US Gun Control

[Arkten]

11 Israelis Olympic team members were hostaged and killed by Black September, not Red Army Faction.

Thank you for correcting my statement. You are indeed correct, the massacres 1972 in Munich were done by Black September. I simply assumed it to be the RAF which terrorized Germany during that timespan.

For every school shooting, there are a large count of people saying "if only someone else in the school had a gun to take out the shooter".
For every school shooting there is a new video that circulates of a home owner shooting and killing multiple armed intruders at night.

1. Interestingly enough schools in the USA are afaik gun-free zones. You are not allowed to carry a gun in a school. Shouldn't this prevent school shootings by your logic?
2. Probably because it seems to be an effective way of defending yourself.

I find this one thought experiment very interesting because it is easily applicable to real world scenarios: Imagine a room, that is filled with 50 people. We do not want someone to be able to inflict high damage and thus ban guns from that room. To actually enforce this rule we search every single person who enters that room to make sure nobody enters with a gun (or any kind of weapon for that matter.). We have a single point of failure here. Not only has it a massive impact if we fuck up ONLY ONCE, this method does not scale very well too. Say we need to search 50,000 people. You are statistically doomed to fail if you choose this method.
If we however give everyone a gun at the entrance, it does not matter much if we miss a couple, because we still have a pretty good balance of powers inside that room. Now this will not of course not prevent any insane person to still shoot someone, but it would probably reduce the amount of damage that can be done.

The obvious middle ground that is being worked on by the liberals in America is the banning assault weaponry and any weaponry that is designed to do heavy damage. Anything meant to make shooty shooty go VERY fast is nothing but a fucking problem. Owner's of these guns cannot form a single defense for having them beyond "its muh 2A right" and "its collectible" and "i like shooty". They also love to claim that the assault weaponry is needed to fend off a corrupt government. Yeah good luck taking out that squad that has millions of dollars of equipment with your AR-15, Cletus.

I do not see how a pistol is any less deadlier than an assault rifle, really. Whether i can just hold my full-auto rifle and let my gun overheat or I quickly tap the trigger on my semi-auto. The damage is done either way and banning ARs are in no way helpful.

Now all high schools have metal detectors in the entrance like as if you're walking inside an Embassy lmaoooo
Plus, house parties are at risk. If anyone and literally anyone can come in with a gun and cause some heat. Next thing you know you Have your house on a 5 star GTA wanted level lol

I can also break the bottle and stab someone. It is really, really easy. The problem is not that everyone is armed. The problem is that someone is armed who is ready to use it and others aren't.

We cant remove all guns from USA. But we can allow people who pass due diligence, psych test and in-dept screening, with no priors of hate extremism to be allowed to carry guns.

I absolutely agree with you here. Banning guns is not the solution, however, restricting them to people who are responsible with this should not be a problem.

There has been 2,487 mass shootings since Sandy Hook. So far in 2020, 140 people have been killed and 583 wounded in 145 mass shootings. These faces are just part of a statistic.
Each image represents a single mass shooting, let that sink in for a minute.
Their death could've been prevented, but gun advocates chose not to.

I doubt that. Banning guns does not mean nobody will die in a violent act.

Criminals don't buy illegal unregistered guns just to shoot innocent people, they do it for their underground business and to use it on other criminals. All of the perpetrators that are responsible for all of these people's death weren't criminals, but people who were thought as normal or odd that snapped. They never had to pay thousands of dollars for an unregistered gun at a black market just to go on a killing spree before they kill themselves, they could just buy them at a local gun store. Stephen Paddock, who opened fire at a 22,000 crowd from a Las Vegas hotel, was a real-estate investor, a property manager, a retired accountant, a normal guy. Those who knew him thought it was unimaginable that he would kill anyone, until he proved them wrong on the night of 1st October 2017.

I don't quite get the argument here. Do you think they would not have killed people if guns were banned? Do you think they would have not bought one from the black market. Sure they did not buy one, because it was easier for them to legally buy one. Just EASIER not IMPOSSIBLE. It also helps that he does not care at all what happened with them. Now, this does sound like a mental health problem and I agree that he should not gotten a gun in the first place. I do not quite know the rules in the US but in Germany you have to provide a psychological evaluation. Sure you can easily get through that test if you are determined to kill. But then again, if you are determined to kill someone with a gun, laws will not stop you.
I also highly doubt that he just "snapped". This is often the portrayal of mental health issues that suddenly become a problem to the public. Truth is, the problem started way earlier, namely at the cause of the mental health problem. You do not go out and kill someone just because you feel like it. It is more often than not planned. These individuals should have received mental healthcare. Stripping the victims of their protection does not help. Instead I would argue that anti-gun advocates chose to let all the people die you pictured in your post.