May i know what are your opinions on gun control?

  १० जनामा ६ जना डिप्रेस्ड, मानसिक असन्तुलन आदि इत्यादि भएको ठाउमा कन्ट्रोल केहि हद सम्म गर्ने पर्ने हुन्छ| हैन र ?
यो केस मा छोरा हैन आमा को हात पनि उत्तिकै देखिन्छ किनकी तेस्तो मानसिक असन्तुलित छोरा लाइ बन्दुक चलाउन सिकाउने अनि किनेर घरमा भित्य्राऒनु नै यो घटनाको सुत्रपात थियो |                  आमाको दोस धेरै देखिन्छ ? हैन र ?

With the facts we have right now, your argument is absolutely right, Magorkhe1.

Kiddo saying ban knives is like saying ban sticks and stones. Knives are not made for killing knives are made for cutting things and they can be abused but not as deadly as guns.

Guns on the other hand are made to kill. You can argue the use of guns for shooting sports but ultimately guns are made for killing.

kiddo don't compare knives with semi-automated guns. Do you really think that the degree of casualty would be same if the killer had used knife instead of those guns ??

Rethink, so you want to ban guns because of its intentions? I am sorry man but that is one weak argument. If you take everything else out and rely on that argument alone, then we gotta ban poisons too, aren't they made for killing? I could very well argue that I didn't buy my gun to kill anybody. I bought it to deter burglers, if I shoot it, I will shoot it on his legs.

I would have been a better audience if you had said ban assault rifles. A [Disallowed String for - replaced word]li can be as lethal as a gun.

People who are up for banning guns, don't forget to consider whether this is possible also or not. Never mind the second ammendment, think about the millions of guns that already exist in US household and think about what happened when they try to ban alcohol.

Kiddo comparing guns and poison is like comparing apples and oranges.

One you use to spray bullets into anything that gets in your path, the other you need to feed the victim somehow. Imagine shooters walking with poison instead of guns. Not very scary or effective way of killing people is it?

Guns you can buy at walmart while poison you can buy animal poison but not lethal human grade poison at any stores.

If you wanted to deter burglars why don't you buy a tranquilizer gun instead of guns that can actually kill?

The point is gun kills and it's not a good idea to make it available so easily. As for people who already have guns so be it, maybe some legislations can be thought of, but at least someone who goes psycho from now on can't go to a store to pick up guns and kill people just because he's a psycho, if it's not easy to get hold of a gun.

Let's not get into the definition of assault rifles and guns. In general a gun is anything that shoots bullets with the potential to kill.

Rethink I completely disagree.

You are getting a little caught up with the analogies I am bringing. You said we can't compare guns with knives because guns were made to kill; so I focused on the intention alone-poison is made to kill. You will now say, a poison doesn't have a trigger...the point is you can't just look at the intention. You HAVE to put everything in context.

Why do you think guns should be taken off the hands of an average citizen but should be given to cops? Even cops shouldn't kill people right?

Your argument about getting a tranquilizing gun, you think if it were that efficient people wouldn't have used it? A gun does the job immediatly which is what's needed as oppose to a tranquilizer.

So you want to let people who already have the guns, have them? You know how many guns are there in US? 310 Million, that's not a number you can just ignore. Thinking of instituting a gun buy-back program as in Australia would just not be possible here. Revising 2nd and 4th ammendments are the easiest hurdles in the war against guns.

Going back to assault rifles; I completely support a ban on assault rifle or even auto/semi-automatic guns. There should be no need for any average citizen to kill that many people at once. They should be completely banned by all states. Any other gun should be heavily controlled.

 If you want COMPLETE gun control then go back to Nepal.

 nepal ma bhutro ko gun control, sabai tarai basi ra paila ka maobadi sanga masta bandook chha. sojha sajha sanga matrai nabhako ho

There are gonna be sick minded and psycho people in every corner of the world. You just can't do anything about it. But what you can do is save the number of lives by restricting guns. Here is how, recently a chinese man stabbed 22 children (6-7 yrs) in China. THERE WERE NO DEATHS. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/world/asia/man-stabs-22-children-in-china.html?_r=0


You guys are comparing Knives with Guns. How many people do you think a person can kill with a knife or knives? and How many people can a person can kill with gun or guns? You do the math.

gun control , did you read the news recently, gun sales have gone up by 45 percent after ct shootings
ppl believed that rifel used in shootings may be banned so they want to get the last piece of it

"The truth is that our government IS the terrorist organization that wants to take down America and they need to disarm Americans first."
 

One seen running from building, chased by police. Seen on this aerial video starting at 7.30 min

@rid - Why am I not surprised? You would definitely think government was behind the shooting. For you, every damn thing is a conspiracy and illuminati related

@ Tesko_baje: you make the point, if you ban guns, then only police and criminals would have the access of the weapons. Law abiding citizens would be left helpless.

My neighbor farted the other day and Rid came up with this youtube video where he claimed government had a hand behind this heinous crime. The video went on to prove that the smell was indeed coming from the fracking induced gas expulsion from our tap and the noise was ultra sonic miniature boom created from one of their top secret experiment.

Kiddo,

Looks like we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

I don't agree with your analogy of having to ban knives if guns are to be banned. The difference being one is a prehistoric weapon and the other one being modern 20th century weapon with ability to kill with one shot where victims don't have a fighting chance or chance to flee since the perpetrator can activate his weapon from far.

I don't agree with your differentiation of gun versus assault rifle. They both can shoot from far and can kill with one bullet. That in my opinion is too much power in the hands of the commoner who can be a mental case as opposed to in the hands of a government sanctioned police or army. If you don't have faith in the police/army to protect and serve then you might has wel not have faith in doctors either. Obviously there will be some cases of police excess and doctor excess but you have to have *some* faith in the system, otherwise you might as well go to the jungle and live there.

Your argument regarding what to do about people who already own guns shows a very defeatist mentality. You have to start somewhere. Just because your computer already has virus does not mean you don't install a new anti virus that came out. Maybe it won't affect the existing virus but it will stop the new viruses. The mainconcern here is the impulsive psycho who will not be able to go buy a gun to shoot out innocent people if there is an effective gun control in place.

It's not necessary for us to agree with each other. I am sure each of us think his point is more valid and neither of us may be wrong, just different type of people.

Interesting piece in nytimes today.
"All the focus on the small number of people with mental illness who are violent serves to make us feel safer by displacing and limiting the threat of violence to a small, well-defined group. But the sad and frightening truth is that the vast majority of homicides are carried out by outwardly normal people in the grip of all too ordinary human aggression to whom we provide nearly unfettered access to deadly force".
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/health/a-misguided-focus-on-mental-illness-in-gun-control-debate.html?_r=0

Good article snurp.

If such unfettered access to deadly force was not possible, many innocent children and people would have been saved.