Student with AS Fatally Stabs Another Student

[Litigious]

Quit arguing about this and start arguing about something I care about.

OK. What do you care about?

Manga porn, young girls with cum on their faces, skin picking and biting?

[Nomaken]

I dunno, the value of life(human or otherwise), think of your feelings on abortion, stem cell research, veal, vegetarianism, ect.

Mostly I want you to put your enthusiastic disagreeing to some other subject because it seems like you arent getting anywhere with this issue, and i wanna read about you not getting anywhere with another issue for a while.

[odeon]

But... but... I just had him cornered. Not fair!

OK. Abortion, yes. Stem cell research, yes. Vegetarianism, sure, for those that prefer it. I don't.

[Litigious]

But... but... I just had him cornered. Not fair!

OK. Abortion, yes. Stem cell research, yes. Vegetarianism, sure, for those that prefer it. I don't.

You didn't have me cornered. Explain how 174 persons could commit suicide with legal guns in Sweden 2002, if the gun laws stop instable people from getting guns. If we re-count the American figures, the victims for gun crimes (11000) would be about 360 in Sweden. The victims for gun crimes in Sweden are 10-15, maybe at most 20 a year, but the people committing suicide with legal guns are just about half the percentage of those killed in gun crimes in the US. What is your response? Total gun ban? Suicides are OK? I'm a lier? And should the governments give up their guns if all citizens did? If not, why?

[QuirkyCarla]

Violence is cowardly, especially when you use a weapon. If people are going to be violent, they should at least use kung fu or something. Even that is cowardly though. The world would be much better off if guns had never existed. Since they do, I think the best we can do is just have stricter gun laws. The screening the US has obviously isn't good enough, since a lot of crazy people and murderers are still passing them and acquiring guns legally. The more guns a country has, the more gun-related deaths. Look at New Zealand. They have what, like 4 deaths a year due to gunshot? That sounds like better protection to me.

That's the way anti-gunners falsely argue. In 2002 only 15 people were killed in crimes with guns in Sweden. On the other hand 174 Swedes blew their brains out with guns the same year, most of them did it with a legal gun. If you count suicides too in the statistics, the death rate related to guns in Sweden is about 50% of the death rate in the US, despite the fact that it's about 100 times harder to get a gun here!!! What do you say about that? That's how good gun laws "work" in reality. And, by the way, 50% more Swedes kill themselves every year all in all compared with the US, despite the fact that the American society is much tougher than the Swedish. But do you hear any authority people or reporters hysterically crying that we must get the suicide rate down? No.

Since I don't live in Sweden nor have I ever been there, I don't know why the suicide rates are so high. There must be other factors contributing to that. It doesn't make sense to blame the gun restrictions for people committing suicide though.

[QuirkyCarla]

But... but... I just had him cornered. Not fair!

OK. Abortion, yes. Stem cell research, yes. Vegetarianism, sure, for those that prefer it. I don't.

You didn't have me cornered. Explain how 174 persons could commit suicide with legal guns in Sweden 2002, if the gun laws stop instable people from getting guns. If we re-count the American figures, the victims for gun crimes (11000) would be about 360 in Sweden. The victims for gun crimes in Sweden are 10-15, maybe at most 20 a year, but the people committing suicide with legal guns are just about half the percentage of those killed in gun crimes in the US. What is your response? Total gun ban? Suicides are OK? I'm a lier? And should the governments give up their guns if all citizens did? If not, why?

I am wondering how stable these people can be if they are committing suicide?

[odeon]

Lit, I was letting it go. I was joking. We aren't really getting anywhere; you can't convince me, at all. Your arguments are hollow at best.

But OK; fewer guns will take care of both problems. If there weren't for the current restrictions, more people would commit suicide, more people would be killed by firearms. I don't understand the point with your comments. Do you think the numbers are OK? Do you find them acceptable? Are they an acceptable price to pay? I don't know if your statistics are correct; I can't be arsed to check them right now, but the exact numbers are not the point.

Did you know that the US states in the highest quartile of firearm ownership had overall homicide rates 60 per cent higher than states in the lowest quartile? Guns kill, Lit, and that fact is hard to avoid, even for you.

[Litigious]

Since I don't live in Sweden nor have I ever been there, I don't know why the suicide rates are so high. There must be other factors contributing to that. It doesn't make sense to blame the gun restrictions for people committing suicide though.

No, of course it isn't the gun restrictions causing the suicides, but the suicide rate is high despite the fact that it's harder to commit suicide in a painless way in Sweden than in the US, and also despite the fact that the American society is much tougher and more brutal. But if the authorities are concerned that much about peoples lives, why do they always yell higher about the sheer fact that people own guns at all, but not over the suicide rate?

The suicide rate is much more alarming than the gun violence, but yet they are always hysterical when a single gun crime is committed, and yell about even harder restrictions or a total ban. It doesn't seem like their main concern is to protect people from hurting themselves but to prevent people from getting guns. Therefore it can be assumed, that the real reason for gun restrictions isn't care about the citizens' lives and health but merely to control that the citizens have no means of real power whatsoever vs the authorities. See what I mean?

[Litigious]

I am wondering how stable these people can be if they are committing suicide?

No, of course they're not stable, and that shows that gun laws are ridiculous. A stable person can always become unstable and an unstable person can be stable enough to get a gun in a legal way. Restrictons will never stop anything and a total ban will never work.

[QuirkyCarla]

Since I don't live in Sweden nor have I ever been there, I don't know why the suicide rates are so high. There must be other factors contributing to that. It doesn't make sense to blame the gun restrictions for people committing suicide though.

No, of course it isn't the gun restrictions causing the suicides, but the suicide rate is high despite the fact that it's harder to commit suicide in a painless way in Sweden than in the US, and also despite the fact that the American society is much tougher and more brutal. But if the authorities are concerned that much about peoples lives, why do they always yell higher about the sheer fact that people own guns at all, but not over the suicide rate?

The suicide rate is much more alarming than the gun violence, but yet they are always hysterical when a single gun crime is committed, and yell about even harder restrictions or a total ban. It doesn't seem like their main concern is to protect people from hurting themselves but to prevent people from getting guns. Therefore it can be assumed, that the real reason for gun restrictions isn't care about the citizens' lives and health but merely to control that the citizens have no means of real power whatsoever vs the authorities. See what I mean?

Maybe for the authorities it is about control, but I'm not the authorities. With a suicide rate that high though, Sweden definitely shouldn't make it easier to get guns.

[QuirkyCarla]

I am wondering how stable these people can be if they are committing suicide?

No, of course they're not stable, and that shows that gun laws are ridiculous. A stable person can always become unstable and an unstable person can be stable enough to get a gun in a legal way. Restrictons will never stop anything and a total ban will never work.

Of course the restrictions help. If Sweden didn't have the restrictions, gun crimes and suicides would go up.

[Litigious]

Lit, I was letting it go. I was joking. We aren't really getting anywhere; you can't convince me, at all. Your arguments are hollow at best.

Because I don't agree with you?

But OK; fewer guns will take care of both problems. If there weren't for the current restrictions, more people would commit suicide, more people would be killed by firearms. I don't understand the point with your comments. Do you think the numbers are OK? Do you find them acceptable? Are they an acceptable price to pay? I don't know if your statistics are correct; I can't be arsed to check them right now, but the exact numbers are not the point.

No, you can't be arsed, because your sister once was nearly killed by a gun, and that day you decided that guns are evil and should be restricted or, if possible, totally banned. You haven't even fired yourself one in your whole life. I say that restrictions don't stop the ones who want to kill themselves and are already in possess of a gun. Neither do they stop criminals who are just the slightest advanced. They only stop law abiding people who want to protect themselves from doing it legally and easily. And yes, for the sake of freedom, the numbers are acceptable. It's a pretty low price to pay. Cars, tobacco, alcohol and junk food each kill more people than guns, but that obviously doesn't bother you or other haplophobes very much.

Did you know that the US states in the highest quartile of firearm ownership had overall homicide rates 60 per cent higher than states in the lowest quartile? Guns kill, Lit, and that fact is hard to avoid, even for you.

No, I didn't know, beacuse I count by gun laws, not by percentage of guns. Percentage doesn't make sense. Vermont has the most liberal gun law in the whole US, but not the highest death rates. You should count by gun laws and not by actual percentage of guns, because your "theory" is that liberal gun laws cause gun crimes but they don't. It's criminals getting access to guns that cause most gun crimes. 

[Litigious]

Maybe for the authorities it is about control, but I'm not the authorities. With a suicide rate that high though, Sweden definitely shouldn't make it easier to get guns.

The suicide rate wouldn't increase that dramatically. The thing that would mainly happen would be that instead of jumping in front of trains, cutting, drowning and OD:ing themselves, more people would shoot themselves instead. And that's not a crime. I just mentioned it to point out how ridiculous and conter-productive all restrictions and bans are.

[Scrapheap]

 Fewer guns means fewer deaths.

Think long and hard about what you're saying about human nature here.  

Stricter gun laws means it's harder to get guns (that includes getting them illegally because a good gun law will restrict more than just buying guns or ammo over the counter).

AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN!!! This is not true!!! We can't stop 11,000,000 people from coming arcoss our borders and we sure as hell can't stop drug smuggling. How do you propose to stop guns from comming in from Mexico?? (I've made this point several time now without anyone comming up with a good answer).

There are enough incidents in the US and elsewhere to demonstrate that easy access to guns will result in tragedies. Witness Columbine and many, many others.

Columbine incidents are few an far between. Also, when you eliminate homicides related to gangs and drugs, you eliminate a large number of U.S. homicides.

I'm very glad that none of these two gentlemen are in any position of power here or elsewhere in the world.

Likewise.

[Litigious]

Of course the restrictions help. If Sweden didn't have the restrictions, gun crimes and suicides would go up.

As I said, suicide would mainly change by methods, not increase dramatically. Gun crimes might go up a little bit, yes, but on the other hand law abiding people would be able to defend themselves. More criminals would be shot, though, which I really can't be sorry about.