These Stores Don't Want You to Bring Your Gun, Now

Post Reply New Topic

Nope the business is taking the responsibility of your defense from you and so they should be liable and provide security able to stop attacks and defend you.

I conceal carry so they aren’t stopping me, can’t stop me and won’t even know. Or are they asking me to stop conceal carrying. It’s just a big show is all. It won’t do anything. It won’t stop mass shooters it won’t stop people from carrying. It’s just grand standing publicly stunt.

What nation do you live it I’d bet I could find shootings, crime, and stabbings in it.
Let he with out sin throw the first stone.
Your nation isn’t some paradise without violence, hate and crime.

It’s a real shame your nation doesn’t believe in freedom and sees its people as peasants.

I've never claimed Canada has no violent crime, but mass shootings of the type that occur regularly in the US aren't seen in the developed world. It's a real shame you think reasonable gun laws amount to a lack of freedom. It's hard to enjoy your rights when you're bleeding to death with the knowledge you'll only be remembered as a statistic when discussing mass shootings, but I guess without the sort of hyperbole you've trotted out you wouldn't have any counterpoint to make at all.

Norway, France, England, many more. Guess they are developed.

My opinion is that open carry isn't very smart. There are many possible scenarios where someone who open carries their weapon could encounter potentially violent or deadly situations with someone using the person's own weapon against them. A person open carrying their weapon is showing the world their weapon in plain sight. This could result in:

> Someone or more than one person tries and potentially succeeds in attacking the person or wrangling the weapon from them. People are known to try this even with police officers, so it's certainly possible against civilians.
> In a high crime area an open carry person could be targeted by gang members and simply shot/killed for their weapon.
> If the majority of a population open carried weapons, the sight of it would be no big deal (think of the 'Old West'). That's not the case. The few that do open carry do not promote positive views of firearms, they unsettle people.

A single incident isn't the same as regular incidents. Mass shootings are rare in those nations.

Yup.

Btw I checked statistics for mass shootings (more than one person shot to death, not including incidents that only included the culprit's family) in Finland and according to the one I checked, we've had nine mass shootings since 1969. Seriously, nine in 50 years while in the USA that's what, a normal weekend? The biggest number of deaths was 11, shooter included, and 3 others were wounded.

I know which country's gun laws I like more.

In a few states conceal carry is illegal so open carry is the only option.
If I go to Washington I either carry open or not at all.

And what’s Finland’s population? And all white you say? Min immigration? So a small mostly one race population has fewer Crimea. Sounds like Japan. Interesting it’s almost like population density and racial makeup has some kind of effect. Strange. But yeah must be the gun laws. Even though data shows gun laws have zero effect.

The USA isn’t Finland, it isn’t japan. We are a much different place, much different culture with much higher population density. Mass shootings and crime happen mostly in big cities tske them out and America is safer then most European nations. Maybe we should just build walls around the big cities lie la, nyc, Chicago etc.

Also and you can look it up John lock didnway more research and found mass shootings aren’t a USA thing they happen globally just don’t get reported on like USA ones. Why do the world care so much what happens in USA and nit other nations?
Least we don’t have terriers take hostages and kill people as our military and police stand by and watch.

Finland isn’t a good comparison at all. You have less people then nyc has and much more land then nyc. Take all Scandinavia and cram it into space size of nyc then being in people from different cultures and lets see how your nation does.

Uk is and island and they’d and stop guns from coming in.

There 5 million people in Finland, nyc alone is 8 million.
Finland is 338,145 sq km.
Nyc is 321.

Your largest city has less population then Portland, and just twice more then my small city.

It’s really comparing apples to rocks.

So what works in Finland won’t work here.

Finland has had 85 murders. Chicago alone has over 300.
Nyc is on track to hit 272, a new low record
La plans to hit 258
See a patern?

My state is similar population to Finland but quite pro gun, we’ve had less murders then Finland.71, 34 of which was in Portland.
Can’t find a number for Helsinki, guess Finland doesn’t want to report individual city murder nukes ? Why, I’d bet it’s similar.
In fact Oregon and Finland are quite similar. But out gun laws aren’t.
So why does Oregon with is far less strict gun laws, of habe way more murders? Our population make up is similar to Finland. , then there California which far excoregons crime and murder rate and has way stricter laws. You can’t even get ammo in California without a background check which requires you to have bought a gun recently. If you didn’t then you can’t buy ammo, if your out of state can’t buy ammo. They have at least 5 assault weapon bans on the books, but yet have so many mass shootings, so much crime, so many more murders.
California has 1,930 murders in 2016.

So no stricken gun laws won’t help the USA, they didn’t in 94-04. We had our most famous mass shootings during the ban. Most the mass shooters would pass Finland’s laws. They pass all our current laws including California’s unconstitutional struck laws.
A person with 6 shot revolver killed 17 people. As many as the kid in Florida with the 10 rd mags they claim would stopped him.

Guy in Texas killed similar with 5 shot bolt actions someone with a single shot gun could kill just as many or more. Bombs can kill hundreds or thousands in a second yet you can still buy bomb ingredients with no background check, they aren’t restricted.

Some guy stood outside a store door and stared 10s of people as they left before anyone knew what was happening.

Big cities of USA are violent and laws won’t change that.
Non of the laws they want will stop anything and they admit it themselves.
No we don’t have to do something if that something won’t help and will in fact hurt.
It’s like killing your pigs cause a fix are your chickens.
Why’d you kill the pigs stand
“Well we had to do something”

You do realize that when comparing statistics you need to compare percents, not numbers, right? Even if you compared the percents, Finland would have far less masskillings.

As for the culture thing, well, wouldn't the question then be what's wrong with American culture if that's a big part of the reason there are so many messed up, dangerous people.

We're not all white. Majority yes, but I'm pretty sure USA has more white people than black or latino or whatever too. We also get lots of immigrants, though thanks to the remote location not as much as south and middle Europe.

Also, since you mentioned population density, it's much bigger in Japan than USA. Japan has well over 300 people per km2 while USA only has 35. In Finland it's about 16, sure, but since you mentioned Japan too and it is what it is, I don't think population density is a sound argument here.

America safer than most European nations? What gives you that idea?

The reason the world pays more attention to USA's mass shootings than to the rest of the world's is probably that USA isn't supposed to be a third world country, but from what I've understood the other countries with these problems are. That USA doesn't have war raging in it affecting everyone's lives, which is the case in many other places.

You're right that guns aren't the main problem; even if all the guns in the world were destroyed, the crazy people would still be crazy. However, without an acces to guns, the amount of people they could kill in a short moment would be much smaller, not to mention the physically weak crazy people couldn't do nowhere near as much damage with a knife than with a gun (neither could the strong ones, but the weak even more so.) So yes, stricter gun laws won't remove the problem, but they'd make it easier to maintain.

No you don’t.
You need to stop comparing Finland to the USA, it’ssmaller then any of our states. Which is why I compared it to Oregon alone which is very similar to Finland.

I could point out a lot that’s wrong with American cultures but no one wants to address them, it’s the actual problem but it’s compli and hard to fix, it took 50 years for it to degrade and it’ll probably take years to fix. So let’s pass laws that hurt people and do nothing so we can say we tried while avoiding the actual problems is what Democrats say.
Poor people for example make up the majority of crime and murders, so we could try to reduce poor people by giving them opportunities and aid, Nah. Let’s just restrict their ability to defend themselves while we sit in our walled communities with arm guards- again democrats.

Oregon isn’t all white either, but majority is similar to Finland. We also get immigrants, but mostly from japan,Korea and China.

Japan is a very controlled culture of submissive, they also hijnin suicide. They’ve never had freedoms. Never been allowed to own guns. They’ve always been peasants. Their culture is very polite. They as a while very racist too. They don’t like foreigners living in japan. Their culture is nothing like ours, if USA had similar culture and makeup to japan then we’d probably have similar crime. Mean even their gang culture is different they don’t hurt others who aren’t gangs.they respect visitors as money makers, they have a odd relationship with the police. They also work themselves to death and aren’t having kids or relationships as much and their population is declining. Again part of their culture is to work hard. While I admire their culture some I wouldn’t want to live in it permanently.
But example two Japanese bump into each other they apologize both. Two Americans do and they start insulting and cursing each other.
In japan they give each other space and bow to each other. It’s rude not to, no the case in USA.
Vastly different culture with different ideas. Even still despite that there is lots of people who want to own guns, so they invented Airsoft. They also are repressed sexually and so have quite weird porn, they sold used panties in vending machines.that would never happen in the USA. And again they have a much higher suicides. Cause to many it’s the only solution. If they can’t handle working extreme hours it’s the only way out since their culture dictates you work as hard and long as come ah needs. Not all bad though companies provide nap chambers and gyms, but they kinda have to since your there 12+ hours a day 5-7 days a week.

I said Oregon, Oregon Oregon Oregon. You can’t compare to USA u less your going compare. the whole continent of Europe’s to it., including Eastern Europe like Ukraine.

I don’t mesn just mass shootings, let’s be honest USA is the center of the world. Ever single nation news talks about us. We might as well be the new Roman Empire, based on the attention we get. In the USA we rarely talk about other countries, besides say ones at war. We don’t hear about how crime is in France. We don’t hear about frence celebrities. I couldn’t name a single European celebrity. So besides Americans obsession with British royals, we don’t seem to give two cents about the rest of the world and what they do. Again unless it’s about war or war with our allies. But from what I gather people all over the world are thinking about us and our celebrities 24/7 it’s quite odd to me. That someone in Finland cares or follows USA news and celebrities. Or someone in China. Never heard anyone talk about Finland here, most don’t even know what Finland is or where it is. Ask random Americans where’s Finland and they wouldn’t know. I do cause I like world war history, the winter wars against Russia. Even still mostly that’s all Finland is to me a nation from ww2 and their character on satw is a drunk guy with knife who stabs people, that’s apparently how other Scandinavians see Finland people? Is that actuate? I’m guessing not. But again i dont know much beside sthe states I looked up for this. I know it’s cold there most of the time. I suppose their view is based on the countless conflicts, like how dans see Swedish people and vice versa.

I pointed out it wouldn’t be smaller. Or do you consider blowing up a Walmart with hundreds of people inside smaller? I’d rather be shot the. Blown up.

Stricter gun laws don’t do anything, zero, Nadia, nothing. Harvard, cdc,fbi, cnn all said so, ever politicians pushing it says so. It’s not about saving lives, they don’t give two s**ts about the victims. (And when it’s nit done with a ar15 they literary don’t pretend to care) it’s about controlling the population and that’s far easier to do if they aren’t armed.

That’s why ven banned guns firs and now look? Their military and police are slaughtering protesters and poor. China is doing sa,e in Hong log, ever dictator took guns as one of their first steps. Hitler disarmed the Jews before sending them cot camps why? Cause a armed Jewish community would fight back, and some in Eastern Europe did just that they fought back. Disarmed people can’t fight back they just get slaughtered and live in fear of their governments.
If the finish government became a dictatorship tomorrow what would you do?

I wont respond further to this cause I’ll start to hate you.

Did you have anything resembling a point to make in that word salad Sly?

Pretending a problem doesn't exist doesn't make the problem go away or get better. Unfortunately the solution to this problem is to become more like the rest of the world where this problem has already been addressed. Perhaps the crazies who will be most aggravated by this shouldn't have been allowed to own these sorts of weapons in the first place; a bunch of potential lonewolf sleeper cells threatening violence if their guns are taken away aren't exactly the best spokespeople against gun control.

To Sly:
I have responses to a lot of what you said, but since you said you won't comment anymore there's no point in me answering you.

Though if someone else, be they for or against stricter gun control, wants to hear my opinions on things then do ask and I'll answer.

I'd love to hear what you have to say.

Sure. I'd just like to say first that I don't support a complete gun ban, just stricter gun control. In fact, in rural areas (rural for real with woods, fields, wasteland and such, not simply small towns) they can really be necessary because of animals.

I think it'd be for the best to have strict psychological evaluation for everyone who wants to buy a gun before they can do that. Or if not for all guns, then the more dangerous ones at least. I know that some people can pretend to be perfectly sane despite not being so and they could pass it anyway, but I'm sure that there are also many not so stable people who wouldn't be able to get a gun because of it.

Also, I think it'd be better to make the rules of who gets to sell guns stricter. Maybe even make it so that a private person wouldn't be allowed to sell their own guns to other people but that they'd always have to be sold to a licensed gun store when the owner wants to get rid of them. That way it'd be easier to keep track of who has what guns, for they'd always have to be registered, too. Of course, some people would still sell theirs illegally, but the amount of the people who'd sell theirs to questionable people would be lower. I think this would also directly lessen the amounts of crimes, for those who have the need to get a gun illegally are more likely to commit crimes with it and this would make getting one harder.

There are also lot of cases where a child gets their hands on a gun and accidents happen, right? I don't know what kind of punishments the owners of those guns get for not storing them properly, but I really hope they're strict ones. Also, I think that for these reasons it'd be for the best if everyone who bought a gun had to take some kind of course about safe handling and storing of a gun. Maybe there could even be a test and if you can't pass it, you can't buy a gun.

Of course, the best thing would be to get rid of the root of the problems, as in find a way to get help to those who do mass killings before they do them, but as long as that's not sorted out, rules like this could slow down at least some of them.

I just don't see why a "regular" person who is not in the active military should be allowed to own an "assault, semi-automatic" weapon.

There's a big difference between a gun which shoots one bullet at a time----and semi/automatic weapons which use cartridges which fire many bullets.

That's why possession of an unlicensed rifle in NY State is a misdemeanor----and possession of an unlicensed handgun is a felony.

Please note that I'm not fanatical about TAKING AWAY A PERSON'S GUNS. I would just rather civilians not have assault, automatic or semiautomatic weapons.