaining weapons illegally than someone does legally.

You are extremely ill informed or naive if you believe otherwise.
 
Matthew Kane said:
Violence in games and films do have some influence, but it all comes down to parenting in the end of what is right and what is wrong.
Click to expand...
^Exactly i have been around guns, watched action packed movies, and played some violent video games(video games started around freshmen in highschool) since i was young. I was taught the proper way to handle them and to realize that you just dont act out what you see in movies or stuff like that. I would say I am turning out pretty well if you ask me since I had parents involved in my life.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Ever hear of the black market? Those who are criminally inclined actually have an easier time obtaining weapons illegally than someone does legally.

You are extremely ill informed or naive if you believe otherwise.
Click to expand...

So where`s the blackmarket?

``Police reports reveal he(Jared Lee Loughner) had purchased a Glock pistol at a Sportsman's Warehouse store less than six weeks before and attempted to buy additional bullets for the pistol at a Walmart on the morning of the shooting. News reports indicate that the clerk at the first Walmart where Loughner attempted to buy the ammunition may have refused to sell it to him based on his appearance and demeanor. Walmart declined requests to confirm or deny the incident.``

LOL. Walmart selling ammo.
 
Don't worry, ASIA911. If you were being attacked by a crazed murderer; I, as a person with a concealed carry permit and firearms training, would try my best to protect you.
 
Yay, more people blaming guns for the actions of a lunatic. You can buy guns at yard-sales in Maine, and we don't exactly see shooting sprees here every year. Blame the psychopath, not the tool.
 
wizdum said:
Yay, more people blaming guns for the actions of a lunatic. You can buy guns at yard-sales in Maine, and we don't exactly see shooting sprees here every year. Blame the psychopath, not the tool.
Click to expand...
Exactly and that roots back to being rasied with parents there teaching you right from wrong.
 
Firearms are not the problem, nor are violent video games, etc. After all, you cannot blame the Jack Daniels distillery for the drunken driving rampage conducted by the late Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), and you cannot blame the ice cream companies for making Rosie O'Donnell morbidly obese.

Instead, the only thing that can be blamed for almost every case, is the person.

ASIA911 said:
Oh really? So guns aren't the problem? If he didn't have access to these guns you think this would happen? You have a lunatic that have access to dangerous weapons.
Click to expand...


Sigh...

Read the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, if you want to get the facts, and not base your wild assertions on emotional outbursts.

From one of the more recent reports:

Washington DC, where lawful gun ownership was all but banned at the time, had a murder rate of 56.9 per 100,000 individuals, whereas just a few miles away (across the river), Arlington, VA, where lawful firearms ownership is at a very high level, has a murder rate of (gasp!) 1.6 per 100,000 individuals.

In every FBI UCR, you can easily see that the facts and statistics utterly destroy your emotional assertions.
 
ASIA911 said:
So where`s the blackmarket?

``Police reports reveal he(Jared Lee Loughner) had purchased a Glock pistol at a Sportsman's Warehouse store less than six weeks before and attempted to buy additional bullets for the pistol at a Walmart on the morning of the shooting. News reports indicate that the clerk at the first Walmart where Loughner attempted to buy the ammunition may have refused to sell it to him based on his appearance and demeanor. Walmart declined requests to confirm or deny the incident.``

LOL. Walmart selling ammo.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter where he got it. You are trying to dodge the fact that you got called out for being flatly wrong. My comment was in direct response to your statement that if he didn't have legal access to a weapon this wouldn't of happened. The legality of the access does nothing to deter someone determined to do something like this.

Any further response from you other then "Oh, I see now. I was misinformed as to the effectiveness of arms legalization" will be regarded as nothing more then blatant trolling.
 
Commander FAT said:
Uh...well let's see. Someone coming to my house trying to take my guns would be breaking and entering and they are attempting to rob me. Felonies in which I would be justified to use deadly force. Shooting someone who has broken into my house and trying to rob me is not irresponsible.
Click to expand...

Re-quoted to put it back into context:

Outamyhead said:
Maybe taking guns off the shelves would be a wiser option?
Click to expand...

Commander FAT said:
If someone came to my house to try to take my guns away I would just shoot him/her.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but someone coming into your home to 'take your guns away' would probably mean some form of governmental, military, or police procedure. Criminals dont try to 'take your guns away' they simply steal them. Your original statement led me to believe that you were not talking about criminal burglary or theft. Especially as your reply was in response to: "Maybe taking guns off the shelves would be a wiser option?" Not trying to nitpick here, just clarify.

Commander FAT said:
It would certainly make my life tough in the way of legal woes and lawyer fees. As for the life of the person breaking into my house...irrelevant. Any person that threatens someone else with grave bodily injury or injury likely to cause death, in my opinion, forfeits his own life to his intended victim. That crook destroyed his own life.
Click to expand...

I would disagree that simple breaking and entering and or theft constitutes the use of deadly force. But should they threaten you, and there is reasonable likelihood that they have means by which to deliver those threats, then force is likely justified and the courts would probably see it that way. Theres still a lot of legal gray area in these situations though depending on where you live.

Anyway, not trying to walk on your toes or anything, but i would recommend getting to know your local laws very intimately if you believe the Castle doctrine applies to your situation (and it may.) Even then in most cases the heavy use of digression with deadly force is still always warranted, but may not be specifically Required.
 
ASIA911 said:
Oh really? So guns aren't the problem? If he didn't have access to these guns you think this would happen? You have a lunatic that have access to dangerous weapons.
Click to expand...

The dude built a BOMB as well... So to answer your question? Yes it would have happened. He certainly didnt buy the bomb off the shelf. It would have happened with a pipe bomb, grenade being thrown into a crowded area as well. It could have happened with a car or an AEROPLANE as well, if you think back real hard that one might sound familiar. Your argument that guns are the problem is irrational and illogical.

Yes guns helped facilitate the crime, but unless you removed every single gun in the entire world, a person like this would probably still have been able to get his hands on one in some illegal manner, even if he failed to do so originally because it was simply 'easier to do it legally.' Making it harder to do legally wouldnt have solved the problem either and would just punish everyone else.

Bad people will do bad things with anything they can get their hands on. Maybe he would have simply just used his CAR and run a bunch of people over. Hell he would have stood more of a chance of getting away with it had he done that. (Again with the car thing.) You cant take away every potentially dangerous is misusable thing from society. And you cant regulate them out of existence either because criminals dont abide by regulations and are thus free to obtain them through illicit means.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Doesn't matter where he got it. You are trying to dodge the fact that you got called out for being flatly wrong. My comment was in direct response to your statement that if he didn't have legal access to a weapon this wouldn't of happened. The legality of the access does nothing to deter someone determined to do something like this.

Any further response from you other then "Oh, I see now. I was misinformed as to the effectiveness of arms legalization" will be regarded as nothing more then blatant trolling.
Click to expand...

Oh really? So now these kind of criminals have 2 chances to access ammo either through illegal black markets or legally. You make me laugh.
 
ASIA911 said:
Oh really? So now these kind of criminals have 2 chances to access ammo either through illegal black markets or legally. You make me laugh.
Click to expand...

Life is dangerous, you either man up, or you rely on others to do so for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top