Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Been There, Taught That]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070417/wl_nm/japan_shooting_repeat_dc

TOKYO (Reuters) - The mayor of the Japanese city of Nagasaki was shot and critically wounded on Tuesday, officials said.

And who's under the gun for the deed?

[P]olice have arrested a member of a criminal syndicate as a suspect.

But why did this happen?

The motive for the shooting was unclear, but Shiroo was upset at the city's handling of a traffic accident four years ago in which Shiroo's car was damaged as it passed by a public works construction site, public broadcaster NHK said.

Well, what about...?

Japan has very strict gun control laws and firearms are mostly in the hands of "yakuza" gangsters or hunters.

...

The police told a news conference they had arrested Tetsuya Shiroo, 59, a senior member of gang affiliated with Japan's largest crime syndicate, the Yamaguchi Gumi, on suspicion of attempted murder, and confiscated a revolver he had with him.

...

I know this sort of thing could happen anywhere, but doesn't it strike you that that realization is just the best reason why guns should not be considered the problem when, as in every other situation--that's one hundred percent of the experience of living--people are the problem?
Also the solution; it's just too bad others have to die to prove it for them.

Same thing at Virginia Tech. No country, no group, just a guy who was responsible for what happened, and now he's among the dead--out of people's misery, if you will.

I could say more, but say no more.

[Cerebroden]

nuh uh....you're just wrong. stooopid white man. Don't you know guns are the problem.

[Scouse Mouse]

How many people are killed by firearms each year in Japan? And (If you want to include all nutters) how many were killed by other means?

I'm willing to bet my left nut that as a % of population it is a LOT less than any country with relaxed gun laws.

[Cerebroden]

question....

If you decided that you were going to just start shooting. Would you rather do it in a place that no one else was allowed to have guns or in an area where you never knew if atleast a significant portion of other people could shoot back?

[Bibbitybop]

Before this flame war gets out of hand, let's make a point about guns in the US:

People kill people. Guns only make it easier. The US is flooded with guns and it is impossible to outlaw them. Guns should be regulated to keep them out of the wrong hands, but that doesn't work well. Responsible people should be able to have legal access guns in the US because the irresponsible people will always have access to them.

And many citizens don't trust the government enough to give up their weapons.

[Cerebroden]

"fear the government that fears your guns"

"guns don't kill people, people kill people"

"If you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns"

[jdog2050]

[lastat06513]

I live in a small city where they had been at least 135 homicides since January 1, both reported and unreported cases. That is a huge number...
And there is an area that is deemed off-limits because it is so dangerous.

Should the US ban public weapons ownership?
To me, yes.

But many people feel that guns are a 2nd amendment guarantee; not true.

The second amendment only allows the establishment of an armed militia for the protection of the state, thus guns were needed to arm this militia (which is the forerunner of the National Guard). But since the government has a full-time military establishment (something that wasn't common until the civil war), guns are not really necessary for "national defense" because private citizens are not responsible for their own defense anymore, this responsibility falls squarely on the shoulders of the army, reserves and police.

Why do people still own guns here?

The answer; a well-paid, well-organized lobbying force.

[Natalia]

My God.

Clearly talking sense with most Americans about gun control is a waste of time.

What's the bloody point?

Take a look at the rest of the world. One shooting in Japan does not equal the horrific number of gun deaths in the United States.

How long are we supposed to keep feeling sorry for imbeciles who support the ownership of guns even in the wake of such a tragedy?

[gsxr750r]

[Bibbitybop]

[JeJuJitsu]

People!

Guns don't kill people, KrazyKoreans kill people.

[gsxr750r]

[n3ptne]

The Constitutional Amendment which gaurantees the rights of [American] citizens to bear arms is completely arbitrary at this point in history.

It was written with the clear intention that should the American government ever become totalitarian, the people would have the ability to rise up and wage yet another revolution, in a bid for freedom.

The problem is that, because of modern technology, it doesn't matter if American's (or any citizen in a modern country) are legally allowed to carry assault rifles, and rocket launchers, because the ability to rise up against the government is completely out of the realm of logistic possibility.

So, as a result, the issue of gun control, cannot, and should not be approached from the perspective of a Constitutional gaurantee.

The fact of the matter is that lax gun laws result in higher gun deaths.

Do people kill each other without guns? Sure. That isn't the issue.

Would less people die every year if guns were prohibitied in countries like the US? Of course.

Because of these apparent realities, this issue needs to be addressed from the perspective of whether or not the general populace as a whole, is more, or less, safe guarded by either the absolute prohibition of fire arms, or their severe restriction, and it is impossible to make any argument, using any statistics, that does not utterly coincide with the answer of, "Certainly".

The chances of you, an untrained fat slob of a bastard, who bought a gun at Walmart, using it to "protect your family", from a professional, and more often than not, perpetual, criminal is so low that it's ridiculous. In fact, you have a much higher chance of wounding, or killing, yourself, or a family member while you are trying to do so.

Given this line of thinking, I have a hard time finding a legitimate reason for the legality of firearms (other than the purposes of hunting, which, even so, could be highly restricted, with owners being required to keep arms in armories when not being used), and am glad to be living in a country like Korea, where there aren't any.

However, a blanket ban is not feasible at this point in a country like the US. Tough restrictions and mandatory training, is.

There is absolutely no rational argument otherwise. The Constitution is a tired and worn document that, truth be told, desperately needs to be abandoned and reworked from scratch to fit in with modern reality.

[n3ptne]