# This one is worn out. I guess not completely.



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

We need to restrict guns. The US of A has too many guns in the wrong hands and this should be stopped.


----------



## lumberdog (Jun 15, 2009)

You can restrict guns all you want, and those wrong hands are still going to have them.Gun restriction is not the answer.


----------



## a1Jim (Aug 9, 2008)

It seems Those who would always have guns if guns where restricted are those who break the law any way. perhaps bigger sentences for those who have illegal guns. Even with more strict laws in place I'm afraid the last two incidents still would have happen.I really don't know what the answer is.


----------



## OnlyJustME (Nov 22, 2011)

Give everyone a gun. Then at least the good guys that follow the laws can protect themselves. I think there would be an increase of shootings for a few years but then it would drop off drastically since all those would be shooters will have been shot already.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

ME: I think that they tried that during the civil war, and that did not work. Ban guns.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Lumberdog: Then what is the answer?


----------



## OnlyJustME (Nov 22, 2011)

Banning guns wont work. It has been done before in Washington DC and there were still shootings all the time there. 
If they can't get guns they will use knives or pipe bombs or chemicals. There will always be something to use to do this evil. The world trade centers were brought down with box cutters. As long as there is evil in the world there is nothing that can be done to prevent these tragedies.


----------



## cutworm (Oct 2, 2010)

Myself? I think better parenting as a start. Kids raise there selves The TV is the babysitter. The problem is that there is an infinite number of ways to commit these terrible crimes. Remove one and it's still infinite. I pray for the families.


----------



## Ken90712 (Sep 2, 2009)

It's not the guns, it is the poor values from the people committing the crimes. They will get them no matter. We are just too tolerant of criminals; adapt tougher laws and shorter death penalty sentences for horrific crimes like rape of children and murder. Why is that when gang members get in shootouts with police we ever let them out of jail? They have made they're statement that they do not care and will not follow the rules of society. Our prisons have become big business is why. Just my 2 cents worth. 
Having guns in my house to protect my family is every American right, even though the government is trying to take that away.
I did a paper in collage about gun control in Florida. When the citizens were allowed to carry them in cars as long as the chamber was empty the politicians cried. Stating, "they're would be so many more shootings."* Result's: Shootings went down, criminals got worried that everyone was going to shoot them or shoot back.*


----------



## GaryC (Dec 31, 2008)

I want to ban spoons. They made me fat. And Chevy pickups…they ran over the dog. Ban all green veggies, they give me gas. Ban all food coloring and sugar. They make kids go crazy. Ban the loud music and digital games cuz kids don't exercise any more. Ban all motorcycles so we won't have any more gangs. Also ban the use of the colors Red and Blue…gang colors. Every once in a while, some goofy cop somewhere beats the crap out of a purp…..lets get rid of all cops. And, no more power tools or sharp tools. They cut off fingers and other serious damage to bodies. And, from now on…no one gets to have a brain. Brains think and come up with bad ideas like shooting innocent people. NO BRAINS for anyone any longer


----------



## Tedstor (Mar 12, 2011)

In the grand scheme of things, the US is a safe, civilized place to live….....today. Most of us currently live in safe communities and can count on the police/government to provide a reasonable level of protection. So it might make sense to ban/restrict (non-hunting)guns…....today. Afterall, who needs a gun to protect themselves in a county (like mine), that has virtually no violent crime?

*BUT-* what about ten years from now? Or 50 years? What if our fed/state/loccal governments go bankrupt, or otherwise can no longer be counted on? Heck, what happens if the government BECOMES a threat (see Syria for the most recent example). Then the 2nd amendment might make more sense to the gun control advocates. Of course, if you write off the 2nd amendment today, its highly unlikely we'll ever get it back…....even if our society becomes less civilized than it is currently.

I personally believe that gun ownership is a sacred liberty…......and a huge liability. I'm glad I have the right to bear arms. But I also realize that my right does have a catch. I also have the responsibility to keep my weapons locked in a metal cabinet and take all other reasonable measures to ensure my children and/or burglar cannot access them. In this case, this 20yo was in possession of two handguns. Since you must be 21yo to own a handgun, he obviously did not procure them legally. I'm willing to bet his 24yo brother is missing a couple handguns.


----------



## JJohnston (May 22, 2009)

Did you notice that when alcohol was banned, how the rate of drinking/drunkenness/alcoholism was zero? Pretty cool, huh?

You know, that gives me an idea: Instead of having a "War on Drugs", why don't we just ban drugs? Then there wouldn't be any!

Wait, wait, wait….I just had my finest inspiration yet. No one wants murder, right? So we ban it. Think what would happen. No murders.


----------



## JGM0658 (Aug 16, 2011)

Madts, Texas and Florida have concealed carry permits, you rarely if ever see this kind of news in these states since the laws were passed.

Here in Mexico, guns are banned, we had approximately 100000 deaths in the last 6 years because of the "drug war". Here only criminals have guns. The only one who gets the full weight of the gun laws here in Mexico is the honest citizen who is trying to protect him or herself. Criminals do not care nor have they anything to loose by going to jail.

Banning guns is not the solution, nor is it passing laws that restrict the ownership of said guns to honest people. What has to be worked out is how to prevent criminals and unstable people from getting them. This is a difficult situation, how to reach a balance between freedom and security. Unfortunately there will always be someone that will break the laws because of greed and will make guns available to those who are willing to break the law. Until someone far brighter than me comes out with a solution, I rather have the freedom to own a gun and at least have a chance to defend myself without risking the rest of my life in jail, than be at the mercy of a criminal because I know that if I kill him I am going to jail because of the ban on guns.


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

To all those gun fanatics who supports your local coward who murders the innocent.


----------



## toeachhisown (Eddie) (Mar 30, 2011)

rosebudjim you are right cowards who murders the innocent, its not the guns no more than the car that is driven by a drunk but the person


----------



## crank49 (Apr 7, 2010)

"bigotry is the root of all evil"

I agree.

And the word bigot is defined by Merriam-Webster as "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions"

Like the belief that any law, limitation, or restriction policy would have had any effect whatsoever on a lunatic that would go an kill his own mother and a room full of innocent children is pure stupidity.


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

eddie: To the brave - thank you.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

I disagree and agree with most of you. Tomorrow is a new day and I will get after it with you.


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

What do you want to stop, school shootings or gun violence?

If you want to stop school shootings, the solution is easy…you give a certain number of teachers and/or administrators on a given campus a gun and you train them in its use. Whether concealed or kept in a gun safe - perhaps unlocked centrally by admin during a "shelter in place" lock-down - you train those people very well in its use. It wouldn't take many…just the public knowledge that certain people In a school are equipped to protect the kids.

Short of that the only solution is metal detectors in all schools…and that's expensive.

But if people knew that somebody like the principal of a school had a gun, for example, then that would be a deterrent to these disasters.

People who use guns like that on innocent others are cowards…so lets see how brave they are when they KNOW somebody on a school campus might challenge them.

If you want to stop gun violence, then you better hope the world ends on the 21st like the Mayans said, because only then will you prevent it.


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

BTW, I am a high school teacher. What happened in Connecticut can happen in my school tomorrow, and honestly, with the amount of security in our schools, especially suburban schools, it's a miracle that there hasn't been MORE of these things happen as there has been.

My school is open campus, people coming and going freely through any of 30+ exterior doors. And as many kids as I seem to piss off, it's amazing that I've never been threatened with violent behavior.


----------



## Christophret (Dec 2, 2012)

Horror. Plain and simple.
My wife is a Special Education Teacher. Deals with troubled every day.
Sure thay have metal detectors…that are unplugged beacuse running them would be to costly.
I can agree first hand to what cosmicsniper has said: its a miracle this doesn't happen more.
Vigilance is a must.

We put air marshals on planes to deter terrorism after 911, perhaps it's time to patrol what is closer to home; the schools.

There will never be a total ban on guns, get used to it.
I'm sorry and i know its hard to swallow but, This is the cost of a free society.


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

It's an extremely sad day today. My heart and prayers go out to all the families envolved. Such a tradgedy. I don't know what has gone so wrong in our society that is creating such confused and insane individuals to do such a horrible thing. The last thing I can even think of doing right now is getting in an argument about gun control….


----------



## Mip (Sep 16, 2012)

Tedstor, the guns belonged to his mother, which she probably obtained through legal means. Ken90712, I agree with what you're saying, the morals of this country are going downhill. Look at all the violent video games for sale. I heard about one teenager shooting two of his friends dead, only to realize that they were not getting up after being shot. He was asked why he shot them, and he said, "they get up in the cartoons, so I figured my friends would get up after I shot them". And this was a teenager who said this! This country and the world are going through a tough time with all the violence going on right now; I just wish, like all of you, that I had the answer for this, but I don't. My prayers go out to the families of the victums.


----------



## Jon1094 (May 12, 2012)

Due to my profession I have studied this in depth and attended many seminars on the subject-I say this (humble opinion of course):

If my daughter was one that had been murdered I admit I would probably side with the gun ban crowd. I probably wouldn't be able to help myself and I would need some sort of immediate remedy to feel like I had some control. But being in law enforcement allows me somewhat different perspective on the why's, how's, and all the other questions we are forced to keep asking our society.

Through the military and my current profession I have seen death and pain more than I ever would care to. I see a lot of other veterans on this site and am sure some of you can relate. Usually it is the innocent that are hurt and, in my experience, the bad people that get to enjoy all the freedoms and safeguards that our society provides. It is difficult to watch and even more difficult to be a part of that "system" that appears so unjust.

That being said, I am of the opinion that firearms or gun control are but a distraction of a much more sinister issue. Regarding firearms, the technological advances made in the past 100 years have done almost nothing to increase the lethality of firearms. The 1911 pistol (I believe created in 1908; I know some gun guy is going to correct me) held about seven rounds and fired in semi-automatic mode. The Browning automatic rifle (1915ish - .308 caliber - 10 rounds), Thomson sub-machine gun (1919ish - .45 caliber - 20-100 rounds).

The point is that the lethality of firearms has remained steady. The main difference now, in technology, is the weight reduction and a greater ease in reloading capability. Magazine capacity has only slightly increased in general.

School shootings, public shootings, usually ending in suicide are a relatively new phenomenon. Something has changed in the last ten to fifteen years and it hasn't been firearms. Col. Dave Grossman has written several fascinating books on the subject "On Combat", "On Killing", "Terror at Beslan" and a few others. What can be seen in studies is that violence has drastically increased with the availability of television and video games. These studies have been shown to correlate the recent rise in violent activity with the prevalence of the horrific movie genre and violent gaming industry.

I remember watching Gary Cooper and others killing people in movies but the messages of movies were different. Cooper played a sheriff in High Noon where he killed multiple people but he was reluctantly fighting against bad guys who were out to do harm. He was clearly wearing the white hat. Older movies show the good guys fighting the bad and draw a clear distinction between them.

I admit that I am a big fan of the man with no name series, but the hero, Clint Eastwood, is a bad guy. Newer movies have taken this even further. Most movies now are "root for the bad guy" films. The hero does terrible things for the sake of doing terrible things. They hunt down, admittedly bad people, and kill them but, in so doing, commit atrocities themselves. These atrocities are considered necessary to get things done and justified by the "even worse" bad guys. One only need watch shows like Boondock Saints, Reservoir Dogs, Saw, or Natural Born Killers to see this change. Some are outright snuff films.

Video games are much much worse. There are main stream games like Grand Theft Auto where you play the main character, an ex-con just released from prison. The point of the game is to complete a storyline that is rife with graphic displays of drugs, sex, and murder. During the game you steal every vehicle you find and kill the police who inevitably attempt to stop you. The more police and citizens you kill the more points you rack up.

Games nowadays are based on killing everything you see. The killing is more insidious because the gamer plays a bad person likely killing police and innocent people for extra points. The kill count is what is important and the more gruesome way things are killed the more the in-game reward.

Check out these games to understand what kids are playing: Postal 2, Grand Theft Auto 3, and Manhunt. There is even a game that replays the Columbine massacre albeit it is not mainstream.

Correlation does not always mean causation but one cannot overlook the almost perfect correlation between workplace violence and the video game culture.

On a side-note, I recently attended training where a psychiatrist spoke about the "me culture". An interesting topic, his theory is that kids are told from a young age that they are wonderful and cannot fail. Everyone gets a trophy and a chance to play so that nobody ever has their feelings hurt or their self esteem damaged. When they get a bit older, late high-school and early adult-hood, they have never developed the coping mechanisms against real life situations that previous generations have and they "lose it".

I don't mean to debate anyone or debase arguments made against firearms from other members here. I respect everyone's opinion. Just my 2-cents.


----------



## davidmicraig (Nov 21, 2009)

They started pat downs in some movie theaters after the massacre during the showing of the Batman movie, not that long ago. Next time, it could be in a grocery store, a hardware store, a restaurant, a public street, etc. We can install metal detectors, enforce more police, and we can make it impossible to buy anything more dangerous than a piece of gum without a license, background check, letter of recommendation, etc.

And this will still happen.

We live in a society of people who dehumanize each other every day. Go into a mall, restaurant, school, any public place, and listen to how we all interact with each other. When a person makes a mistake, listen to the string of insults that come out of someone's mouth. Go on youtube, amazon, rotten tomatoes (a movie review site) and read the dialogue when someone posts something. People don't say "I disagree" or "nice attempt at creating a how-to video," you get comments like "You are stupid."

I couldn't give an explanation to my kids about the "why" because the reasons are varied. What I did tell them is that every interaction they make in life, plants a seed. We can build people up or we can tear someone apart. Getting rid of guns won't help if we don't work on getting rid of hate first.

I want to be clear on this, I am not justifying these atrocities. What happened was horrible, I do not feel that those parents "got what they deserved." I do not believe that the people who commit such crimes should deserve mercy strictly because someone was mean to them at the office or picked on them at school. What I am saying is that our day to day interactions do have an impact. That we can make a difference in someone's life (or maybe lives) by what seeds we plant. That maybe we should stop looking at these events as a problem but a symptom and look at the other symptoms of violence in our society and target the real problem. That we should look at the bitter hatred, the increased anger, aimed at society and sometimes towards someones self worth. To ask ourselves why that anger and hatred is there and work on correcting it in our own little ways.

My heart goes out to those families as I hold my own kids close in gratitude.

David


----------



## JoeinGa (Nov 26, 2012)

cosmicsniper… My hats off to you sir! ANYBODY who is a teacher today is WAAAAY up there in my book. I salute you for what you do!


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

We have speed limits and people still speed
shoplifting is against the law, people still so it.
having a fully automatic weapon is already illegal, people still have them.
in case you didn't already know this, shooting another person is already against the law.

how can any reasonably intelligent person believe more gun laws will stop violence?


----------



## DonOtt (Jul 10, 2009)

This is such a sad and tragic event and the fact that it happened just before Christmas makes it even worse. I can't imagine the pain and sorrow those families are feeling right now.

I will tread very lightly in my comments as I am from Canada and our laws and views towards gun ownership are a little different here. If I say anything that offends you, I apologize in advance.

Gun control is a multi-headed beast that has good and bad attached to it. To me, gun control is all about not allowing those who shouldn'have guns get them or get their hands on them. I know that if someone wants a gun bad enough, they will always find a way to get one, even here. Everything is available for a price. The average citizen should go through hoops and loops and have an extensive background check done on them before weapon is handed over. Once a weapon is in someone's possession, care must be taken so that someone can't get easy access to it. Ammo and weapon should be stored separately. Trigger guards, padlocks and locked cases must be used.

Someone is going to have to ask tough questions and decisions are going to have to be made that will piss off a lot of people. What was the mother doing owning an assault weapon and why did he have such easy access to it and the other guns? Start with these and go from there.

We live in a different society than most of us on here grew up in as kids. We all grew up with violent cartoons, movies and tv shows. Bad things have always happened to good people and every time it happens, we ask 'why' it happened. My kids have grown up with the violent games and violent movies and tv and none have gone off their rocker. Please don't take the easy way out and try to put the blame on games, tv and movies. If you continue to do that the problem will never be fixed. The cause runs much deeper than that.

Criminals will always have guns…period. Nothing we can do about that. Make the consequences much, much tougher for crimes. Stop being easy on criminals (speaking about both countries here).....

Okay, if I keep going I'll go off on a side rant so I will stop here. My heart aches to think about those families today. You, as a nation have a lot of soul searching to do and I don't envy you. Every time one of these horrible events take place, it makes me wonder about your 'right to bear arms'. Maybe it's time to rethink that….


----------



## WoodenFrog (Jun 4, 2010)

Ban Guns!!! Make the streets safe for a Government *TAKEOVER!!!!*


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

Thank you, Joe.

@Dakremer - The talk about the gun control subject comes up because some people, in addition to their grief, reach anger about it faster that others. In order for me to do my job, I have to stay strong, and being analytical about it helps. Fortunately, I didn't hear much about the schooling until after I left school yesterday. Believe me, the first thing I did when I got home yesterday was hug my 3 kids. And the first thing I'll do when I go back to work Monday is shake the hand of everything one of my 220+ school kids as they come through the door and tell them I love them.


----------



## OnlyJustME (Nov 22, 2011)

I agree with a lot of what Jon1094 and David Craig said. I think those points attribute to a lot of what happened but they are just parts of the whole reason.

Most of us older generations were actually educated about guns and what they do when we were very young. My father taught me to hunt and what a gun or bow does by the age of 10. I knew where he kept his gun and i probably could have gone and taken it out on my own if ever had the inclination but i dare never touched that gun if my father didn't hand it to me or tell me to. Not sure if it was fear of the whooping i would get or the fear of what a gun can do but i never played with any thing but a toy gun. Yes we played cowboys and indians, cops and robbers and gangsters even before the video games came out. We were just as violent; it was just done outside instead of on the couch. I also had plenty of reason to go off on many of my class mates since i was bullied throughout my school days to the point of a breakdown where i felt less than worthless but i didn't take a gun into school and exact my revenge. Since the 70s i think there has been a lot less of that education and a more general "guns are bad" thought process so kids these days aren't taught to think about the ramifications of using a gun and then they think about using it out of anger and are blinded.

My other thought is that maybe we should stop trying to take God out of our society. Separation of church and state was not meant to take God out of our schools and pledge of allegiance and courts and society. We are not a Godless nation but that is what we are becoming due to the reduction of the presence of God in society. The intent of that law was so that no one could be persecuted or prosecuted for whatever religion they believe and they were free to do so. Used to be they started the school day with a prayer in public school. Now one can't mention God in a public school.

This type of tragedy is a culmination of many different factors of cause and there is no one answer to it so to just blame one thing and ban all guns is not the answer. The same thing happened in china only it was not a gun that was used, it was a knife. Are we going to ban all knives now too?


----------



## moke (Oct 19, 2010)

I have worked in Law Enfrocement for my entire adult life. I have taught and recieved more training than I care to admit…..it is an absolute and unquestionable fact that in countries where gun control is dramatically increased or guns taken away, that the murder rate increases. There is simple reasons, too long to outline, but, I would do some research before I backed a false premise…..


----------



## donwilwol (May 16, 2011)

If the exact same person drove a car through the school, harmed and killed the exact same people would we be talking about controlling car sales? Of course not because the car wasn't to blame!


----------



## DonOtt (Jul 10, 2009)

I grew up around weapons of all types and sizes my whole life as my Dad was an avid collector, everything from pistols to ground mount .50 cal's plus my time in the military so I am very familiar with weaponry and I have an absolute respect for them and what they can do in the wrong hands.

Gun control is pretty tight here in Canada and I'd really have to challenge you to prove your point Moke using the US and Canada as test cases.

Murder rates where weapons are used in crimes aren't the same as 'crimes of passion' where someone grabs and goes. Not trying to preach to the choir but if you want to stop the senseless slaughter like what happened yesterday then do something about it and stop making excuses….or live with the consequences.


----------



## americanwoodworker (Nov 26, 2011)

Jon1094 I agree alot with your assessment on movies and games. When I was a kid and video games first came out it was no more than trying to get the frog across the street. Now, the popular games are like grand theft auto where the player rapes people, shoots cops and civilians, and steals stuff. Kids think it's cool.

My wife and I have considered banning television in our house because we walked in on our children watching the Disney Channel. No big deal right? Wrong, they were watching a teenager cheerleading show which was no big deal but what caught my attention was that the characters were calling each other b*cthes. Keep in mind, this was on the disney channel. Supposed to be safe for kids to watch.

I was watching a rerun of the Dukes of Hazard one day. There was a scene where these two guys kidnapped daisy, tied her up in a chair, and they just kept watching out the window waiting for the dukes to show up. I kept waiting for the part where one of the guys walked over to daisy and started insinuating that he was going to do something to her. Like we see so often in todays shows. But it never happened. I forgot how innocent and fun the old shows were.

The problem is not guns. Never has been. The problems are we the people and how our standards have gone downhill. When I was a kid I went off by myself at 11 years old with a .22 and shot squirrels. No adult supervision. I was taught what would happen if you shot a gun this way or that way. I was also told if I ever abused my privilege my butt would never see the light of day again.

Problems should be solved with more freedom, not less. Let school officials carry guns. I don't care what kind of classes and training you gun haters want to put on them but let them carry. When my wife told me about this when I got home my first response was "good, I am glad the SOB shot himself". Why? Because he would go to court, be givin life in prison because Connecticut banned the death penalty, and live the rest of his life with free food, free cable television, and extra curricular activities. Sorry, no not sorry, prison should be miserable. No television, bread and water the whole time, no a/c and chain gangs.

I know, I know. I am mean and cruel. But don't punish me because I didn't do it. Gun haters stick that in your pipe and smoke it!


----------



## dpwalker (Aug 25, 2010)

These shootings happen in "gun free zones". Coincidence? No. It isn't the guns, but the cowards who are committing the crimes that are to blame. Who has guts enough to walk into an area that they know there are armed citizens or law enforcement officers & start shooting? Not these idiots. Do they usually wait to be arrested as the theater shooter did? No. They takes the cowards way out. They are terrorists. Banning guns is not the answer. Sick or evil people will find a way to get their hands on guns.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Guns were invented of one thing only, and that is to kill things. So therefore the argument that cars, spoons etc. are just as dangerous does not fly with me. These things were invented as a useful item in the daily world. Yes you can kill a lot of people with a car. You can drive drunk or put a bomb in it. but that was not what it was intentioned for. Yes criminals will always have guns, but make it very hard for them get them. The fact that people carrying licensed guns cut down on crime, I do not believe. The few cases that you hear about, the young man in Florida who shot a teenage black man, is a good example of why I think concealed guns are over rated. I know of two people who have concealed gun permits who have either shot their foot or car.
Jorge mentioned that tens of thousands of people have been killed in Mexico because of the drug wars going on the that country. Where did the guns come from? From what I read it is from the USA. because of this countries very lax gun laws.


----------



## OnlyJustME (Nov 22, 2011)

I believe the preferred weapon of choice is the AK-47 which is not a gun from the USA. And the more restricted the laws get in this country the more the gun sales go to outside sources like the drug lords and armies in other countries.


----------



## JJohnston (May 22, 2009)

Yes, guns were invented to kill things; so what? Do you think the Founding Fathers' guns were designed to whistle Dixie? And yet they still saw fit to enshrine the right to have them in the Bill of Rights - or maybe I should say it's precisely BECAUSE they were "invented to kill" that they understood the importance of the right to have them.


----------



## SCOTSMAN (Aug 1, 2008)

As I said I don't have a clue maybe it would be easier if semi and automatic weapons were banned but then I really have never seen a real gun or held one other than my many visits to the usawhere I saw them in shops pawn brokers etc never got to hold one I am not a lover of weapons truth is I hate all weapons, we don't allow them here since we had a similar tragedy in Dunblane Scotland of all places this has to be sorted that's for sure there is too much love of guns for them to be banned imho in America they just love guns end of story you can't buy them here in the UK. But something has to be at least initiated by the government.I would like to know what percentage of people in usa want to ban guns that would interest me greatly.But as said if you want to kill lots of people there is always a way although I suspect it would be much harder though with a knife or single shot weapon I suppose. I am sorry but what is this about a government takeover what is that about? Alistair


----------



## americanwoodworker (Nov 26, 2011)

*Where did the guns come from? From what I read it is from the USA. because of this countries very lax gun laws.* Sorry but this statement is incorrect. The guns were givin by the authorities that are supposed to follow and uphold the law. Instead they broke the law in an effort to find those others who broke the law. Just like what Jon1094 said. We are rooting for the good guy who does bad things in order to catch the other bad guy who does bad things. Which makes them both bad. So sorry, your "gun laws" were not followed…yet again. It had nothing to do with *this countries very lax gun laws*.


----------



## jonsajerk (Jan 13, 2012)

Man these comments are pretty disappointing. I feel like idiocracy is a reality. If you believe that your right to bare arms will protect you from the US government your a fool. You'd be pretty hard pressed to knock a drone out of the sky or take on the US military. And the argument comparing cars to guns is ridiculous. Guns are designed to kill, cars are designed to transport people sure you could hit a jogger but a classroom of students or a packed theater maybe if you have an army tank. I'm not anti gun I believe rifle and shotguns are fine, stuff you can hunt with and not conceal. The godlessness in schools drives me nuts I'm an atheist and do not believe you need god for moral, values and love of your fellow man. I do not own any guns and the odds just are not in anyones favor to prevent something like this with an old fashion shot out like the movies. Thats the movies and thats my 2 cents.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*Yes*

*YES...*

*Criminals do NOT obey any laws… * They use laws to take advantage of situations.
No GUNS… No Defense…

*Guns in the hands of Sick Wackos is another subject… The subject we should be talking about…* 
NOT a 100% ban on guns!

If a teacher at that school had access to a gun (properly stored & locked up), perhaps the wacko could have been taken out before he killed so many kids!


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Has anybody ever thought of changing the bill of rights. Maybe this thing with everybody being able to carry/own a gun was wrong. I an sure the NRA will say no. I will say yes.

Joe. Be careful. This is my post and you have booted me from yours.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

How can you possibly restrict guns when there are already billions out there? All you would do is grow the black market. We need to restrict lunatics.


----------



## Tedstor (Mar 12, 2011)

jonsajerk-
I could cite a few dozen instances where lightly armed civilians took-on "the state" and prevailed.

And what happens if "the state" dissolved and people were on their own with no police/military protection?

I've also read that the Japanese (in WWII) considered the possibility of invading the US mainland until they realized how many Americans owned guns.

In those regards, an armed society is safer. BUT, as we've seen in CT, there is a price to be paid. Whether that price is acceptable is open to debate.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

DKV: You are rather verbose ( By no means any offense meant. I enjoy it). Let loose on how we restrict lunatics. As far as I can see that would require a better health care system. That would be fine by me. Maybe this would be politics and do we want to go there?


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Madts, our only other option would be to setup airport security portals at all K-12 schools with armed guards. No one in but through the portal. A lot of our inner city and low income schools already have that. We just need to spread the process to all of our schools, and malls, and theaters, and post offices, and…


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

Most of these tragedies have centered around mentally unstable people. There are always warning signs that someone is unstable and yet nobody ever brings up controlling the crazy people.


----------



## DonOtt (Jul 10, 2009)

If your answer to what happened yesterday is putting more guns in the hands of people, you are lost.

Our cities are getting worse every day in Canada and it's because of gang related activities. Big cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal are breading grounds for gangs. Do I think arming the people of those cities will cut back on crime? Hell no. Do I think it will deter criminal activity? Hell no.

The problem isn't about gangs and criminals though, it's about people who typically are law abiding citizens having access to a firearm and using it when they go off their nut. THIS is what needs to be controlled. Stop the ready access.

Why does anyone outside the military and registered gun enthusiasts (who have these weapons stored safely) need a semi or fully automatic rifle? Insanity!

What drives the irrational fear of "the state"? Why do you feel the need to arm yourselves against the government, just in case? In case of what? What makes you think that by walking around with a loaded pistol on your person that it makes things safer? Safer from what? Don't you think that there are enough guns already out there? When kids, teens and adults can shoot someone because they feel slighted or because they were cut off in traffic or because they 'felt threatened', how is that a better society?

If that's what society has become, then I weep for society…...


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

I'm all for putting the mentally unstable people away but someone might think that of me. I'm probably the most mentally stable centered person around. It would just take one Jimc or Joe or…to put me away. Do you want to put your life in the hands of someone that does not especially care for you? That would be like going back to old Salem and the problems they had with neighbors ratting out neighbors for being witches. What we are looking at here is human nature and the killing has been going on since the beginning of time and will never end until humanity comes to an end. After all we are susceptible to the same evolutionary processes that all animals are subjected to.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*madts
*

It will be a Cold day in Hell before you see Texas agree to change the Bill of Rights…
... before that is ever done, we will have another Civil War…

All we have to do is Arm responsible people and disarm the Mentally Sick that may go berserk!
That's all we have to do… Clean & simple…


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

*What drives the irrational fear of "the state"? *

I bet this same thing was said to Jews living in 1930's Germany.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Joe: Please explain to me how you would disarm the mentally sick.. Clean & simple….
I would like to see a cold day in hell where Texasans were forced to give up there guns. A lot less dead people.

Where is the DUDSTER.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Arguing guns is like arguing politics, religion, and sport teams. A conclusion will never be found. I go back to we are human. Live with it it is not going to get better.


----------



## DonOtt (Jul 10, 2009)

Yes Pat because if the Jews all had guns in the 30's, history would have been completely different….*sigh*


----------



## Ken90712 (Sep 2, 2009)

OR,=










The lines to get in everywhere would be so bad. Not many understand the need to do this at the airpport as it is. Everytime I'm there someone is going off about this or that aand the TSA. The world is changing, I can only hope we figure out a way to keep our kids safe.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

Don not arguing for guns, Im calling you out on your "irrational fear of the state" comment.

You can't defend that statement so you change the subject.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

DKV: That sounds like you are giving up. That is not what i had expected from you.

From this post I hear lot of for and against, but not any of how to solve the problem. I think that we as a nation need to solve the problem of every six months of having a mass shooting. Judging by the woodwork I see on this website there is more than enough IQ to get some ideas to solve this problem.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*madts*

Here are some things that could be done:

1. Have a law that mandates the Medical field report patients that fall into the Mentally Unstable, crazy, etc. category.

2. Gun retailers would have to check the list before selling to them…

3. Other responsible people, like Parents, Friends, Guardians, etc. that suspect a person is or could be dangerous, contact the authorities to follow up possibly and help, if needed. They would also Report them if they ever had gun(s) in their possession… and remove the guns from them.

4. Make sure access to any guns around them are safely locked up and controlled, as well as being placed on the Do Not Sell list.

5. In NO EVENT would the police just show up, based on someone reporting a person thought to be unstable, and arresting them to find out if they were or not. Instead, a professional would meet and briefly evaluate the person… which would lead to further testing if deemed to be required… Then, the appropriate action taken in keeping guns away from them.

That would be a Start… and would take more Study than I just gave it…


----------



## toeachhisown (Eddie) (Mar 30, 2011)

let anybody have a gun that wants one,that knows how to shoot ,nothhing wrong with being armed ,teachers ,preacher who ever ,in Louisiana any one that qualifies can get a permit ,then you have to have hours at a fireing range to get one,but its limited to where you can conceal one at


----------



## DonOtt (Jul 10, 2009)

No Pat, maybe it's the way it came across….

I've read several people post on here that they feel the need to arm themselves against the state and government (paraphrasing) and I just don't understand it all. I don't see where this is coming from.

We live in a democratic society, not in a police state or war zone so I don't understand the 'need'. That's why I said "...irrational fear…" etc.

I don't feel the need to arm myself against our Prime Minister and the elected officials, military etc. Just trying to wrap my head around it.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

Ah Don I see

Its not so much arming yourself against, as long as freedom and democracy exists I don't see it as against. Actually Germany was a democratic country, Hitler was never actually elected, he lost the only election he was a canidate in by a wide margin. He was put into power by peoples irrational fears (and probably a well placed fire) and then handed absolute power by an ineffective, scared leader.

No government in the history of the world has lasted forever and I don't expect either one of ours to.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

I think a major reason for these atrocities is the 24 hour sensationalized news of today. I wish news outlets wouldn't put any focus on the shooters. Most of these guys probably want to go out with a bang and become famous, if their names were simply withheld from all the coverage I bet this would go a long way to curtailing the next nut job to come along. In the end these guys are getting what they so desperately want.


----------



## teejk (Jan 19, 2011)

DKV figured it out…like them or not, they are out there and there is no way to pull them in from the people that should not be allowed to even look at them much less use them (those will be the last ones turned in after we go back to where we came from a few years ago…the "sitting duck" era).


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

*JOE:*
I like your list. Who is going to do that, though. I think that the NRA will pass on that. More government? Most people will baulk. I agree with you that more education would be good, but needs more money, and that needs higher taxes.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

As Alistair mentioned, Dunblane in Scotland suffered a school shooting in 1996. The gunman entered with four handguns and killed 16 children and 2 adults. It has never been legal to own any kind of weapon in the UK without a permit and since the Dunblane massacre, laws were tightened up. Gun ownership is not illegal as long as those with guns have the correct permit, subject to rigorous background checks, correct gun safes etc. Handguns can only be owned by members of gun clubs and must be kept at the gun club. That's the only place they can be stored and used.
There is an element in British society that use hand guns - criminals and gang members. They shoot each other so they're actually doing the public a favour. Gun control in the UK works because it's a relatively small nation that had a relatively small amount of handguns to begin with.
Don't ask me how you could even start to try to control hand gun ownership in the USA. A huge nation with a huge amount of weapons and consternation from most if you even suggest taking away one of their constitutional rights. Even if gun control was introduced, criminals and gang bangers would likely still carry weapons. That obviously is not ok, but criminals and gang bangers are not the demographic who perpetrate these senseless school shootings. 
It just seems too easy for mentally imbalanced people to get a hold of weapons, and when it happens it doesn't end well.
There is technology already available where a chip in a weapon recognizes a persons grip and will only fire for the registered user. You could argue that it would only take a bit more engineering to make a weapon that recognises the owners grip and will activate another safety no-fire in the vicinity of schools, colleges, shopping malls and other public places, and that would be great for all new purchases, reassurance for all those who want to avoid another school or public massacre but still in favour of keeping their right to bear arms. But it could never work because of the millions of weapons that are already out there and would never be handed in. Besides, anyone who wanted to shoot someone else that badly would find a way to override it.
I don't know what the answer is. Here, in Ireland they would hold a referendum first - and let the people vote to either ban or not ban guns and make policy from there.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

I was very sad to see this post from an LJ I admire.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Why is that Bertha. We live in a society where gruesome things happen. Why not talk about. See if we can fix it.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## dhazelton (Feb 11, 2012)

Problem is your God may not be my God or my neighbor's God or take into consideration the POSSIBILITY that there are no Gods.

Other problem I see is that guns are designed to kill - not slow down, not paralyze - just kill. If that kid's mom didn't have 3 assualt weapons in her home he wouldn't have used one. If all he had was a knife he might have killed someone, but certainly not 26 someones. You guys can all stock up on your weapons and when someone in your family loses it and uses those weapons on others, well, you get what you get - which is exactly what all those kids and teachers got.


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

@madts - It's disappointing to hear people talk non-sense. The non-sense is not so much that society wouldn't benefit if no guns existed…of course it'd be great. The non-sense is people thinking you can control guns. There are as many guns as people in America. And every would be criminal knows how to get a hold of one. Legislating new gun purchases does nothing. When anti-gun advocates can actually provide a solution (getting rid of all guns) instead of just spouting out non-sense, then perhaps guys like Al and myself won't just roll our eyes every time we hear it.


----------



## eaglewrangler (Jun 15, 2011)

In hind sight a woman in Hoboken with an unstable son should not have an unlocked assault rifle. I think even the NRA would agree. Not sure how to legislate that except to look at guns as restricted by your situation. Someone in an apartment shouldn't have anything but a 22 pistol, too many people next door to accidentally shoot. A rural person with more land can have bigger guns with out endangering the neighbors. If you don't own enough land to shoot it on, probably not a good fit. I know it means Ted Turner can hunt with an f16 on his ranch and some people in urban areas don't get to have assault rifles, but it seams logical. Did this teacher ever use the assault rifle? Was she fearing home invasion or goverment civil war and bread riots? I have to wonder why a shot gun and a pistol wasn't enough firepower. I have lived rural and urban, had gang guys and bears open the front door(the bear was not as scary angry or well armed) There are times for a good pistol even as a noise maker to clear off the porch. I can only guess this woman felt waving the assault rifle was a good way to clear the front steps and this added fear is the attraction in a world where ordinary guns are all to common. Just like the speed limit varies from area to area, so should the guns people are allowed to own. Also anyone getting an assualt rifle better show a reciept for a gun safe too. Just my thoughts on it. Good for people to vent on the post than each other


----------



## lumberjoe (Mar 30, 2012)

The answer is there is no answer. Some people are just rotten. Japan has no guns, so someone just released Sarin gas in a subway instead of bullets. There are those that just want to see the world burn. You cannot regulate that, you cannot control it, and you cannot plan for it. Be a good person, raise your kids right, and be thankful for what you have.


----------



## vipond33 (Jul 25, 2011)

A fairly balanced view of the problem. Well worth reading as he covers all the bases without being strident.

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/15/how_americas_toxic_culture_breeds_mass_murder/


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

Typical Texas answer.


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

People want power. To get power, you take advantage of the powerless. This stuff happens in schools and churches (I personally knew people affected by the Wedgwood Baptist shootings many years ago) because the cowards KNOW people are powerless to stop them. Rapists, bullies; cowardly mass-murderers; the psychological reasons for doing what they do is the same.

Everybody cried during the Cold War about the proliferation of nuclear weapons, but smart people knew Mutually Assured Destruction (M.A.D.), meaning that the balance of weapons existed to assure that they would NEVER be used.

With guns, there is an imbalance. As long as criminals know there are places without guns (or other security measures), then these things will continue to happen.

The problem isn't that there are too many guns…it's that criminals know the places where there are NO guns.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

I think this is pretty interesting.

http://www.cchrint.org/school-shooters/


----------



## cjwillie (Sep 6, 2011)

We don't need gun control, we need CRIMINAL CONTROL!!!


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

Depression has become much more widely recognized for the physiological and psychological disease that it is. More than 11 million people take medication for depression.

One in Four U.S. Women Take Medication for Mental Health Programs .

http://jonathanturley.org/2011/11/18/one-in-four-u-s-women-take-medication-for-mental-health-programs/


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*madts*

*We need to restrict guns. The US of A has too many guns in the wrong hands and this should be stopped.*

How do you propose that to be done? LOL

bye…


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Joe you are such a weenie. Instead of click and paste why don,t you put down some of your thoughts. That would be nice even though I might not agree with them.

To get rid of guns you take them away from people when you find them, and restrict the sale of them. Yes it will take years but will work.


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

Taking away guns and making them illegal will not work. Only a simpleton can actually believe this.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Well Dakremer, I guess that I am a simpleton. I have my dreams and this is one of them. Less killing in this world. Why don't you come up with a better idea?


----------



## OnlyJustME (Nov 22, 2011)

It's not just happening here in the USA. http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/14/15901085-villager-slashes-22-kids-with-knife-at-elementary-school-gates-in-china?lite
It still happens when guns aren't available.


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

Do u really think making guns illegal will 1) get rid of guns and 2) stop people from killing people??? Absolutely not. This isn't a gun problem. It's a society problem. It's a human problem. Guns are an inanimate object. There is no inherent danger or evil in a gun. The danger and evil comes from the human. The crazies doing all this sick ******************** are products of our society. Guns don't make people dangerous, people make guns dangerous.

This all being said. I don't own a gun, probably never will own a gun. I'm not biased at all in this argument. I literally could care less if guns became illegal. It won't affect me in the slightest. However, making guns illegal isn't the answer and WON'T work.


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

What's the answer to this problem? Good question. I have no clue. But getting rid of guns isn't the answer


----------



## TedW (May 6, 2012)

LumberJoe (#73) makes the most sense, although I disagree about there being no answer. We, as a society, cannot stop all of the tragic shootings, but we can prevent many of them. If, as a society, we pay attention to who has guns (especially assault weapons) and the character of the people with access to them, then many of these situations could have been put in check before they happened.

If you know of a situation where an unstable person has access to guns, inform the authorities of the situation and make sure they know that others know that they have been informed. Put the spotlight on those with the authority to do something about it, and they probably will take the necessary precautions - such as removing the guns from that household, or keeping a closer eye on the unstable person.

Complacency is what allows most of these tragedies to happen.

The only way to control guns is to get rid of them, and we all know that's not going to happen.


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

I agree, lumberjoe's got it….


----------



## SawDustNeophyte (Nov 30, 2009)

Look at history. Restricting citizens rights to be armed only strengthens the criminals and crazies position. Most people rarely look at the long term outcome of such actions. When tragedies like the Conn. elementary school shooting happen it is the immediate response to want to do something. The emotional response is to ban the guns. However, had someone at that elementary school been armed…. lives would have been saved. My heart breaks at this horror. As an elementary school teacher I see situations where the safety of students cannot be guaranteed and this is more than frustrating. But I also understand that if someone wants to go on a homicidal rage there is little that can be done in any such situation be it in a school, church, grocery store, post office or even federal buildings, unless someone is armed an prepared to stop it. Take away people's rights to defend themselves and you can watch crime and death tolls rise. It's just that simple, but people rarely want to face this reality.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

My first two posts were frivolous and tongue in cheek responses to what I think is a problem impossible to solve. My third post #50 touched on the reason it is unsolvable. LumberJoe and Dakremer also touched on the reason. That is we are human. We have been killing since the beginning of time. It is part of our nature to kill whether we are sane or not. Some of our killing is justified by society and some is treated as a horrendous act not worthy of good people. It will never change…it is us.

Controlling guns will never work just as controlling the use of drugs or any other knee jerk human response to what we think is right or wrong. What you see in the world is nature taking it's course. There are good parts of society and bad. Another typical response is to blame parenting and ask everyone to be better parents and to raise good, solid citizens. You cannot regulate and control parenting just as you cannot regulate and control guns, drugs and a hundred other issues. We cannot even control the simplest of laws and that is the speedlimit. If we cannot get people to adhere to even the simplest of laws how can we ever expect to control anything else?

We are what we are and we have done our best to adjust to ourselves through the ages. What we cannot adjust to and anticipate are the deviants and genetically deficient amoung us. They will always do whatever society does not want them to do. Whether they do it via genocide at the national level or by shooting people at the local level it will never end. We do not have a miracle drug or solution to the problem of being human and all the evil that may entail.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*madts*

I didn't feel like getting into an endless debate with you…
... so, I just asked you the same question that you asked me…
... I'll let you waste your words instead of me wasting mine!

You don't have a CLUE about how to handle guns in our society.

How on earth are you going to take guns away from Criminals (even if you could legally take them away from them)?

It is IMPOSSIBLE to take guns away from criminals!

Law abiding people would give up their guns if that were the LAW… (it might turn some of them into criminals because they would want to be able to defend themselves)...

With the general public without guns, it would be the Criminals DREAM COME TRUE!
They could so much more without having to worry about a possible gun facing them…
Crime would be much more rampant than ever…

I can hear you after you have been Help Up at gun point by a criminal…
"Why can't I be protected… blah blah…" 
You're so damn dumb, you wouldn't realize that you made it happen to yourself by getting rid of guns… the way you're talking right now…

Go on… be your dumb self… knowing what to do with guns… You have NO IDEA of what you're talking about!

Guns will always be in our lives… PERIOD!

It's the screwball people that misuse the guns that are the problem… but you cannot see that… & it's right in front of your nose!


----------



## mtenterprises (Jan 10, 2011)

For what I am about to post I will most likely get banned from here but I found these 2 items on my Facebook page this morning. The first is from a local pastor:

"Let's not forget that 2000 years ago there was an evil man who killed all the little boys who were two years of age and younger in a small region around Bethlehem all because he was disturbed with jealousy. There is nothing new under the sun. And our only hope comes from the little boy who escaped the slaughter to Egypt because an angel gave His Daddy a warning to go. The little boy's name is Jesus." - Pastor Patrick Jones, Eastern Hills Wesleyan Church.

The second was this picture posted by a mother and grandmother (and she doesn't have any military people in her imeadiate family):









As you can see from the picture it was orignally posted at - The Soldier's Sanctuary
http://www.thesoldierssanctuary.com/

I thought these both to be insiteful and just wanted to share them here. Beyond this I will not wade any deeper into this conversation I will just continue to watch it and see where it goes.
MIKE


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

When you start "cherry picking"" on who can and who cannot own a gun then all is lost.

BTW, I hope you all noticed the news coming out of China THIS WEEK:
Man with knife injures 22 kids at school in China

Geez… Now we will all have to tear our meat from the dead animal's bones because no one will be allowed to own a knife! Just saying this is very a slippery slope!...

And for the record, I am about as Liberal as they come!


----------



## vipond33 (Jul 25, 2011)

As usual in times of unthinkable horror The Onion nails it.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/********************-everything-nation-reports,30743/?ref=auto
http://www.theonion.com/articles/right-to-own-handheld-device-that-shoots-deadly-me,30742/


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

The term assault weapon really gets over used. Most reporters wouldn't know what an assault weapon was if it bit them on the behind. Most of what gets labeled an assault weapon just has the look of one.

So what do you think an assault weapon is?


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

I see a couple folks have used the incident in China as equivalency to the Connecticut shootings. How many funerals are being held for those Chinese children? (Hint: none of the Chinese victims died)


----------



## Spike_dawg (Sep 8, 2012)

We already have laws restricting guns, murder, weapons in school zones and every other imaginable thing. Doesn't seem to work very well.

Maybe we should outlaw knives, and rope, for the people who hang themselves. How about a law to restrict the ownership of cars, the number one killer in America? If you don't want to restrict cars, how about a law to prevent speeding, DWI, or running a stop light? We already have those laws and they don't work either.

We are experiencing the breakdown of society and the family unit, where parents are no longer responsible for their children.


----------



## MikeinSC (Dec 15, 2012)

My thoughts and opinion is that the laws that are in place are more than adequate. And it has already been said but anyone wishing to do harm to others will find a way.

A gun is a piece of hardware. A tool. It is not the problem.


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

"*...anyone wishing to do harm to others will find a way.*"

And guns are the most effective, efficient and available way.


----------



## 33706 (Mar 5, 2008)

Here in Winnipeg, Murder Capital of Canada, you can be killed for not having a cigarette or 'bus fare', or for simply passing the wrong person on the sidewalk. A knife is just as likely to be used as a gun. There will NEVER be any proactive programs to make *enough* of a difference in improving the low respect for life around here.


----------



## Spike_dawg (Sep 8, 2012)

Muleskinner… I point out that OJ thought a knife was good enough.


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

Well Spike, I think that old saw about not bringing a knife to a gun fight would apply here.


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

A bomb is far more affective and efficient. I'd say guns aren't even on the top 10 list of most effective and efficient. I'm not sure why people are anti-gun. Like I said above, guns don't make people dangerous, people make guns dangerous. I come from a large family of hunters. Most of my family owns multiple guns and there hasn't been a single death or injury by gun in my family ever. Quit blaming the gun. The gun isn't the problem. It's the human. He could have just as easily made 10 pipe bombs and killed way more kids. So are we going to ban every ingredient and every raw material that could possibly be used to build a pipe bomb?? It just doesn't make sense. I will never understand why people think banning guns will stop people for killing people. It's the dumbest thing I've ever heard


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

Dak, sadly, they've closed down the bomb shop in my area. I checked these online sites-
www.firearmsforyou.com/
www.gunauction.com/
www.firearmsforyou.com/
texasguntrader.com/
floridaguntrader.com/
www.autoweapons.com

but, again sadly, none of them seemed to have a bomb section. Do you have a source for quality bombs with good customer service?

Look, I'm not anti gun either. And I do own guns. More than I'll ever need. But to argue that the proliferation and availability of guns in this country (US) are not a problem is delusional. An angry asshole is annoying. An angry asshole with a gun is dangerous.


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

Spike (@97), cars are not the number one killer in America, I think that is heart disease. Cars are the number one instrument of accidental death. Guns are the number one instrument of murder.


----------



## TedW (May 6, 2012)

I don't think anybody is arguing about the proliferation and wide availability of guns - the argument is about whether or not it should be legal for people to own guns.


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

Ted, I didn't read the entire thread so I was unaware that there was a argument to make it illegal to own a gun. The OP mentioned restrictions and I thought that was a reasonable position. What gets my keyboard active is a reaction to folks that equate guns and cars, or guns and knives, or any other absurd comparison. The idea that a gun is just a tool like a car or a knife or a table saw is correct. What doesn't get said is that it is a tool whose existential purpose is to penetrate flesh. Another site I read had Youtube links to some kind of 3 gun shooting competition. Handgun, long guns and shotguns (although one also featured a minigun which looked like fun) All good clean fun (mostly overweight middle-aged guys in Cabelas camouflage) But I notice that these guys weren't shooting at targets shaped like refrigerators or tv's. The targets are human silhouettes.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

I'd say a couple 5 gallon cans of gasoline or some grill propane tanks could have done way more damage.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

*What doesn't get said is that it is a tool whose existential purpose is to penetrate flesh.*

So is a scalpel.


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

Maybe I should have bolded* "absurd comparison"*. How much damage does a scalpel do at 30 feet?


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

muleskinner, do remember that you do not set the rules of use, the one using said weapon(pick one, any one) makes the rules in the field, be it a knife, a gun, a bomb, poisonous gas/water/solid, spork, etc. And how about box-cutters on a jet…


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

All LJs, I think the only position that will work is the missionary position. All other positions are the work of lunatics, the mentally deficient and those that willfully break the law. The only answer is to install cameras in all bedrooms of the US, start another government agency to "oversee" the positions and then arrest those that break the law. We can send all the ruffians to "correct sex" school until they have it right. Who's with me on this?


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

I want to thank everybody who has commented to the thread. I am not from the States. I come from Denmark where there are very strict laws about guns. And people get shot there to. In Norway, which has similar laws, they had one of the worst mass killings ever. IMHO I think that having guns easily available, makes it too easy for somebody to shoot somebody else.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

*Agree with HM.*
.
A rock will do just fine. 
.
We're devolving, let's just face it.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

DKV: Good one, but sex does not kill that many people, unless you are getting boinked to death. I have heard that, that can be quite enjoyable.


----------



## Jon1094 (May 12, 2012)

@DKV: Good one, but sex does not kill that many people, unless you are getting boinked to death. I have heard that, that can be quite enjoyable.

In the words of a great sage of song: "I have loved some ladies and I have loved Jim Beam, and they both tried to kill me in 1973".


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

madts - You and I are in complete agreement, the only reason none of our proposals will work is, we are not in control of the world.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

How about Knives, Swords, Bows & Arrows, etc.?

I heard Senator Dianne Feinstein this morning… she's got a bill that is directed to Assault weapons, clips of more than 10 bullets, and the ammunition for same should be banned… leaving everything else alone.

That sounds like it might help a little bit… the thing that bothers me is… if someone WANTS that stuff, they are going to find a way to get them & they will… Now what? The law isn't much good now… except for stopping those that don't know how to illegally get them. LOL

Sounds like a good idea on the surface… but won't work as much as she feels it will..

Closing the individual BUY/SELL law at gun shows falls into the same group…  The criminal will GET what he wants when he wants it.

I think the laws should be directed more to Safety Control requiring ALL Firearms to be strongly stored & locked requiring at least two keys to get to them, etc. Strengthen the storage & lockup laws. ANY violation stemming from a gun goes to the OWNER as well as the SHOOTER… The Owner faces the same penalty as the Shooter…
That should make the Lock-up work…

It takes a Person to aim & pull the trigger of a gun to make it shoot… the gun is only a device that can be used to shoot… Controlling the person owning the gun might be a way to pursue…

Without guns being available, other things will be used, as discussed, to take their places… bombs, knives, etc.

So, NOW What?

It all boils down to the Person… not the device…

I hope they don't go off half-cocked with things that cannot be enforced, etc.

It's out of our hands…


----------



## JJohnston (May 22, 2009)

Remind me….how many "assault weapons" were used in the Connecticut shooting?


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Joe, you are a wimp. You post to my thread and block me from yours. I do not block people. But please go get a life.

JJohnston. What difference does it make. A gun is a gun and a lot of small people got killed.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

I don't know if clips, holding more than 10 rounds were used or not…
I don't think "assault" weapons were used… don't know…


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Joe, I agree with madts. You are a wimp. If you're going to participate in his threads then you need to open yours up to him. Open wide Joe. BTW, which position do you favor. You strike me as a strict missionary type set in your ways. Kind of a by the numbers kind of guy.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

In the end its all about the person doing such a thing thinking their own life is so worthless that it doesn't matter.

Just last week a nurse that fell for a radio prank killed herself because she fell for it and leaked info about princess Kate, she also must not have valued her own life very much.


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

Joe is one of them persons who can dish it out but, can't take it. He has me blocked also, just because I didn't agree with him on a subject somewhere about 10 light years ago.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Do not ignore my question Joe. You must have an opinion. You have one on every other subject.


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

Mike, the rules are also set by the limitations or advantages of said weapon. It seems that based on demonstrated user preference the tool of choice in the US is a high capacity semi-automatic.

Box-cutters on jets were primarily responsible for several several deaths and secondarily responsible for ~3000. As a consequence they are no longer allowed on commercial airlines (among multiple other potential weapons). Timothy McVeigh killed 160 some odd people with ammonium nitrate and diesel fuel. As a consequence Congress passed the Secure Handling of Ammonium Nitrate Act of 2007 (with more stringent regulations under review). There are approximately 10,000 gun homicides per year in the US. The consequences I see proposed range from universal concealed carry to arming teachers in the classroom (the later coming from some of the same people that in another conversation would blame those teachers for the moral decay that has brought us to this point - how's that for irony?). It seems that our national gun fetish clouds our perspective.


----------



## wrenchhead (Sep 26, 2009)

I will happily give up all my guns(minus hunting rifles and shot guns) as soon as every criminal gives up theirs. My point is guns will never go away unless you can find a way to keep them out out of the hands of criminals FIRST!! I don't understand why everybody should loose their right to defend themselves because of the actions of a few crazy people. As long as those crazy people can harm me or my family, I will continue to carry a firearm.


----------



## americanwoodworker (Nov 26, 2011)

Isn't murder illegal? Do we not have laws already in society that says murder is illegal? Think about this for a moment. Stop thinking about guns, cars, rocks, or sex…

We have laws on the books that says taking another mans life is illegal. So why do we need any other law on that subject? It does not matter what you use to kill someone it is still illegal. You say " well we have to stop making it easy for someone to get guns because that will help prevent murder". Will it? If someone wants to kill someone they will find a way to do it. Whether it be a car or a gun. Okay, you then say "well if we keep guns out of peoples hands that shoot more than one bullet then we will have less fatalities". Will we? Man created the atom bomb. Why? To kill more people than guns can. It does not matter what you do, a person will find a way to do what they want to accomplish.

Remember Oklahoma city and Tim McVeigh? He did not use a gun. But then what happened? You put regulations on fertilizer thinking that will prevent this from happening again. Then what happened? People used planes to kill more people. Now whats happening? Who the hell knows. I keep hearing reports now that authorities are afraid of dirty bombs, EMP's and cyber war.

Do you understand yet? Keep trying to solve problems with less freedom. All you get in the end is less freedom. People will still get murdered, and in mass amounts by different means. It's a sick world we live in and you cannot legislate emotion out of human beings.

As I have said before. It is illegal to kill someone or harm them. There should be no 1st degree 2nd degree or hate crimes. It's all murder, it's all hate. You do any of it and you lose *ALL* freedoms. You go to prison to pay a debt to society. Society owes you nothing. You no longer have rights except to not be tortured. You get no T.V.. No A/C, no weights. You DO get bread, water and beans for every meal and you will be put on chain gangs. Is that cruel and unusual punishment? YOU BET! But so is murder. Is it Torture? NOPE!

Now ask yourself, would you want to go to a prison like that? Of course not! So now comes in the old saying…You do the crime, You do *HARD* time.

*Keep trying to solve problems with less freedom. All you get in the end is less freedom*.

I also want to add… I AM GLAD THAT SOB OFFED HIMSELF!


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

"...with more stringent regulations under review…"

And murder, in and of itself, has always been "stringently regulated" but that stringent regulation doesn't seem to have stopped the insanity of murder, now has it… Such laws and regulations are pretty much for the gullible and the under financed. The super rich and connected have their own set of laws/regulations that do not apply to the masses. At some point, even that will reach a critical mass and a great leveling will take place. IMO, the trigger for this great leveling will take on a very similar form as the attempted Wall Street fascist coup to overthrow the US Government in the 1930s. At least in the 1930s we had Butler.

Wall Street's Plot to Seize the White House: Facing the Corporate Roots of American Fascism


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Americanwoodworker, stop thinking about sex? Isn't that more fun and interesting than talking about murder and guns? Where's your priorities?


----------



## americanwoodworker (Nov 26, 2011)

DKV your right! But if your like me nothing ever gets accomplished during that thought process. well, you know what I'm saying. LOL


----------



## BillWhite (Jul 23, 2007)

As my platoon Sgt. said, "This is my rifle. This is my gun. One is for fightin', one is for fun." 
Don't wanna sound crass, but a screwdriver in the hands of a fool is a deadly weapon.
Bill


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Not from 30 feet is is not. And not 26 times. Show me any proof of any body blasting into a school armed with a phillips head screwdriver, even a flat head, and killing 26 people.


----------



## Cantputjamontoast (Jan 1, 2009)

I don't want my country shaped by some demented 24 year old who really had some problems.

I wish a teacher had a gun in a thigh holster up under her dress just like a fire extinguisher waiting for the day this happened.

When you legislate the extreme it becomes part of the norm.

Why is it when somebody kills somebody with a gun there is an outcry to take them away from people who did not do it.


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

@cantputjamontoast - good question! The answer is that people like to gripe about stuff after these things happen, yet they lack the ability to be rational about it.

The market for a product is driven by the demand FOR that product. You can't take away the market by making it illegal. The market remains, just goes black. That just makes it impossible for good guys like me to get the same guns that the bad guys already know how to get.

This would be true for guns in the same way it is for drugs and alcohol (during prohibition).


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

@Madts - unless you are a teacher you have absolutely no right to say what a teacher would or would not do in that situation. I can assure you, as a real-life school teacher, I would go to great lengths to protect my kids. Please do us a favor and refrain from further insults.


----------



## JGM0658 (Aug 16, 2011)

madts, don't loose your cool men, remember you started a thread on a controversial topic so Cantputjamontoast has as much right to his opinion as you do, even though you might not agree with his opinion. Al (Bertha) posted he was disappointed you posted this topic, I sort of felt the same way. While I expressed my opinion once, I knew to stay away from posting further because it might turn ugly. Don't be the first one to throw the stone, after all, some here might object to you posting on this topic when the US is not even your country. Know what I mean?


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Cosmic: I have nothing but respect for all teachers. As a teacher do you think that you should be armed in class, as cant putjamonbread thinks? I think that would be a horrible idea. Gun toting teachers. Think about it.


----------



## OnlyJustME (Nov 22, 2011)

They would not blast into a school armed with a screw driver they would disable the brakes on a school bus and kill children from miles away.

+100% on americanwoodworker post #128

Stop making prison so cushy, it's a punishment. A guy just escaped lethal injection because he was overweight and would not die quick enough and it would be too painful. I'm sure it was painful for the hotel clerk he murdered.

People are literally getting away with murder.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

So Madts again starts calling people "morons", "idiots" 
Some things never change…...Thats why I blocked him 6 months ago.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Jimc, I wondered how long it would take you to stop lurking and post something. Very intelligent post. It added a lot to the thread. Good one Jimc.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

Thank you DKV and a very merry Christmas to you and yours.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

Is this really an appropriate thread in which to carry on petty squabbles?


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

Mule - just because there isnt a site out there selling bombs, doesnt mean you can't make a bomb - your post was pointless


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Ren buddy, madts said this thread was worn and over. So I guess my welcome back of Jimc was ok and appropriate.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

I think lumberjocks is a perfect example. Afew months ago people lobied to ban political posts because they could not keep themselves from clicking a post that they knew would offend their sensibilities. Since political posts were banned I saw outright viciousness in a thread about …..drawer slides. The insults went as far as throwing around racial insults. So people wanted to ban political posts and guess what that changed….not a damn thing.


----------



## renners (Apr 9, 2010)

Not singling you out DKV. Just think it shows a lack of respect for the victims of this latest tragedy.


----------



## dhazelton (Feb 11, 2012)

Yes, murder is illegal. So maybe the tools that make it easy to murder dozens in a few minutes should be illegal also. Yes, that would include gas, bombs etc. But those require more forethought than this even may have required.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Ren, I lowered my flag to half mast, watched all the media coverage and researched Adam in an attempt to comprehend. I have respect for the victims. I think we all do. However, I am short on respect and patience with Jimc. That's my problem and it doesn't really matter where or when I post my thoughts. All of the posts had something to do with the tragedy except Jimc's.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

Boy I must have really pushed your "stupid" button DKV
Enough has been said on this thread regarding pro's and con's on gun control. I didn't need to throw in my thoughts, as everything has been said. I only commented on Madts, who continues to call people names, that don't agree with him.
I can continue to war with you, as you are the most despicable nutcase on this forum. You start flame wars, then sit back and watch the fire.
You have changed your icon numerous times, but your latest (Jesus) is an insult that you perpetrate for controversy and your own perverted satisfaction.
Using Jesus is religious, and should be banned under the politics and religious rules. You must be special.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

JimC: When somebody suggests that a school teacher carries a gun under her skirt, I will call that person a moron. I might even use the term Idiot.


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

I always thought that was a real picture of DKV….


----------



## oldworld124 (Mar 2, 2008)

I would like to add one fact to this subject.

About 12 years ago Brazil had a referendem voted on by the people as to whether or not the people should have the Right to owns guns. The overwhelming majority voted in favor of having the right to own guns. What did the fascist government do anyway? They put an all out ban on a persons right to won guns. Well. 12 years later the violence has escalated and is now almost completely out of control.

This is a Real result of disarming the population. Now, only the police and criminals have guns. The average person lives in fear their whole lives.

My question is: Do you want your children to grow up in an even more violent society?

Ban guns and this will surely happen.


----------



## Bagtown (Mar 9, 2008)

I'm not from the US, I live in a small town in eastern Canada
So I can't fully understand the need of citizens to require more weaponry than is required to bring down a deer or a bear.
I grew up the same as a lot of you did. Dad showed me how to shoot out in the back field.
He didn't have a lot of guns, .303 for deer and a .410 for partridge, and we all had 22's and pellet guns as kids.
People talk about needing weapons to protect themselves from criminals and even their own government someday.
If this is true then maybe you do need them.
I don't know the answer.

What I do know is this: If in fact you need to carry to protect yourself from criminals or your own government, then you have a much, much bigger problem than some nutjob kid killing children and teachers. If you really need to protect yourselves this way, then you better find someone to elect that more folks could back than only half the population, and that person better be a hell of a leader. And that person needs to make some damn hard decisions that might have more lasting effects than 4 years. I haven't seen a real leader whose not afraid to make decisions in a very long time. (talking about my country here too)And the damn politicians need to stop fighting each other, working together and fighting for everyone, not just the ones that elected them.

And everyone needs to start helping raise children. Society has become afraid to say something to kids that are out of line. Whats that old saying? "It takes a whole village to raise a child". When I was a kid, if I screwed up, I got told right then and there by any adults present, and by the time I got home, Mom or Dad knew too. But these days we're afraid to say anything for fear of reprisals, sometimes even being taken to court. That comes back to the lawmakers. Lawmakers and insurance companies. I'm not sure why insurance companies, I just know they a re a huge part of the problem with all of the liability issues out there. Crazy media with their right to sensationalise everything from a snowstorm to a murder is a problem too.

So I'm not sure if you folks could go backwards and try to remove all the guns out there. If it's written into your federal laws that you have that right, then you have that right. I just think you need to figure out how to maintain that right while maintaining peace and sanity. I think maybe having a little more stringent requirements might be in order. Background checks, gun vaults, etc.

Sorry, I may have overstayed my welcome here. Didn't mean to go on like this. But like all of you my heart tore to hear about those kids and their teachers. Nobody deserved that.

One more thing…
When I was a little kid, maybe 8 or 10 years old. My Grandmother was up for her annual visit from Vermont. I remember there was a discusion on the radio about capital punishment, and I said something about not killing these people (I was talking about the convicted murderers), it wasn't right. At least that's what we were taught in Sunday school. My old Grandmother was all over me. I couldn't understand how such a nice elderly lady, my own Grandmother was for capital punishment. She was actually in favour of killing these people. I look back now and see she took this moment to teach me something. She said "Well, what if someone came over tonight and stabbed your mom and dad and brother and sister in their beds tonight?". What should we do with that person? I eventually came around to her way of thinking. IF some comes and kills my loved ones. Sorry, but I want them dead and not easy like either.

I've rattled on long enough.

To all of my American friends, you have to start to pull together again. It wasn't always like this. Your great country is slipping. You need to figure it out together and correct it.

Mike


----------



## Ken90712 (Sep 2, 2009)

Well I have to tap out on this post,

Madts who started this post is proving what type of person he is. Name calling really? As you said you were not even born here. I have defended this great nation in time of war ( or Conflict ) whatever you call it, like so many others here. What have you done to make this a better country sir?

Those great teachers ( whom all were women ) were heroes. Running towards the gunmen to save those poor children while they were UNARMED. Would you of had the courage to do this? So if they did have a gun, like other teachers in other countries maybe some or all would be alive today. To me that is worth it! As I stated in the beginning of this post lets hold the human responsible…Our Pilots carry guns that seems to be working. I know one thing living in Los Angeles if someone tries to home invade my wife and I we surely wont be victims… 
I'm done……


----------



## oldworld124 (Mar 2, 2008)

Ken, Very well said. same goes here. You are your own first defense. The "authorities" usually show up long after the fact.

Thanks


----------



## gfadvm (Jan 13, 2011)

A friend sent me a pic yesterday of a teacher in Isreal with a gun on a sling across her back and said this is how they protect children in other countries.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*DITTO...*

... and nothing has changed…


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)




----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

Madts - No, I do not think I should be armed in class, though I see no reason why certain educators couldn't go through police training with weapons in the event there is a "lock-down" scenario in a school, whereas the weapon is in a strategically located gun safe(s) on campus. Many high schools do have police on campus now, but for those who don't, like suburban elementary schools, it's probably a good idea for such criminals to know that at least SOMEBODY on campus is armed.

The point is that if would-be a shooter KNEW there were officers or other armed personnel on a campus, then they wouldn't try it…and if they did, they'd be met with resistance.

People just need to get real. Guns will not go away anytime soon. It's guaranteed in our constitution. It is what it is. And nobody has X-MEN powers that can seek out and destroy all such weapons. So instead of getting all butt-hurt about it, we should probably be thankful that these things don't happen as often as they do. And if we insist on being butt-hurt, then rational thoughts would be appreciated.

As long as there is ZERO security in locations where there are tons of people, then those locations will always be targets…which is why there are no such shootings at sporting events. If schools cannot afford the security measures, then they MUST do something. And perhaps it can start by states like Texas NOT cutting educational funding.


----------



## JGM0658 (Aug 16, 2011)

And perhaps it can start by states like Texas NOT cutting educational funding.

Maybe parents should demand that Texas cuts football funding instead of educational funding. While I agree that sports are character builders, they should not be the primary reason kids go to school.

Ken90712, would you please leave religion out of this? I don't think God or whatever religion you believe had anything to do with this.


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

Jorge…football funding in Texas is largely self-sustaining and self-funding. That's not a problem. The problem is that local districts don't have the monies from the state that were originally projected because those funds, in actuality, are not available. A state like Texas gets about 60% of its total funding from sales taxes (we have no state income tax)...and when in a recession, the school districts don't get the monies originally budgeted.

My school district has been hit with $17 million less than they budgeted every year starting last year…and will continue to endure that shortfall until the economy turns around. In many districts, teachers get canned. In others, like ours, there's a hiring freeze and teachers are relocated according to need. This is why I lost a planning period this year and why I have 36 kids in my classes. It's also why football programs stay strong, because their stadiums are financed by bonds and their operations are financed by massive gate receipts.

Schools without adequate security either don't think it's needed (which is stupid) or don't have the money to put into it.


----------



## JGM0658 (Aug 16, 2011)

Jorge…football funding in Texas is largely self-sustaining and self-funding. That's not a problem.

Yeah, because they sell TV rights, etc. Which sends the wrong message to kids, most of them want to be football, basketball, baseball or actors stars than chemists, physicists, etc. Cancer, AIDS, etc won't be cured by a football player, yet they are more valued than the sciences. Maybe I am naive or and idealist, but even when I went to college in the US I always thought the emphasis on sports over academics was way too one handed.

I busted my ass working and paying for college, no student loans, no assistance whatsoever, yet I would see the Basketball player have free tuition, room and board, etc. Most of them had a hard time adding 2+2….

I bet if some of the funding that goes to keep the sports programs went to security, academics etc, that the schools would be safer and turning out better prepared kids.

just saying.


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

Jorge - Can't argue about that. I agree. I am amazed that when school boards go to the public to build their facilities that they don't price in the total security. But this is less a funding issue as much as its a lack of foresight.

When I went to high school in the 80s, there was one gate open to enter the campus with a security man guarding that gate. You had to show identification to enter the campus. In my current district, there are no gates and no guard houses on any of our campuses. Many campuses do not have camera systems. We have a police officer on campus, but they sit in an office. Nobody patrols anything.

What bothers me about these school shootings is that you'd think it'd force schools to rethink their security measures. They think that as long as people have ID badges and visitors check into the office first that that's good enough.

It's made worse in our district because our kids have to leave campus to do their vocational classes. They are supposed to take the shuttles to the vocational campus, but because there is no gate security, kids just take their cars. And because people are always coming and going, kids are going to unauthorized doors to exit…which must stay unbarred because of fire codes. So, people (even with guns) could come onto campus during the school day through any of our doors and NOBODY would know it

And to add insult to injury, because kids take their cars during the day, they bring McDonalds and Jack in the Box to class with them. Even though I have a no food policy in my class, I still have to fight it daily.

It's just a big mess.


----------



## prattman (Aug 8, 2012)

I'm very dissapointed in this thread, This site is supposed to be about woodworkers comming together to exchange ideas and experences with wood and tools.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*Jorge G.*

Whether you think so or not,* it has A LOT to do with what is happening right now…*

It's probably the main* CAUSE* for it to happen in the first place… along with a multitude of other things.

*We never had this problem before He was kicked out! * DUH…!!

*Think about it… * before you start playing Him… LOL

*Commentary on the subject...*


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

prattman- Sorry to disappoint you. What I have learnt from this thread is that a gun is a tool, and it is just a dangerous as a screwdriver or a spork. So this thread is about tools.

Joe- Still the wimp, When will you get a life? Unblock me from your threads and I will stop calling you a wimp.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Madts, that's not much of a trade. Joe will always be a wimp even if no one calls him a wimp. Joe was a wimp from day 1. I remember my first day on LJs and I thought to myself, "Boy that Joe is a wimp and Jimc comes in a close second wimp.". Can I call them or what? Once a wimp always a wimp. I think if we had a wimp contest Joe would win by a landslide. Know how to find a wimp? Their first name begins with J.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*This is really FUNNY!*

*I BLOCK TWO complete idiots… * I still have them blocked for good reason… They are STILL complete idiots… Nothing has changed!

I post on a thread, started by one of them… *and he is begging me to UNBLOCK him! LOL*

This is one of the funniest things that I have seen on LJ's…

*DUH??*

If they do not like me posting in THEIR thread, why don't they Block me?! * LOL*

*DUH??!!*


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Joe: I believe in free speech. That is why I do not block anybody. You have the right to say anything you want in my threads. As I believe in free speech, I also end up with Wackos/Wimps having their say.
Have a wonderful afternoon. By the way you do add color to a thread, but nothing of substance.

I sure am glade that I am able to amuse you.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*LOL…*


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

Prattman…then stay out of the off-topic threads! Then you won't be disappointed!


----------



## prattman (Aug 8, 2012)

Cosmicsniper, I expect a more mature approach , and just for your information I am a gun toting nut with more guns and ammo than I can use for the rest of my life. Twenty years in law enforcement, trained by the government. If you want to come and try to take my guns or my gun rights then your welcome to TRY


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Prattman- That was just about the most mature post in this thread so far.


----------



## Cosmicsniper (Oct 2, 2009)

I have my own guns as well, Prattman. I have them because I enjoy shooting them on my family's land. I also feel more secure knowing that I can protect my family in a worse case scenario.

And the worse case scenario is what this thread is about. We always hope for the best and - unfortunately in this society (which is the more benign and utopian than most societies) - we have to plan for the worst. We just hope and pray that these worse case scenarios do NOT happen to us.

When they happen at all, particularly to the most helpless of the powerless, we are at a great loss on how to internalize it. So, this thread, as with most any outward expression of grief, is merely the way we deal with such tragedy.

So, although there maybe disagreement and even name-calling, it makes total sense - even therapeutic - to have a thread talking about this, even among what is normally the most level-headed and intelligent of people, on a board of the most benign and peaceful of hobbies.

That's what this is Prattman. People have a right to go a little nuts in trying to deal with these things. It's an outlier to our actual personalities and realities…it should all be regarded as such.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

This has got to be one of the most chilling things that I have ever read, especially the part about the siblings safety plan. How a mother has to deal with her sons mental issues http://thebluereview.org/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother/


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Patcollins, the article is hard for me to understand. I was raised in the 50's and 60's and do not remember any mass shootings by children occuring even though the time was perfect. It was a time that at the age of 14 I bought my own. 22 handgun at the local sporting goods store and at the age of 16 bought my own 12 gauge at the same store. The handgun was for target practice and the shotgun was for duck hunting. Back then guns were easy to come by, easier than today, and murders by children did not happen. What changed?


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

We use to have insane asylums and we did not medicate every kid that comes along that has trouble behaving in class. Not saying locking people away was the right thing to do, but Im sure they kept some incidents from happening. Between that and glorifying these incidents (in crazy peoples minds) on the news for days even weeks at a time it gives the nut jobs ideas. The news needs to stop putting their names out there every day, this crazy kid went from a nobody to someone famous, people remember his name now, and that is probably exactly what he wanted in his twisted mind.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

DKV
Family values, broken marriages, violent internet and electronic video games, drugs etc., etc.
I too grew up in the 50's and 60's but we had a parent at home, teachers who were allowed to kick ass when needed and sport activities outside in the neighborhood, rather than in front of a computer screen or T.V. shows like MTV.
Different world, different times.
Now there is no responsibility from parents, and adults. It's someone else's problem. No time for discipline, teaching right from wrong, or setting examples.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Jimc, You and I have had a lot of "dialogue" in the past and it pains me greatly to have to say you're right. I wrote the original post and question with my answer in mind. However, I wanted to hear from others before posting mine. I have to agree with you 100% (you might want to do a copy and paste on this sentence) for future reference. I can't remember any mothers that worked. Teachers could indeed kick ass (I had 12 years of real nuns). TV back then was milk toast compared to now. Even though I love technology and our advancements I miss the orderly growing up that we had back then. The worst thing that we could do as kids was to find someone to buy us beer and get drunk. I did that once and was "encouraged" not to do it again. To me it was a gentler more sane time. I'm sure we had just as many "mental kids" but they didn't shoot anyone. Most of them were the bullies and all you had to do was stand up to most of them to be left alone.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

DKV
And I couldn't agree more.
I had 8 years of nuns and 4 years of Christian Brothers who knew how to break a nose when warranted. We also found homeless guys who would buy us beer as long as we gave them a buck for their wine. Are you sure you didn't grow up in Chicago?
We could walk the streets at 9 PM, hang around a pizza place, never get bothered and bothered no one. Just camaraderie, laughs and talking about what we wanted to be.
Great times and no one got hurt from violence.
Where did it all go?


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Jimc, I don't want you getting all excited thinking that we may now be friends just because we have similar backgrounds and upbringing and agree on a post. Statistics tell us that eventually that will happen.


----------



## vipond33 (Jul 25, 2011)

But you could be.


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

Joe - You ol" blowhard, I AM NOT BEGGING YOU TO UNBLOCK ME. Wait, as I think of it - keep it up ! That way you can still hide behind all the skirts between you and me. Waaaaaaa.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

Oh, CRAP, another one… I'm not hiding from anyone…

I just do not appreciate how some people enjoy doing what they do…
... I'm now done…

Y'all have fun with all of your version of FUN…


----------



## toeachhisown (Eddie) (Mar 30, 2011)

hummmmmmmm now this is getting interresting not the normal bs  DKV and JIMc world might be ending


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

chuckle, chuckle, chuckle.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

*Jimc, I don't want you getting all excited thinking that we may now be friends just because we have similar backgrounds and upbringing and agree on a post. Statistics tell us that eventually that will happen"*

DKV
I'm not getting excited about being friends, I'm just relaying my background and history when this country was without violence.

Statistics, and you're history of provocation, as well as your forum history on your home page, pretty much tells everyone you're only here to promote chaos of people's differing feelings.
You enjoy dicking with people, then stand back and watch the bonfire.

The sad part is a lot of the folks here that fall for it.

Take your meds and respond in the morning.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Well guys, you can't say I didn't try. I put the olive branch out there and was brusquely turned down. That's the last time I make myself vulnerable like that.


----------



## prattman (Aug 8, 2012)

COSMICSNIPER I apologize I over reacted , the OP put this thread out to get the reaction that I gave him , he is an ass and I let him make an ass out of myself. I looked at his history , few projects a lot of hate and he still doesn't understand why people block him


----------



## prattman (Aug 8, 2012)

DKV if you want to extend the olive branch , don't cover it with thorns .


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

This thread is awesome!! This is what Non-shop talk is all about!!! The arguments, the anger, the name calling…...Gets my blood PUMPIN!!!


----------



## davidmicraig (Nov 21, 2009)

There is no debate that will ever exist that can't be handled with a simple "You're a poopeyhead."


----------



## OnlyJustME (Nov 22, 2011)

i know you are but what am i?


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

My issue is not that of owning a gun as that is sort of gauranteed by the constitution. My major objection is with the NRA as they "push" the right of gun ownership but do *NOTHING* to solve the issues that face us today.

The NRA *SHOULD* be leading the effort to find solutions we can all live with in safety/security and stop the myopic response *"we have the right to bear arms."*


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

+100 Prattman

Now he is playing the victim again.


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

Funny thing about the NRA. I went to their website (http://home.nra.org/#/nranews) this morning to see what their reaction to recent events was. Firstly, I don't think they're ever going to win any WebDesign awards. When I got to their New/Politics tab I found stories about Fast-n-Furious, Bob Costas and one about the lack of outrage over the recent NFL drunk driving death. I did a search for "newtown", "sandy hook" and "lanza" and each one returned the same thing - "no results found".


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

The NRA has no responsibility to make a statement about this tragedy or lead the effort to find a solution, just like car manufacturers don't everytime there is a deathly car accident. Nor do the food/drug organizations say anything when people get sick/cancer from all the crap we are putting in our bodies. Why don't they? Because its a human decision and society flaw that is behind all of these things.

The gun didn't cause this regretful event. This isn't a gun problem, it's a human problem. Why does the NRA need to do anything?????


----------



## dakremer (Dec 8, 2009)

Instead of always pointing to and blaming the easy target (guns) why don't we start discussing and putting into affect ways to stop bullying, improving parenting skills, enhancing education, Implementing HEALTHY LIFESTYLE CHOICES - eating well, thinking well, moving well - that so many kids lack BIG TIME, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc

On second thought…..nah, that's too hard. Lets just blame/ban guns and pretend that'll solve everything.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Today's society consists largely of the "it's not my fault" types. It's not my fault that the schools don't raise my kids better, it's not my fault that tv stations and game makers don't entertain my children in a fashion that makes them solid citizens, it's not my fault that I'm a modern woman who has the right to work and ship my kids to day care, it's not my fault that junk food causes my kids to be fat, it's not my fault that the schools aren't able to teach my kids how to multiply, it's not my fault…(fill in the blank)


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

DKV & dakremer
Right on again.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Jonathon, are you referring to allowing Joe to post here?

See how I left Jimc out of this one. I'm trying my best…


----------



## MontanaBob (Jan 19, 2011)

I think that if the news organizations, would stop trying to get ratings from tragedies like this, the copycats wouldn't think of doing this kind of stuff….Whats it going to be one month or six months on the air??
.....


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Bob, anyone that has been shooting from a very young age is probably a hillbilly. Don't rush the school. The cops will mistake you for the shooter. Also, I understand that they now make cradle guns for those kids that want to start even younger.


----------



## JollyGreen67 (Nov 1, 2010)

dakremer #194 - Yah Hoo !


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

MontanaBob, you edited your post (206) and now it makes my post (207) look a little silly and confusing. I'll leave mine because I want to warn everyone of the cradle guns they now sell. However, in the future stick to your "guns" and don't delete. After all, I don't post to look silly or confused. I post to help the silly and confused…


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

It is interesting the split in opinions.
There are the Ban all Guns crowd
The Everyone should have anything crowd.
Then the (IMHO) weirder…let's ban "Bad" gun folks.

None of the above is a solution to the issue.
We have a society that doesn't talk anymore. The Kids will sit and text eachother even though they are only 6 feet apart rather than actually look up from their Cell Phone with their earphones and I-pod in…and actually say Hi, or have a conversation.
This is a society issue - not really a gun issue. The gun was just the tool du jour.

On the same day as Sandy Hook - in Denver two guys decided that it would be great fun to use a pump up plastic garden sprayer to douse people with gasoline and set them on fire.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/14/denver-fire-attack_n_2297829.html

The worst school fatality was in 1927 in Michigan.
May 18, 1927, which killed 38 elementary school children, two teachers, and four other adults; at least 58 people were injured. The perpetrator first killed his wife, and committed suicide with his last explosion. Most of the victims were children in the second to sixth grades (7-14 years of age1) attending the Bath Consolidated School. Their deaths constitute the deadliest mass murder in a school in United States history.
The bomber was the school board treasurer Andrew Kehoe, 55, who was angry after being defeated in the spring 1926 election for township clerk.

Mr. Harris from the Columbine shooting - 
On April 20, Harris was equipped with a *12-gauge pump-action shotgun*, (which he discharged a total of 25 times) and a Hi-Point 995 *Carbine 9 mm carbine with thirteen 10-round magazines*, which he fired a total of 96 times.

That was in a high school - imagine the carnage of 25 shots with a 12 guage shotgun in elementary schools? Banning large clips would have done what? If someond just carries a duffle bag of small clips? he took 96 shots!!
A pump shot gun is not semi-auto, nor an assault weapon.

Lest folks think this is a USA problem only as madts seems to imply - 
•March 13, 1996 - Scotland
A deranged gun collector kills 16 children aged four to six and their teacher at a school in Dunblane. He then kills himself.

•April 26, 2002 - Germany
16 people, including 12 teachers and two students, are gunned down at a school in Erfurt in eastern Germany by a 19-year-old former student, apparently in revenge for having been expelled.

•November 7, 2007 - Finland
An 18-year-old student opens fire in a school in southern Finland killing five boys, two girls and the headmistress before turning his gun on himself.

•September 23, 2008 - Finland
Eleven people, including the gunman, die in a massacre at a training school at Kauhajoki, Finland.

•March 11, 2009 - Germany
Nine pupils, three teachers and three passers-by are killed in a school shooting at Winnenden in southern Germany by a former pupil who then kills himself.

•April 7, 2011 - Brazil
A man believed to be a former student opens fire in a school in Rio de Janeiro killing 10 people and wounding 18 others before taking his own life.

•March 13, 1996 - Scotland
A deranged gun collector kills 16 children aged four to six and their teacher at a school in Dunblane. He then kills himself.

•April 26, 2002 - Germany

16 people, including 12 teachers and two students, are gunned down at a school in Erfurt in eastern Germany by a 19-year-old former student, apparently in revenge for having been expelled.

•November 7, 2007 - Finland
An 18-year-old student opens fire in a school in southern Finland killing five boys, two girls and the headmistress before turning his gun on himself.

•September 23, 2008 - Finland
Eleven people, including the gunman, die in a massacre at a training school at Kauhajoki, Finland.

•March 11, 2009 - Germany
Nine pupils, three teachers and three passers-by are killed in a school shooting at Winnenden in southern Germany by a former pupil who then kills himself.

•April 7, 2011 - Brazil
A man believed to be a former student opens fire in a school in Rio de Janeiro killing 10 people and wounding 18 others before taking his own life.

Sept. 13, 2006
Montreal, Canada Kimveer Gill, 25, opened fire with a semiautomatic weapon at Dawson College. Anastasia De Sousa, 18, died and more than a dozen students and faculty were wounded before Gill killed himself.

July 22, 2011
Tyrifjorden, Buskerud, Norway A gunman disguised as a policeman opened fire at a camp for young political activists on the island of Utoya. The gunman kills 68 campers, including personal friends of Prime Minister Stoltenberg. Police arrested Anders Behring Breivik, a 32-year-old Norwegian who had been been linked to an anti-Islamic group.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777958.html

I think we have a bigger problem than just that "Guns Exist" 
Guns are HARDER to get today than in the past. Yet mass murder/ heinous crimes are both more extensive and more frequent.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

DrDirt
That pretty much says it all.
Thanks


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

DrDirt's source link leads to a timeline of 77 school shootings. 17 of them took place outside the US. 60 of them took place inside the US. School shootings may be a universal occurrence but the US is showing some unique exceptionalism.

Here's one the timeline misses:

"On April 28, 1996, a gunman opened fire on tourists in a seaside resort in Port Arthur, Tasmania. By the time he was finished, he had killed 35 people and wounded 23 more. It was the worst mass murder in Australia's history.

Twelve days later, Australia's government did something remarkable. Led by newly elected conservative Prime Minister John Howard, it announced a bipartisan deal with state and local governments to enact sweeping gun-control measures. A decade and a half hence, the results of these policy changes are clear: They worked really, really well.
...
What happened next has been the subject of several academic studies. Violent crime and gun-related deaths did not come to an end in Australia, of course. But as the Washington Post's Wonkblog pointed out in August, homicides by firearm plunged 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no corresponding increase in non-firearm-related homicides. The drop in suicides by gun was even steeper: 65 percent. Studies found a close correlation between the sharp declines and the gun buybacks. Robberies involving a firearm also dropped significantly. Meanwhile, home invasions did not increase, contrary to fears that firearm ownership is needed to deter such crimes. But here's the most stunning statistic. In the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, there had been 11 mass shootings in the country. There hasn't been a single one in Australia since."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

This is from my son in law in Texas. An interesting read.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/18/stop-school-shootings-by-letting-teachers-fire-back-say-texas-officials/


----------



## SCOTSMAN (Aug 1, 2008)

we had such a massacre here in Scotland uk all guns were removed and guess what we have had none since,But I don't believe this would work in the USAas you guys have a differnt idea of guns than we ever did or want, but do you really need asault weapons with a hundred rounds in the chamber answer I don't believe you do.In otherwords doing nothing is not an option.I get really tired with some of the excuses the gun lobby rant out something has got to change and this is my 2 cents. worth. sorry if you don't like it. Alistair


----------



## toeachhisown (Eddie) (Mar 30, 2011)

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151207029493634


----------



## stevenmadden (Dec 10, 2009)

*JJohnston*: I read through rather quickly, so forgive me if this has already been answered. There were no "assault weapons" used in the Connecticut shooting.


----------



## MontanaBob (Jan 19, 2011)

DKV-- Me a Hillbilly??? You assume, but when you assume u make an ass out of u and me… So don't act silly even if you are confused….


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Scotsman - I know I am casting a wider net than scotland for the UK - 
but
:
On 2 June 2010, Derek Bird, a 52-year-old taxi driver, shot and killed 12 people and injured 11 others while driving through Cumbria. He then shot himself. Bird was a licensed firearms holder; his weapons were a 12 gauge double-barreled shotgun and .22-calibre bolt-action rifle

As can be seen these were far from Assault weapons. ANd this is 14 years after the massacre and tigher laws. I am not going to touch on Northern Ireland.

Skinner - Australia story you record only talks of gun violence.
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/341-360/tandi359/view%20paper.html

The Australian government shows that violent crime is increasing in that country especially sexual crimes against those under 14 years old. So while SHOOTINGS are down, crime is not.

Finally population needs to be included. We are seeing these crimes in Canada which has 1/10th the population of the USA and a slightly larger land area so MUCH lower population density., 
Same with all the Skandanavian violence…Finland has had 2 shooting like this in the past 5 years.
They only have a population of less than 6 million people! 1/50th the population of the US.

This wild west picture that is painted isn't very accurate.


----------



## Bayman (Jan 22, 2012)

It's the people, not the guns…..do better screening


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*Should Americans Learn From Israeli Gun Laws?*


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

MontanaBob

It's an honor to be called something derogatory from DKV. You should be proud
Welcome to the club.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Still lurking Wimpy Joe, I see.


----------



## JoeLyddon (Apr 22, 2007)

*I just stopped by to enter that Link… about how Israel does it…

Sounded good to me… I think it could work here…*

And, I don't care what you think about it… I know what idiots think of good things like that…


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

JAY,
Carry on… I fully support your position. I own several guns and I am a flaming LIBERAL. I challenge ANYONE to say otherwise! I own guns and want to keep them!


----------



## mark88 (Jun 8, 2009)

or (from my perspective) they just need to crack down on the law and make the penalty a little more permanent. If you cause the death of another body, then life in prison if not the death penalty. Works for me. That would make criminals think twice when they load a pistol. Theres nothing you can really do in this case where the gunman kills himself in the end. I don't agree with the legality of walking around with a gun. The rest of the world does fine without carrying firearms. But access to a firearm is way too easy. More laws need to be enforced on possession of a firearm from my point of view.


----------



## DLCW (Feb 18, 2011)

The US of A has to many cars in the hands of drunks killing thousands of people each year. We need to restrict cars to one per family.

Same logic MADTS.


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

*JAY,
Carry on… I fully support your position. I own several guns and I am a flaming LIBERAL. I challenge ANYONE to say otherwise! I own guns and want to keep them!*

HM
We have despised each other in the past, but +100 to you on this one.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

DLCW: Guns were designed to kill. Cars were meant for transportation. You can move a lot of guns with a car, but you can't move a lot of cars with a gun.
And I do agree with you that there are too many drunk drivers out there. That might just be my next thread.


----------



## Ken90712 (Sep 2, 2009)

Here is food for thought.


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Jimc, I thought I was the only person you had problems with? Now I learn about Mike. Are there more I should know about?


----------



## muleskinner (Sep 24, 2011)

DrDirt,
No matter how you slice it, the US with about 5 percent of the worlds population is the site of 78 percent of your school shootings.

If population density were a significant contributing factor I'd expect places like Japan, India or Great Britain to have a more prominent presence on the list. The simple fact is that among Western industrialized nations the level of gun violence (in or out of schools) in the United States is unique and unchallenged. If there is a non-US LumberJock out there who would be willing to accept our gun violence numbers in trade for loosening of their gun restrictions, I'd like to hear from them.

Yes, my Australian story only spoke to gun violence (while also observing that *all *homicides declined) which is what this thread is about. The increase of sexual assault on females 14 and under is an alarming statistic. I suspect that is a result of other societal factors rather than gun restrictions. I doubt the rate of armed 13 or 14 year old girls has changed much from pre-1996 to post-1996.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

I see the arguments, but I don't believe that draconian controls will actually make us safer.

Similarly, while I am not a prepper, I don't think that the government really has protecting individual liberties at heart, as they set such criteria for ownership. I think the laws that will stem from all this that get enacted, while not " outright Banning" guns will be so onerous that they will have the effect of a ban.

eg. Annual certification of gun and user ($$) 
license annually ($$) 
Home visits to show you have a "propper safe for storage" with new standards from ATF every other year
Medical/Mental certification akin to pilot medical $$ not covered by insurance.
Ammo taxes akin to cigarette taxes.

All of this builds to something unsustainable, but "Deemed Constitutional". But a right only available/affordable to th 1%, who will pay this to have their personal bodyguards armed, and have private skeet ranges, while the rest of us left to our own devices.

Beaurocrats with an agenda are not who I like to put in charge of who can excercise their rights or not.
I think there shoudl be a Sandy Hook test for the new laws… Show the people EXACTLY how any laws planned would have prevented the tragedy that happened.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

maybe it is the video games.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

I was glad to see that Wayne (mussolini) Lapierre has an excuse for all these mass killings. Music videos. Music videos kill more people from 30 feet than guns do according to the spokesman. I am a firm believer in logic, but this one one takes the cake.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

DaN, that is total mayhem. Should I buy a gun?


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

No
Do not buy a gun.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

DaN…..........really needs a hobby
Maybe try woodworking.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## chocked (Oct 27, 2012)

Just look at Switzerland
everyone has a gun and they have a very low crime rate. I agree in this country if criminals want guns they would be able to get them any way.


----------



## waho6o9 (May 6, 2011)

Why don't libtards blame the car in a drunk driving accident?


----------



## oldnovice (Mar 7, 2009)

Switzerland's low crime rate is partially a result of their drug policy and is a model for reducing death rates not only for those addicted but also for reducing crimes related to drugs.

Switzerland's drug policy

A good educational system is also another major component of reduced of crime in Switzerland!


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

Do some folks have any impute other than finding cartoons on the internet?
It's getting old.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

just keeping myself entertained ...


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Keeping me entertained also. Thanks.


----------



## inchanga (Aug 13, 2012)

If you started off with no guns but introduced a law that allowed people to carry them…providing they could prove they were criminals or psychologically unstable, you would create the situation that would arise if you banned gun ownership now.

The crooks and cranks would keep their guns while the law abiding citizens handed theirs in.

How many people would vote for the scenario outlined in paragraph 1 above?


----------



## jeepturner (Oct 3, 2010)

Thanks for the cartoons DaN, they are very entertaining. 
I am surprised that this string has stayed up so long, after all it is a political discussion. I hope it doesn't get taken down just because I have stated the obvious. Maybe it was left up because of the obvious, we do need a frank and honest discussion in this country about "Gun Control" (for those on the right) or "Gun Regulation" (for those who want to think about it).
It doesn't take long for the "Gun Control" folks to bring out the straw man arguments any time this subject is brought up. I could list them here but I wont. You can find them all in the prior posts if you read them.
My take is this…
I own hand guns. I own a rifle that is well suited for bring down large game animals. I own a rifle that some would call an assault rifle that is nice for target shooting and for shooting varmits. I have a concealed weapons permit, and I carry when I take road trips, take the family out camping, or if I am going somewhere that I feel I may need it. 
I beleive that anyone who owns or wants to own a rifle/hand gun should have a license. That license should be like getting a CWP. There should be an interview, and a background check. You should have to sign a notice that you are legally liable for any weapons that you own or purchase. Your weapons should be kept under lock and key when not in your personal possession. Like my CWP this license should have to be renewed, and could be revoked if any weapons purchased or controlled by the holder were used for any unlawful purpose.
Because of my views on gun regulation, I cannot and would not join or buy any of the products sold by the NRA. The NRA uses those membership fees to bully elected representatives to resist any type of limits or licensing on gun ownership in this country, and because of those activities, they, and those who support them are culpable in these tragedies. These tragedies that take place in this country on a far more frequent basis than anywhere else in the world.
Yes, guns do not kill people, but guns do make it way easier for a crazy twenty something, to kill his mother with her own guns and then kill school children.


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Mel: By CWP are you referring to the *C*ommunist *W*orkers *P*arty card or a *C*oncealed *W*eapons *P*ermit

))


----------



## jeepturner (Oct 3, 2010)

LOL, and I don't use that unless I just did, madts.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

*JAY,
Carry on… I fully support your position. I own several guns and I am a flaming LIBERAL. I challenge ANYONE to say otherwise! I own guns and want to keep them!*

Horizontal Mike

I don't consider you a flaming liberal, your points are usually valid, you are mostly respectful of other peoples opinions etc. Maybe my defination of flaming liberal is different than yours.


----------



## CL810 (Mar 21, 2010)

Two days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in
San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the
people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman
followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people.
He started shooting and people in the theater started running and
screaming. It's like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant!

Now aren't you wondering why this isn't a lead story in the national
media along with the school shooting? There was an off duty county
deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times
before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the
point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good
person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.

Here's the link.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## jeepturner (Oct 3, 2010)

CL810
You should read the story in the link, it doesn't exactly match up to your lead in.
It doesn't read like he went to the restaurant to "kill his ex". The story says, "Pollard said the woman called to warn restaurant employees, but by the time she saw his message, Garcia was already outside the China Garden firing a Glock 23 at the front door about 9:25 p.m." 
Why would she attempt to "call" the restaurant if she was in the restaurant?
I sounds to me like this Garcia character was trying to commit suicide by cop, because of this line in the story, ""He was chasing him, shooting in the air and at other cars," Pollard said." If he was trying to kill people, why would he shoot in to the air?
It sounds like Garcia will survive, and he will go to jail, the only other person shot by Garcia was struck in the back.
I do understand the gist of your argument, the media does not report stories like this one on the same scale as the Newtown shooting. But really can you compare these two stories? Young love struck Romeo is heart broken and decides to lash out and spends his young life in prison because he shot out the window of a police car, and could have killed someone, to young school children being gunned down by a twenty something crazy guy?

My headline for your post would be:
Ya know, there is a reason that not everyone can be a newspaper editor. 
Or, Another Strawman Ignores This:
- Charlotte Bacon, 2/22/06, female
- Daniel Barden, 9/25/05, male
- Rachel Davino, 7/17/83, female.
- Olivia Engel, 7/18/06, female
- Josephine Gay, 12/11/05, female
- Ana M. Marquez-Greene, 04/04/06, female
- Dylan Hockley, 3/8/06, male
- Dawn Hochsprung, 06/28/65, female
- Madeleine F. Hsu, 7/10/06, female
- Catherine V. Hubbard, 6/08/06, female
- Chase Kowalski, 10/31/05, male
- Jesse Lewis, 6/30/06, male
- James Mattioli , 3/22/06, male
- Grace McDonnell, 12/04/05, female
- Anne Marie Murphy, 07/25/60, female
- Emilie Parker, 5/12/06, female
- Jack Pinto, 5/06/06, male
- Noah Pozner, 11/20/06, male
- Caroline Previdi, 9/07/06, female
- Jessica Rekos, 5/10/06, female
- Avielle Richman, 10/17/06, female
- Lauren Rousseau, 6/1982, female (full date of birth not specified)
- Mary Sherlach, 2/11/56, female
- Victoria Soto, 11/04/85, female
- Benjamin Wheeler, 9/12/06, male
- Allison N. Wyatt, 7/03/06, female
to make the case for more guns in school.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)




----------



## FeralVermonter (Jan 1, 2013)

I really can't understand why so many law-abiding gun owners want to support policies that continue to allow criminals access to firearms. We need to get out of our ruts on this one, fellas, stop parroting the talking points of the pro/anti gun lobbyists. They're way out there-whichever side they're on. Most of us, though, are somewhere in the middle. We need to start having our own conversation, and start ignoring the radical outliers (on both sides).

I believe in the right to bear arms. I also believe that there are any number of reasonable ways to restrict criminal access to guns without restricting a law-abiding citizen's access. And that's it. That's my argument.


----------



## Shanman (Jan 2, 2013)

Drunk drivers kill alot of people each year….does that mean we need to ban cars? It all starts with good parenting, and NO, good parenting does not mean buying your kid an X-Box so he can play violent games, so you dont have to interact with, or spend time with him…..wake up people!


----------



## DKV (Jul 18, 2011)

Record gun sales in December.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/01/record-gun-sales-in-december-2012/


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Thought the background graph from DKV's link was even more interesting…. Look at the total checks done since 2006 versus the prior 10 years.

Checks have doubled in 6 years but have really taken off in the past 2 years.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

FeralVermonter the problem is criminals don't mind breaking the law, thats what makes them criminals.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## SCOTSMAN (Aug 1, 2008)

Here in the uk we decided after a vote to ban them everyone seems to be very happy with the result and I did say we choose not to have them we didn't have it foisted upon us by big brother we don't like guns here never did and never will.I am 61 years old and have never seen a gun for sale in the uk and neither have any of my friends we just don't think about them like you guys do.So it was actually quite easy to have those few in circulation held in and compensated for by the taxpayer.I fully understand this is not an option in America but I do believe that guns which hold rediculous ammounts of bullets or multi round guns could be banned .IMHO Alistair


----------



## tierraverde (Dec 1, 2009)

Scotsman

*Do Gun Bans Reduce Violent Crime? Ask the Aussies and Brits*
BY GLEN TSCHIRGI 
5 months, 3 weeks ago
(H/T Instapundit)

Nothing original to add here, but this posting I picked up from Instapundit is well worth passing along, particularly in light of the typical, knee-jerk, Statist reactions to the horrific Aurora CO shootings:

Actually, if the Australian Bureau of Criminology can be believed, Americans would be insane to concern themselves with what non-Americans think about American gun rights.

In 2002 - five years after enacting its gun ban - the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault - Australia's equivalent term for rape - increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

Moreover, Australia and the United States - where no gun-ban exists - both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:

Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7 percent.
During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault - Australia's equivalent term for rape - increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.

So, if the USA follows Australia's lead in banning guns, it should expect a 42 percent increase in violent crime, a higher percentage of murders committed with a gun, and three times more rape. One wonders if Freddy even bothered to look up the relative crime statistics.

The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations. Twenty-six percent of English citizens - roughly one-quarter of the population - have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more than 30 percent of its population victimized. The United States didn't even make the "top 10″ list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime.

Now all this statistical and factual information isn't going to mean anything to Lefty's and Statists, but it is always good to know that reality backs up the conservative position on gun rights and the 2nd Amendment.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

well said Alistair


----------



## cbehnke (Mar 28, 2011)

the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. the Constitution protects gun ownership. the Constitution has clearly defined methods to change it. if you want to try to lobby to get it changed, please feel free to do so.


----------



## cbehnke (Mar 28, 2011)

if you think it's all about just the right to have a gun, you're mistaken. it's more about natural rights (inalienable), property rights, ability to defend against tyranny.

Read the philosophers that guided the founding fathers; Locke, Montesquieu, Hume, Adams, etc.

It's so much more than the right to have a gun, so much more.


----------



## Ken90712 (Sep 2, 2009)

Here is some interesting info for us to think about.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## GaryC (Dec 31, 2008)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

DaN you are the best at this.


----------



## soylentgreen (Jan 18, 2013)

What do other countries do ? do they have the crimes like we do? just askin


----------



## madts (Dec 30, 2011)

Other countries do not have one gun per person.


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

Guns don't kill people , People with guns kill people ;unless People with guns kill the other people with guns who are trying to kill them with guns first . So practice your quick draw in front of a mirror at home .


----------



## kelvancra (May 4, 2010)

Oh cut the nonsense. Detroit and DC have been crime free since guns were banned.

Be mindful of there will be detractors who claim those millions upon millions murdered by governments in countries where citizens were disarmed, might have been safe, had they had guns. but this should be ignored. Had those people fought back, the would have broken laws.

Meanwhile, it is good to know guns are good an will allow those with them to force others with them to give them up, because they are dangerous.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

This guy lives in a shed in the back yard of his moms house, drinks lots of beer and needs a assault rifle. YUP!


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)




----------



## waho6o9 (May 6, 2011)

An armed society is a polite society.


----------



## DanYo (Jun 30, 2007)

*You may have heard, on the news, about a Southern California man who was put under 72-hour psychiatric observation when it was found he owned 100 guns and allegedly had (by rough estimate) 100,000 rounds of ammunition stored in his home. The house also featured a secret escape tunnel. By Southern California standards, someone owning 100,000 rounds would be called "mentally unstable."

Just imagine if he lived elsewhere:

In Michigan, he'd be called The last white guy still living in Detroit.

In Arizona, he'd be called "an avid gun collector."

In Arkansas, he'd be called "a novice gun collector."

In Utah, he'd be called "moderately well prepared," but they'd probably reserve judgment until they made sure that he had a corresponding quantity of stored food.

In Kansas, he'd be "A guy down the road you would want to have for a friend."

In Montana, he'd be called "The neighborhood 'Go-To' guy.

In Alabama, he'd be called "a likely gubernatorial candidate."

In Georgia, he'd be called "an eligible bachelor."

In North Carolina, Virginia, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky and South Carolina he would be called "a deer hunting buddy."

And in Texas he's just "Bubba, who's a little short on ammo."*


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

There was a claim some time back stating the UK had 5 times the crime as the US.

more than 2000/100K population in the UK vs. 466/100K population in the US.

The 5X figure was shown to be incorrect - because the UK includes more minor crimes in teh 2000 number.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jun/24/blog-posting/social-media-post-says-uk-has-far-higher-violent-c/

But they went on to analyze:
For England and Wales, we added together three crime categories: "violence against the person, with injury," "most serious sexual crime," and "robbery." This produced a rate of *775 violent crimes per 100,000 *people.

For the United States, we used the FBI's four standard categories for violent crime that Bier cited. We came up with a rate of *383 violent crimes per 100,000 people*.

So the original post still begs a good question- is it really GUNS that are teh problem?

You are twice as likely to be Clubbed to death (or beheaded) in london than be shot in the States?

*Is being beaten to death really so much more civilized that being shot?*


----------



## JGM0658 (Aug 16, 2011)

Had those people fought back, the would have broken laws.

So, is it better to be killed than breaking a law? This statement is dumb, as it has been said I rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.


----------



## RockyTopScott (Nov 16, 2008)




----------



## kelvancra (May 4, 2010)

Isn't it interesting how all the gun control proponents avoid one simple, but critical topic: The [liberty] right to own guns is about protection from government. However, all the conversations are about criminals acting using guns.

Of course, they also avoid the fact less than one percent of gun owners endanger, injure or kill others (but there is at least one politician who has proven he shouldn't be allowed around them).


----------

