I Really Hope the news is Wrong...

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

They need eliminate the sale of body armor, using body armor, trading in body armor, owning body armor. Makes it difficult to get a shot on the bad guy, And only bad guy's are wearing body armor around the mall or school district.

this shooter was not wearing body armor. just a vest.

BASE jumpers sometimes wear body armor. Let's eliminate them.

[normiss 619]

Not one of those things would have changed this incident nor prevented it in any way.

This was a responsibility failure by a legal gun owner.

Gun safes are very important. I strongly believe in them.

[kallend 1,619]

Quote

Not one of those things would have changed this incident nor prevented it in any way.

This was a responsibility failure by a legal gun owner.

Gun safes are very important. I strongly believe in them.

OK, add responsibility to secure firearms to the list. Other items would have prevented the V.Tec massacre.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The only thing false is your assertion bans work

FALSE STATEMENT, I haven't claimed that.

Then stop advocating for one

I'm not. Try reading what people write instead of making things up.

I have been reading what you post for years

You are just in denial

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

You are suggesting a false dichotomy.

Just because a solution isn't 100% effective doesn't mean it's useless.

1. require NICS check on ALL transfers.
Seems reasonable.

2. penalty for violations such as straw purchase minimum 20 years no parole.
What about "gifts", can I buy my son his first .22? or is it still "mine" and he gets to use it?

3. mandatory reporting of all mental health problems.
Tough one, i think a "credible threat needs to be there, but lower that threshold and make the means to gett he temporary ban lifted a plain path to follow.

4. registration of guns. Penalty for having unregistered gun 20 years no parole.

I think mandatory training and proof is a better idea.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

The UK hasn't suffered a school-shooting (as far as I'm aware) to the extent of Dunblane since personal handgun possession was banned.

How many did we have before it? Dunblane was pretty much a stand alone event in British history. I don't think the ban had any impact on a recurrence. Also its easy enough to circumvent the hand gun ban while remaining in the law. Long barrels, extended stock, black powder revolvers make handgun ownership still legal. Criminals still have access to SAPs the only ones the ban has caused problems for are those who obey the law.

Quote

Either give up your guns and change your culture

Change 'and' with 'or' and that might be a solution.

If we look at the Bird and Moat shootings you mention on another thread, we can see they used shotguns that aren't banned.

How many more innocent people would be dead if they'd used semi-automatic weapon systems that *are* banned?

I think this is quite a significant point that can't be ignored.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

What's the point if prolific gun ownership is the crux of the problem?

Since prolific gun ownership is not the problem, you have no point

What is the problem then please?

You mentioned a few things earlier, yet other developed nations suffer exactly the same problems you described, as I pointed out, but without frequent massacres.

I believe the other poster proved you incorrect in regards to frequency

I believe the other poster has yet to provide the evidence.

Whether he does or not, it doesn't detract from the simple fact the high frequency of US massacres.

You've still to address my earlier question. Please do so; I'm all ears.

You start from a flawed premise.

Guns are not the issue

Not that you care

Well, could you be so kind as to tell me what you believe is the issue then?

I actually do care; don't be like that...

the complexities of any murder like this would boggle the mind I am sure

He was very troubled kid. mom collected guns,(heard that on the news this am) he was not taking his meds, he was a loner (if reports are correct) His mom is somehow connected to the school (stories are changing so nothing is for sure yet, heck, I even heard she was killed by him at the school. Now I am hearing she was not at the school)

As for the real issue? What triggered him? We will never know for sure. But we as a people do not accept not knowing very easily. So, it is guns. Somehow we need to have some kind of definitive answer. Well, that reason, at least those of us who could never do something so terrible, will EVER have the ability to understand. If you can understand this then you could, maybe, repeat this (not aimed at you)

This person had mental problems. Looks like he should not have had access to guns. But how do, in the end, we know which person will snap like this? It does not, despite your assertions, happen that often but still banning guns, ammo, magazines and the like is all that can be discussed. That to me is sad.

You want an answer, I understand that. But there is a good chance, no matter what actions are taken because of this, it will happen again, some place, some time, some day

Banning guns to enhance a feeling of security will not stop it

Banning guns will make such massacres in the future more difficult to conduct.

We can only imagine what the killer might've done if he couldn't access firearms so readily, but then if he had difficulty getting his hands on such firearms, wouldn't the likelihood of such a mind-bendingly horrific massacre be therefore less likely??

I'm not implying a national ban will completely eradicate the frequent mass killings America is suffering, but it would reduce them significantly, and change the current perceptions on the necessity to bear arms through the significant reduction.

Wouldn't you and future generations prefer to live in a society where there isn't a perceived need to bear arms?

Whilst it's a poor comparison being that the UK doesn't have a gun culture anything like the USA, our last couple of mass murders involved shotguns that aren't banned.

But significantly, they didn't involve semi-automatic weapons that *are* banned.

Guns are very much a big part of the problem because in virtually all of the incidents it's guns that are being used!

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Time for a different track. 30 years of "ban guns" hasn't worked. This is an uncomfortable thought to many because it goes to the core of beliefs. Religious-level beliefs.

Let's think of other ideas. But for the time being, since we are no good at preventing this stuff from happening let us start planning what we can do to mitigate it.

What's the point if prolific gun ownership is the crux of the problem?

Because it isn't the problem. When you start out blinded by reality, anything else that comes from that is pure fantasy.

What is the problem then?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[kallend 1,619]

Quote

O

Time for a different track. 30 years of "ban guns" hasn't worked. This is an uncomfortable thought to many because it goes to the core of beliefs. Religious-level beliefs.

Where have guns been banned for 30 years, counselor? Certainly not in the USA. We have the most lax gun rules in the developed world, and the most gun murders to go along with it.

“The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins" according to a well known Justice.

As far as I am concerned the right of crazies to have guns ends when crazies shoot little children and their teachers dead.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,619]

Telling!

qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/school-killings-around-the-world4.png?w=1024&h=1525

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Let's run down a partial list of laws that the Connecticut shooter violated:

CT has a law that says that says that no person under 21 may possess a gun. The shooter was 20. He had three guns. He didn't have a permit to possess these guns. He possessed the guns at a public school. He did not get any background check or go through the statutory waiting period. He broke into the school - defeating the security measures.

As a matter of law, we can therefore presume that he had no guns because the it was against the law for any of this.

There were laws that were supposed to prevent this from happening. They didn't work. The activites were banned. So what do we do? Give them an extra-special double-secret banning? Or do we start to approach things differently to come up with different solutions.

This isn't particle physics - where you can keep doing the same thing over and over and expect different results. When something is not working - and gun free zones are not working - then another strategy should be considered.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 1,619]

Quote

Let's run down a partial list of laws that the Connecticut shooter violated:

Lame. Laws that aren't enforced may as well not exist.

Like speed limits on the Dan Ryan Expressway in Chicago. Limit is 55 or 45, people drive 80. State cops just ignore them.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

Let's run down a partial list of laws that the Connecticut shooter violated:

CT has a law that says that says that no person under 21 may possess a gun. The shooter was 20. He had three guns. He didn't have a permit to possess these guns. He possessed the guns at a public school. He did not get any background check or go through the statutory waiting period. He broke into the school - defeating the security measures.

As a matter of law, we can therefore presume that he had no guns because the it was against the law for any of this.

There were laws that were supposed to prevent this from happening. They didn't work. The activites were banned. So what do we do? Give them an extra-special double-secret banning? Or do we start to approach things differently to come up with different solutions.

This isn't particle physics - where you can keep doing the same thing over and over and expect different results. When something is not working - and gun free zones are not working - then another strategy should be considered.

There are very strict laws for private ownership of automatic weapons in this country, but you never hear much (If at all) about these weapons being used in mass public shootings; I wonder why that is?

[jgoose71 0]

Quote

This isn't particle physics - where you can keep doing the same thing over and over and expect different results. When something is not working - and gun free zones are not working - then another strategy should be considered.

Whole heartedly agree. If I was going to go on a rampage and wanted maximum body count, where would I go? Why to a place that I know no one else is packing.

Remove the ban on fire arms for adults in public schools, ask teachers if they want to volunteer to be vetted and trained to carry fire arms, and let them be the first line of defense. If a shooter comes to school, they are in the cross hairs anyway. Give them a fighting chance.

Also, if the teacher is carrying heat, do you think little Johnny is as likely to lip off?

I seem to remember a shooter that tried to rampage in a mall in Utah. An off duty policeman was carrying and on scene. The shooter didn't get that far....

Once news gets out that starting a shootout in a school will likely have the same results as starting a shoot out in a police station, I'm sure "nut cases" will start picking different targets.

My $.02

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

3. mandatory reporting of all mental health problems.

Who is going to report it?

1. Federal law prohibits the mental health professional from reporting it.

2. Mentally ill people see themselves as OK. It's the other people who are bad and they are making the individual feel bad.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

What's the point if prolific gun ownership is the crux of the problem?

Since prolific gun ownership is not the problem, you have no point

What is the problem then please?

You mentioned a few things earlier, yet other developed nations suffer exactly the same problems you described, as I pointed out, but without frequent massacres.

I believe the other poster proved you incorrect in regards to frequency

I believe the other poster has yet to provide the evidence.

Whether he does or not, it doesn't detract from the simple fact the high frequency of US massacres.

You've still to address my earlier question. Please do so; I'm all ears.

You start from a flawed premise.

Guns are not the issue

Not that you care

Well, could you be so kind as to tell me what you believe is the issue then?

I actually do care; don't be like that...

the complexities of any murder like this would boggle the mind I am sure

He was very troubled kid. mom collected guns,(heard that on the news this am) he was not taking his meds, he was a loner (if reports are correct) His mom is somehow connected to the school (stories are changing so nothing is for sure yet, heck, I even heard she was killed by him at the school. Now I am hearing she was not at the school)

As for the real issue? What triggered him? We will never know for sure. But we as a people do not accept not knowing very easily. So, it is guns. Somehow we need to have some kind of definitive answer. Well, that reason, at least those of us who could never do something so terrible, will EVER have the ability to understand. If you can understand this then you could, maybe, repeat this (not aimed at you)

This person had mental problems. Looks like he should not have had access to guns. But how do, in the end, we know which person will snap like this? It does not, despite your assertions, happen that often but still banning guns, ammo, magazines and the like is all that can be discussed. That to me is sad.

You want an answer, I understand that. But there is a good chance, no matter what actions are taken because of this, it will happen again, some place, some time, some day

Banning guns to enhance a feeling of security will not stop it

Banning guns will make such massacres in the future more difficult to conduct.

We can only imagine what the killer might've done if he couldn't access firearms so readily, but then if he had difficulty getting his hands on such firearms, wouldn't the likelihood of such a mind-bendingly horrific massacre be therefore less likely??

I'm not implying a national ban will completely eradicate the frequent mass killings America is suffering, but it would reduce them significantly, and change the current perceptions on the necessity to bear arms through the significant reduction.

Wouldn't you and future generations prefer to live in a society where there isn't a perceived need to bear arms?

Whilst it's a poor comparison being that the UK doesn't have a gun culture anything like the USA, our last couple of mass murders involved shotguns that aren't banned.

But significantly, they didn't involve semi-automatic weapons that *are* banned.

Guns are very much a big part of the problem because in virtually all of the incidents it's guns that are being used!

THERE WAS ALREADY GUN CONTROL IN THIS INSTANCE. HE WAS DENIED BUYING A GUN AT THE GUN SHOP. HE STOLE A GUN FROM IS MOM. BANNING GUNS IS NOT THE SOLUTION AS THERE ARE TOO MANY GUNS OUT THERE THAT CAN BE STOLEN.

[regulator 0]

Quote

Quote

Let's run down a partial list of laws that the Connecticut shooter violated:

Lame. Laws that aren't enforced may as well not exist.

Like speed limits on the Dan Ryan Expressway in Chicago. Limit is 55 or 45, people drive 80. State cops just ignore them.

-----------------------------------------------------------

You are very correct. Laws that arent enforced do as much good as the people that circumvent those laws to get the results they choose.... and so how does adding MORE laws help your cause?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Let's run down a partial list of laws that the Connecticut shooter violated:

Lame. Laws that aren't enforced may as well not exist.

Like speed limits on the Dan Ryan Expressway in Chicago. Limit is 55 or 45, people drive 80. State cops just ignore them.

-----------------------------------------------------------

You are very correct. Laws that arent enforced do as much good as the people that circumvent those laws to get the results they choose.... and so how does adding MORE laws help your cause?

You are wasting your breath.

[kallend 1,619]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Let's run down a partial list of laws that the Connecticut shooter violated:

Lame. Laws that aren't enforced may as well not exist.

Like speed limits on the Dan Ryan Expressway in Chicago. Limit is 55 or 45, people drive 80. State cops just ignore them.

-----------------------------------------------------------

You are very correct. Laws that arent enforced do as much good as the people that circumvent those laws to get the results they choose.... and so how does adding MORE laws help your cause?

Who suggested more laws?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,619]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Let's run down a partial list of laws that the Connecticut shooter violated:

Lame. Laws that aren't enforced may as well not exist.

Like speed limits on the Dan Ryan Expressway in Chicago. Limit is 55 or 45, people drive 80. State cops just ignore them.

-----------------------------------------------------------

You are very correct. Laws that arent enforced do as much good as the people that circumvent those laws to get the results they choose.... and so how does adding MORE laws help your cause?

You are wasting your breath.

He sure is, because his post was irrelevant.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Quote

3. mandatory reporting of all mental health problems.

Who is going to report it?

1. Federal law prohibits the mental health professional from reporting it.

2. Mentally ill people see themselves as OK. It's the other people who are bad and they are making the individual feel bad.

Actually, there are many mentally ill people who realize they are mentally ill and choose to seek treatment for themselves. It's already a difficult decision to make for oneself; mandatory reporting of all mental health problems would probably greatly reduce the number of people who choose to seek help.

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

Quote

Quote

3. mandatory reporting of all mental health problems.

Who is going to report it?

1. Federal law prohibits the mental health professional from reporting it.

2. Mentally ill people see themselves as OK. It's the other people who are bad and they are making the individual feel bad.

Actually, there are many mentally ill people who realize they are mentally ill and choose to seek treatment for themselves. It's already a difficult decision to make for oneself; mandatory reporting of all mental health problems would probably greatly reduce the number of people who choose to seek help.

Of course there are some, actually many, individuals with MI who seek treatment. Psychiatry is a very lucrative field. My point is that the ones who snap don't seek treatment and if they do the professional is not allowed to reveal their diagnosis.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[kallend 1,619]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The only thing false is your assertion bans work

FALSE STATEMENT, I haven't claimed that.

Then stop advocating for one

I'm not. Try reading what people write instead of making things up.

I have been reading what you post for years

You are just in denial

I've been reading your posts for years. You repeatedly make the exact same LIE and when challenged to back it up, you can't.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

3. mandatory reporting of all mental health problems.

Actually, there are many mentally ill people who realize they are mentally ill and choose to seek treatment for themselves. It's already a difficult decision to make for oneself; mandatory reporting of all mental health problems would probably greatly reduce the number of people who choose to seek help.

Just imagine the effect we'd see if HIPPA regs were pulled.

People in the process of divorce would avoid therapy, knowing that it would used against them by their spouse for child custody, or for fault (are there states that haven't gone to no fault yet?). These are people who tend to be in a lousy mental state - discouraging them from working out issues can only increase the violence.

People in jobs where others' safety is an issue could be suspended or fired. This would include pilots, cops, teachers, and who knows how much further it can go. Again, in order to "protect" us from the crazies, we ensure a lower state of mental health in these industries.

[mpohl 1]

Very powerful speech by President Obama in Newtown.

Let's just say: if we need a sex offender registry, we surely need a gun owner registry!!!

For I like to know if my neighbor has an AR-15 or AK-47 in his closet.

Quote

Quote

Quote

3. mandatory reporting of all mental health problems.

Actually, there are many mentally ill people who realize they are mentally ill and choose to seek treatment for themselves. It's already a difficult decision to make for oneself; mandatory reporting of all mental health problems would probably greatly reduce the number of people who choose to seek help.

Just imagine the effect we'd see if HIPPA regs were pulled.

People in the process of divorce would avoid therapy, knowing that it would used against them by their spouse for child custody, or for fault (are there states that haven't gone to no fault yet?). These are people who tend to be in a lousy mental state - discouraging them from working out issues can only increase the violence.

People in jobs where others' safety is an issue could be suspended or fired. This would include pilots, cops, teachers, and who knows how much further it can go. Again, in order to "protect" us from the crazies, we ensure a lower state of mental health in these industries.