Vol_Bengal Posted July 26, 2012 Report Share Posted July 26, 2012 [quote name='Orange 'n Black' timestamp='1343230682' post='1140639'] It bothers the shit out of me that this turned into another gun control debate. Whether you think this could have been prevented by a CCW or more restrictive laws, the gun issue is irrelevant. Guns are a scapegoat, like everything is scapegoated in modern America. People don't care about the real reason for a tragedy like this - mental instability combined with the lack of any treatment or support for it. It's far easier to get self righteous and squawk about TOUGHER GUN LAWS or MORE CCWS. Neither viewpoint is going to change the status quo. Sure, it's highly doubtful anyone else is going to be able to buy 6000 rounds of ammo over the Internet. But this guy didn't use nearly that much. The VT shooter caused far more human destruction with handguns alone. I know it's a lot harder to get self righteous over mental health, but that's where the blame lies. [/quote] [quote name='Orange 'n Black' timestamp='1343236898' post='1140655'] And in that case the gun control argument was valid, because he was only able to purchase the guns due to a loophole wherein Virginia authorities were not notified of his previous mental history. I don't have a solution to picking out murderous psychopaths before they snap (probably because there isn't a universal one). Just making the point here that the gun debate is irrelevant. Would more or less people have died if he didnt have an AR-15? Maybe, or maybe he just would have kept on firing off the shotgun (which is a legitimate hunting weapon). I am a firm supporter of the right to purchase and bear arms, but I also don't think anybody carrying in the theater would have made a difference. [/quote] [quote name='Orange 'n Black' timestamp='1343237305' post='1140658'] It only proves what's already known - people can snap and hurt others. I don't have a problem with people owning high powered weapons. There are millions of them owned by millions of responsible people. You can't argue that he would have caused more or less destruction based on what weapons or equipment he had - that's pure speculation. Cho killed 30 people with handguns that are carried by millions daily. Al-Qaeda took down the twin towers with box cutters. The rifle is a scapegoat for a culture that thrives on blaming icons instead of itself. [/quote] [quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1343281586' post='1140854'] Nope but a truck bomb like Timothy McVeigh made would have killed more... [/quote] +1 to all these... Once his mind is made up... the means is just one more thing he works out. And, there are a multitude of options that would have accomplished the same task, frankly, much cheaper than what it cost him here. And, very possibly, with greater loss of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.