Guns don't kill people, immigrants kill people and must be banned.

[Greyhound]

Yeah, I know, pretty stupid huh?

Will yesterday's massacre make us finally understand that "NO" doesn't work? In America, "NO" is our first response to anything we don't like, and it keeps not working, yet we keep saying "NO".

We know that when times are hard, crime goes up. We also know that when more money is in the hands of the people lower on the economic scale, they put that money into the economy, and it gets stronger and times are easier, resulting in less crime.
So, do we make sure that that is what happens? NO.

We know that it is far cheaper to prevent illness than to cure it, we know that when people are sick they need to get the care that will help them to heal.
So, do we make preventative health care a priority and ensure that everyone has access to it and the care needed when they do get sick? NO.

We know our environment is sick, and it is us that has made it so, we also know that without a healthy environment we will die.
So, do we take the steps necessary to stop hurting the environment and let it heal? NO.

We know that most drugs are injurious to those that take them to excess, and we know that imprisoning them does not stop them from taking those drugs and that at some point they will get out of prison. We also know that, in the overwhelming majority of cases, these people take these drugs to stop, at least temporarily, their personal pain, and that treatment is very effective.
So, do we apply the known treatment to this problem? NO.

We know there are already over 200 million guns in this country and there is simply no way to ever find them, let alone, take them away, we also know that the overwhelming majority of those guns are never involved in any crimes. We also know that the hundreds (thousands?) of laws we've passed trying to reduce their numbers and eliminate certain types have never worked (fully automatic rifles have been severely restricted or outlawed since the 1930's, yet there are thousands still around), and that when guns are used like yesterday, there were many signs that it, or something like it, was coming and that it could have been prevented.
So, are we going to see some helpful, feasible, steps taken to prevent the next occurrence? NO.

[ORDagnabbit]

1. so what are the numbers for all immigrant crimes vs citizen crimes?

[Greyhound]

2. Didn't read the post, did you? n/t

[INDIA]

3. I think Geraldo, during his near cage match with O'Reilly, said that the crime

rate was lower, which would make sense if you're an immigrant trying to avoid deportation. I know Hispanic/Mexican gangs are a big problem in L.A., but for the most part the immigrant population is just here to make money, and start a new life or go back to Mexico.

I can guarantee you though that the collective Black, Hispanic and Muslim communities of America breathed a sigh of relief yesterday when they found out the shooter wasn't one of their own. I doubt the Korean population will take much heat for this. Although it won't be easy to be an Asian male at VT any time soon.

[Greyhound]

8. It may be lower (who knows with the congenital liars running our government), but

the immigrant title was meant to show how misguided the predominant reactions we have in this country to events like yesterday's massacre are. The overwhelming response to this tragedy, on DU and the radio at least, has been another call to ban/regulate/restrict guns and gun owners, instead of how/why was this allowed to happen?

It makes as much sense as destroying Iraq because a bunch of Saudis attacked us almost six years ago.:shrug:

[piedmont]

4. Yeah, NO guns is clearly different than our usual knee-jerk reaction of "NO"

[valerief]

5. WARS KILL PEOPLE. nt

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. pshaw. ENGLISH MAJORS kill people.

get it right next time.

[Greyhound]

12. You're right, I should've mentioned that.

Just, please don't make me listen to them recite their own poetry.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

14. ahhh. similar to vogons, eh?

that explains even more.

[Greyhound]

15. Absolute worst fate in the galaxy.

:rofl:

[Cleita]

7. This is a difficult problem because how do you deny someone

entrance to a college because they are mentally unbalanced? This could have prevented this tragedy, however, I don't know how it could be done. On the other hand making stricter gun laws could have made it harder for this person to obtain firearms. Having medical care available for this young man could have helped too. When I worked at UCLA, the students had a health care plan at the Medical Center that also included psychiatric help. I don't know if this is still so considering all the cuts the state university system has had to endure these past decades.

[Greyhound]

9. You say that stricter gun laws would make it harder to get a gun.

Do you still live in LA? If so, you should be aware that literally anyone can go into neighborhoods within easy walking distance of the UCLA campus and buy virtually any kind of gun for less money than a person working at In-n-Out makes in one day, one week if you want a full-auto rifle.

In addition, California and LA have some of the strictest gun laws in the western US. Just a couple of weeks ago there was a guy in OC that was found to have an huge arsenal, most of which was illegal in CA, in/under his garage. He was found out entirely by accident.

More laws on guns (the "NO" response I spoke of in the OP) are not the answer, more concern and caring are the only hope we have to prevent this kind of thing.

[Cleita]

10. I haven't lived there in fifteen years.

I don't want to fight about this but let me give you my opinion. If we licensed gun owners and the guns, I think it would weed out people who shouldn't have firearms, either because they are criminals or are nutty. Now doing this will cause fewer illegal weapons to be in circulation so it would be harder for those criminals and nuts to buy weapons.

I used to live in Chile in a mining camp and gun ownership was strictly forbidden. We lived a hundred miles in any direction from the nearest settlement or village in the Atacama desert so we were very isolated. There was a barracks of mounted police who kept order and they were the only ones allowed to have firearms.

I bring this up because there was a certain amount of violence. Miners are a rowdy bunch and there was many a Saturday night fight after an evening of drinking in the local bars where scores over work or girl friends were settled. Imagine if any one of them had guns?

There would have been killings every weekend, which was the reason guns were banned. There were some stabbing incidents but they are not as lethal as gunshots and many people just don't care to get that up close and personal to stabbing someone who might stab you back, so it really did keep any killing down statistically.

[Greyhound]

11. Not going to fight, the simple fact is that it has never worked here and it will

never work here. There would be a chance if we had never had them, but you can't get the toothpaste back in the tube.

Considering Chile's history, I'm not sure it is a good example to use advocating an unarmed citizenry.

[Cleita]

13. This was prior to Pinochet when it was actually a very democratic

country, even more democratic than the USA in many ways.