This is just....

[Remember remember the 5th of November]

...sick is what it is

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30710883?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_breaking&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central

[BADecker]

No. The real sick is that the French government doesn't allow people to keep guns with them. If the government could protect the people, it might be okay, somewhat. But the government can't protect the people, as evidenced by this.

If the magazine people had guns with fully loaded "magazines" with them at their desks, they would have been able to fend off the crooks. Possibly the crooks would never have done the thing they did, knowing that the people would fight back WITH GUNS.

Crooks are free to own guns (well, they obviously were in this case). Why not the good people?

Let the law abiding people own all kinds of armament so that they can protect themselves and the police who attempt to protect them.

When the gunmen are found, and when it is proven that they are for sure the murders, execute them.

[Remember remember the 5th of November]

I don't see this changing.

My country also has strict anti-gun laws, even somebody at age 40-50 has a slim to none chance to get a license, let alone somebody half that age.

[MUFC]

No. The real sick is that the French government doesn't allow people to keep guns with them. If the government could protect the people, it might be okay, somewhat. But the government can't protect the people, as evidenced by this.

If the magazine people had guns with fully loaded "magazines" with them at their desks, they would have been able to fend off the crooks. Possibly the crooks would never have done the thing they did, knowing that the people would fight back WITH GUNS.

Crooks are free to own guns (well, they obviously were in this case). Why not the good people?

Let the law abiding people own all kinds of armament so that they can protect themselves and the police who attempt to protect them.

When the gunmen are found, and when it is proven that they are for sure the murders, execute them.

I'm not sure more guns is the answer to guns. You can always get a bigger weapon as well. In fact In the report I read they may ahve had some sort of grenade launcher or something. Not sure if it's confirmed though.

[Lethn]

I'm not sure more guns is the answer to guns. You can always get a bigger weapon as well. In fact In the report I read they may ahve had some sort of grenade launcher or something. Not sure if it's confirmed though.

Well unfortunately we have several real life examples now of how gun control does absolutely nothing, when you have someone trying to attack you, they'll try to attack you, forcing anyone law abiding to not be able to carry a gun is exactly the kind of thing that helps out people looking to carry these shootings. I'd feel a lot more comfortable in that situation if I I even had a small 9mm with me and I'm from the UK ffs.

I'm sorry but people like you just don't live in the real world and I certainly don't trust the police to do the job right, the police end up getting fired on the same as everyone else and they did in this situation and to be frank if you have civilians walking around with guns it's going to completely take a terrorist by surprise than if they know for sure there are going to be a bunch of unarmed civilians wondering around waiting to get shot.

It's not a question of more guns, it's a question of self-defence, I'm not going to feed you a load of bullshit about hunting and so on to justify an assault rifle but I think the idea of making people utterly defenceless, particularly people who aren't capable of learning martial arts or physically fit enough is ridiculous, even then I wouldn't count on that if my enemy has an assault rifle. Also yes, when you take away guns entirely, you really do make people defenceless, we've had several shootings from the Jihadists in the past few months now and it's not going to go away.

[spazzdla]

When seconds matter the police are only minutes away.

The idea that personal protection is a communial thing is hilarious and sad.. very very very sad.

[SOAD]

I'm not sure more guns is the answer to guns. You can always get a bigger weapon as well. In fact In the report I read they may ahve had some sort of grenade launcher or something. Not sure if it's confirmed though.

Well unfortunately we have several real life examples now of how gun control does absolutely nothing, when you have someone trying to attack you, they'll try to attack you, forcing anyone law abiding to not be able to carry a gun is exactly the kind of thing that helps out people looking to carry these shootings. I'd feel a lot more comfortable in that situation if I I even had a small 9mm with me and I'm from the UK ffs.

I'm sorry but people like you just don't live in the real world and I certainly don't trust the police to do the job right, the police end up getting fired on the same as everyone else and they did in this situation and to be frank if you have civilians walking around with guns it's going to completely take a terrorist by surprise than if they know for sure there are going to be a bunch of unarmed civilians wondering around waiting to get shot.

It's not a question of more guns, it's a question of self-defence, I'm not going to feed you a load of bullshit about hunting and so on to justify an assault rifle but I think the idea of making people utterly defenceless, particularly people who aren't capable of learning martial arts or physically fit enough is ridiculous, even then I wouldn't count on that if my enemy has an assault rifle. Also yes, when you take away guns entirely, you really do make people defenceless, we've had several shootings from the Jihadists in the past few months now and it's not going to go away.

Are you sure you're not the one living in the real world? Compare the number of shootings in the US to the UK. The notion of self-defence is also alarming for those who feel they can't defend themselves. If you were attacked on the street currently what would you do? Normally run away or fight back I assume? If you had a gun you'd probably pull it out and shoot the person as soon as he came up to you to ask the time. Whoops. It's always a bad idea giving cowards weapons because they shoot first and ask questions later regardless of the situation. Just look at all the police shooting unarmed people because they're scared they might have to actually deal with a situation and that's too difficult so just shoot them instead and then you'll be safe with your nice gun in your pocket.

[Lethn]

That's why you do background checks and give law abiding citizens proper training so they aren't trigger happy, in the U.S it could also help community ties with the police if they acted as instructors, but of course you only want a total ban on guns don't you?

It's sad that even in the face of total destruction there are people who believe that what they want is the only option available.

[RodeoX]

It is sick.   
Same old shit; "My invisible sky man is better than yours!"

Many French may not think guns would have helped, but this would have been very dangerous for the attackers if they tried it in a place with concealed carry. Our crazy killers have to attack schools and the few remaining places that no one has a gun.

 

[Sefton]

That's why you do background checks and give law abiding citizens proper training so they aren't trigger happy, in the U.S it could also help community ties with the police if they acted as instructors, but of course you only want a total ban on guns don't you?

It's sad that even in the face of total destruction there are people who believe that what they want is the only option available.

Background checks probably wont stop crazy or mentally disturbed people getting them and police have extensive training yet use them when they're not needed or as a first line of defense and so will citizens with or without training.

[BADecker]

No. The real sick is that the French government doesn't allow people to keep guns with them. If the government could protect the people, it might be okay, somewhat. But the government can't protect the people, as evidenced by this.

If the magazine people had guns with fully loaded "magazines" with them at their desks, they would have been able to fend off the crooks. Possibly the crooks would never have done the thing they did, knowing that the people would fight back WITH GUNS.

Crooks are free to own guns (well, they obviously were in this case). Why not the good people?

Let the law abiding people own all kinds of armament so that they can protect themselves and the police who attempt to protect them.

When the gunmen are found, and when it is proven that they are for sure the murders, execute them.

I'm not sure more guns is the answer to guns. You can always get a bigger weapon as well. In fact In the report I read they may ahve had some sort of grenade launcher or something. Not sure if it's confirmed though.

Alone, more guns is not the answer. The people need to be united to some extent.

Think about this instance. Officer down and shot in the head. Citizens on the street would have shot out the tires of the escape vehicle... if they had guns and knew what to do with them. There may have been a gun battle, but the assailants would have died... perhaps along with some of the citizens. And it wouldn't have a chance of happening again for a good long time.

A question is, why doesn't this happen in the U.S.? 9/11 was an inside job because foreigners with guns are too chicken to do it in the U.S., with all the armed populace. If people weren't trained to be such pussies, there would be strength in the U.S. It would be the same around the world.

Terrorists wouldn't stand a chance, because most of an armed populace aren't terrorists. And for the protection of themselves, their families, and their friends, everything would be different. There wouldn't be any terrorism.

[Lethn]

That's why you do background checks and give law abiding citizens proper training so they aren't trigger happy, in the U.S it could also help community ties with the police if they acted as instructors, but of course you only want a total ban on guns don't you?

It's sad that even in the face of total destruction there are people who believe that what they want is the only option available.

Background checks probably wont stop crazy or mentally disturbed people getting them and police have extensive training yet use them when they're not needed or as a first line of defense and so will citizens with or without training.

Welcome to the real world, why is it when they're wearing a uniform you feel so much more trusting? Also background checks would help a lot, but people like you just aren't interested in anything else than a total ban on firearms.

[bitgeek]

That's why you do background checks and give law abiding citizens proper training so they aren't trigger happy, in the U.S it could also help community ties with the police if they acted as instructors, but of course you only want a total ban on guns don't you?

It's sad that even in the face of total destruction there are people who believe that what they want is the only option available.

Background checks probably wont stop crazy or mentally disturbed people getting them and police have extensive training yet use them when they're not needed or as a first line of defense and so will citizens with or without training.

It will stop these people from getting a licence and buying a gun and ammo at the store. They will have to turn to smugglers, which is what they've been doing all along.
The main problem in the EU is that it's harder for an average citizen to get a gun than it is for a criminal.

[(oYo)]

The government doesn't want your safety (or anything else for that matter) to be left in your own hands, they want it to be in their hands. The happier, healthier and safer you are, the less you depend on them, the less control they have over you and the less likely you are willing to give up your freedom. This incident will likely be spun in a way to lobby for more surveillance, militarizing police and giving them more power.

The more fucked up everything is, the better it is for the economy too, by the way. Think of all the jobs reliant upon the destruction of lives. If you are carrying a gun illegally, it means courts, lawyers and possible jail time, then afterwards counseling and parole - all good for the economy. The more laws they make, the more laws you'll likely break. It's no wonder or accident that the police state is getting bigger and more powerful. Also, if you get shot, it means hospital care, maybe even some counseling - once more, all good for the economy. Really, it's no wonder companies only get a slap on the wrist when they make people sick from pollution and whatnot. They contribute the most to the economy, even when that contribution is the destruction of the environment and sickness. But, I digress and so I'll just stop now.

And, yeah, I'm real fun at parties.

[Sefton]

That's why you do background checks and give law abiding citizens proper training so they aren't trigger happy, in the U.S it could also help community ties with the police if they acted as instructors, but of course you only want a total ban on guns don't you?

It's sad that even in the face of total destruction there are people who believe that what they want is the only option available.

Background checks probably wont stop crazy or mentally disturbed people getting them and police have extensive training yet use them when they're not needed or as a first line of defense and so will citizens with or without training.

Welcome to the real world, why is it when they're wearing a uniform you feel so much more trusting? Also background checks would help a lot, but people like you just aren't interested in anything else than a total ban on firearms.

Welcome to the real world where we don't need guns, but people like you need them because they feel defenseless without them. And where did I say I was trusting of police? I said the opposite. I don't trust them to have guns.

[RodeoX]

Background checks probably wont stop crazy or mentally disturbed people getting them and police have extensive training yet use them when they're not needed or as a first line of defense and so will citizens with or without training.

I have to disagree with a few of your points Sefton. Not the part about background checks catching everyone. There is always someone who could slip through the background checks. But most crazy people have a history and in the US a history of mental illness, criminal activity, or violence of any kind will preclude you from getting a permit.
But the part about the police having extensive training is not true. I have more training and experience than most cops. I know because my family is a LEO family. I shoot hundreds of rounds per week. Most cops shoot hundreds per year. I train with pistols, AR/AK, as well as shotgun and sniper rifle almost every week. In the US a typical country boy knows far more than a typical urban cop.

I shoot as a hobby but my CC weapon is not for fun, make no mistake it is for killing people. That is a serious responsibility and you will only see my gun if you are murdering me or someone right in front of me. If you rob me I'll give you my wallet, but try killing me and you will see my gun for a few moments as it all fades to black.

My dad was trained by Hover at the FBI academy. He instilled in me the idea that we don't run from the bad guys, we make them run. We are not afraid, they are in the wrong and we make them afraid of us.  

[BADecker]

That's why you do background checks and give law abiding citizens proper training so they aren't trigger happy, in the U.S it could also help community ties with the police if they acted as instructors, but of course you only want a total ban on guns don't you?

It's sad that even in the face of total destruction there are people who believe that what they want is the only option available.

Background checks probably wont stop crazy or mentally disturbed people getting them and police have extensive training yet use them when they're not needed or as a first line of defense and so will citizens with or without training.

Welcome to the real world, why is it when they're wearing a uniform you feel so much more trusting? Also background checks would help a lot, but people like you just aren't interested in anything else than a total ban on firearms.

Welcome to the real world where we don't need guns, but people like you need them because they feel defenseless without them. And where did I say I was trusting of police? I said the opposite. I don't trust them to have guns.

The only differences when only the government has guns, are quality and length of life.

[Brooker]

The government doesn't want your safety (or anything else for that matter) to be left in your own hands, they want it to be in their hands.

But neither does the stranger on the street or the criminal care about your safety either. Gun control is just a debate where there's no right or wrong answer and there's two sides to the whole debate of safety/liberty vs danger/protection. Sure guns are good for protecting yourself in certain situations but they can get you unnecessarily killed in others. Some people want them others dont and they can be used for good or bad reasons etc etc.

[(oYo)]

The government doesn't want your safety (or anything else for that matter) to be left in your own hands, they want it to be in their hands.

But neither does the stranger on the street or the criminal care about your safety either. Gun control is just a debate where there's no right or wrong answer and there's two sides to the whole debate of safety/liberty vs danger/protection. Sure guns are good for protecting yourself in certain situations but they can get you unnecessarily killed in others. Some people want them others dont and they can be used for good or bad reasons etc etc.

I agree, there is no real good solution here, since humanity as a whole is kinda fucked up. I personally wouldn't carry a gun, but since criminals will carry them regardless of whether or not it's legal, I think it's better for everyone if decent people are permitted to carry them as well.

[s.mouse]

I don't think there's a right or wrong answer but I feel safer in countries where they're not common but thats just me.

The government doesn't want your safety (or anything else for that matter) to be left in your own hands, they want it to be in their hands.

But neither does the stranger on the street or the criminal care about your safety either. Gun control is just a debate where there's no right or wrong answer and there's two sides to the whole debate of safety/liberty vs danger/protection. Sure guns are good for protecting yourself in certain situations but they can get you unnecessarily killed in others. Some people want them others dont and they can be used for good or bad reasons etc etc.

I agree, there is no real good solution here, since humanity as a whole is kinda fucked up. I personally wouldn't carry a gun, but since criminals will carry them regardless of whether or not it's legal, I think it's better for everyone if decent people are permitted to carry them as well.

Seems like a catch-22 situation. You need a gun to protect yourself against those people with guns  .