I know, right? They should totes crack down on weapons like they have on drugs, 'cause we all know they were super good at that.

love that quote. It's funny how people think that intent to kill goes away if you remove access to firearms.

Suzanna Gratia-Hupp would probably want to have a word with you.

someone with the intent to harm groups of people will find a way to harm groups of people. Look up the Akihabara massacre. Making it difficult to acquire weapons harms only law abiding citizens. It's a band aid fix for a deep wound.

Can't help fearing the crazies out there. I honestly don't want to speculate, but my initial point is that this tragedy didn't occur because the killer got his hands on guns. It occurred because the killer was sick enough to execute it.

ah...I was referring to simple purchasing online, not looking for deals. I probably should have been a bit more specific and said decent cheap ammo is .30-.35 cents.

I think you might have the wrong impression of what the government is actually capable of. I don't want the government to reduce the guns in circulation. The guns aren't the problem. Owning a gun doesn't make me feel safe. I'm not afraid of guns, I'm afraid of the people who use them. If they didn't have them, I…

my point is that it's not the tool the killer uses, it's the killer that's the issue. The guns aren't to blame. Pipe bombs are one possibility. Had he used those, would you blame home depot for making pipes easily available? Say he waited for people to exit the theater and he drove a vehicle straight through the…

Like I said in the last post, you can't effectively do that. Just like with drugs. I think you missed the last sentence of my previous comment.

where are you getting .223 for 3 cents a round?

I like how you redirect from the points being made.

because people will get their hands on guns. Say you had it your way and you made guns illegal, all you accomplished was making guns illegal. People still break the law. Humans are very very clever animals, and they figure out how to effectively get around things.

the absence of guns doesn't curb gun violence. Reminds me of the cartoon where bank robbers stop at the door of a bank because a sign says, "no guns allowed."

like I said, I can only speculate, but I'm afraid to think of what he could have done with a bag full of pipe bombs.

as much as the car he took to the theater did, or the ticket of admission. I can only speculate, but considering what he did in his apartment, I think it's farfetched to assume that if he didn't have guns, he wouldn't have harmed people.

didn't read all of that, but you might want to reword "the recent massacre that happened due to poor gun control practices" to "the recent massacre that happened due to a sick individual." "Poor gun control practices" is a variable, but this tragedy didn't happened because of that variable. Saying he did this…

which sounds a lot like placing blame on easily accessible ammunition. Like I said, it's silly to sensationalize the bulk purchasing of ammo.

I'm not sure why you're arguing that point. My initial comment had nothing really to do with that.

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but my understanding is that the military uses fully automatic (and burst) for suppression more so than for killing. I'm not in the military so I don't know.

this type of stuff seems pretty common in articles regarding this tragedy. But honestly, I don't think there should be a ban on firearms (won't use the term "assault rifle") but I do think they need to change the procedure to purchasing guns. I'm not talking about waiting periods, but a better screening process. …