And still this happens.....

[Worf101]

Facts: We have more guns in private hands than any nation in the world and any nation in history.

We have on average 20 mass shootings in America every year.

We have more people in prison than ANY nation on earth....

And still we aren't "safe".

I'm vet, I own guns, I believe in self defense. I'm not King, Ghandi or Jesus Christ... that being said, when some right-wing gun nut says in the next 24 hours (and believe me they will if they haven't already) that this could've been lessened or prevented IF MORE PEOPLE WERE ARMED my head's going to explode. Given the above facts, does any rational or sane person think that MORE weapons will help stem this bloody tide of mass-murder? I don't.

Worf

[thekid]

In this country we can't seem to figure out how to differentiate between guns used for sport/hunting and guns designed with the basic purpose of killing people and often times lots of people......... Worf Site says I can't give you any greenies or I would for your post.

[LeRoy]

Ya, I own one firearm for home defense and while I used to (mid-90's) legally conceal carry in my home state of Texas I was always of the mindset of where can I go and carry because I have a right to survive etc....that was not a healthy state of mind for me to be in..always at the ready to be ready for action. I simply own one with the hope I will never ever have to use it on anyone-ever.

A few years ago the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd amendment allows for citizens to own firearms separately from purposes of militia. Now, I never went to law school but in reading the 2nd amendment I would never come to the conclusion that Scalia did in review of the citizens right to bear arms.

Personally, I would be greatly in favor of restricting/prohibiting the manufacturing and sale of most handguns and all assault style weapons (long guns/shotguns/handguns) that the general public has access to now.

From my perspective of self-defense, I would be okay with handgun self defense firearms options: 22 cal, 22 WMR, .380 cal, .38 Cal, and .45 Cal. I would like to see all other handgun calibers that I have not listed simply not allowed for purchase by the general public.

I am not a hunter so I really don't know how much long gun is enough for hunting deer. However, I don't think an AK-47 or AR-15 or Mini-14 and similar type weapons are really designed for hunting anything other than people. I'd really like to see these weapons abolished forever from the hands of the general public.

Here is what really gets me....where is the voice of the police departments from around the nation with regard to firearms reduction/gun control? Why are P.D. silent on this topic?

[Mr Peabody]

The sad thing is not only are guns available that no one in their right mind would hunt with but you can buy one with out any background check in most places. You would think even the NRA would be in favor of guns being out of the hands of those who are known to be mentally unstable or already have a criminal record. You know some idiot is going to say, "if the teachers were armed". We all know from history no one wins in an arms race. We have had several recent high profile mass killings yet no one acts, not even to strengthen the laws that address the purchase of guns. In the old west most every one carried a gun, as society progressed that was done away with, it's interesting after all these years instead of continuing to progress society wants to regress back to every one toting a gun. When you see some of the stuff out on the internet from political parties having detaining camps of those who oppose to Obama going to declare martial law etc. it's scary to think those feeble enough to believe and/or create this stuff might have a gun.

I will never understand what makes some one want to take their anger out on innocent lives and to do so on children who haven't even had a chance to live is tradgic beyond what I can describe.

[winston]

after reading this clip, and browsing the site, all that I can say is "it makes me (Angry) to ask this question, why isn't politicians taking care of all these things that causes us so much pain!!?? A Guide to Mass Shootings in America | Mother Jones (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map)

there's a map in this link, that also gives us a wake up call on the mass murders and spree killings that happens in this country,

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

The problem in this country is that we have so many issues, and tug of wars, most folks just cannot get their collective heads around all of the problems. We are ignorant about the motives of certain special interest and political groups, and blindly believe their marketing angles. The NRA has always used the 2nd amendment as a ruse to support the gun lobby and sales. That is their job. They have resisted any attempt to regulate guns in any sane way. Here is what I say - maybe we cannot touch guns, but we can touch the bullets they require to work. Maybe we can place limits to their access without touching the right to own the gun.

We must start somewhere here. My confusion is how can you be pro-life, and still support a policy of no gun control, and all access? Money, money, MONEY.

Personally I think politicians are more about the money than they are about the people they supposedly sent to represent. That goes for both sides of the political divide. And we Americans are complicit in this for not paying attention, not acting, and not holding the bums to our representation.

[Smokey]

They have resisted any attempt to regulate guns in any sane way. Here is what I say - maybe we cannot touch guns, but we can touch the bullets they require to work. Maybe we can place limits to their access without touching the right to own the gun.That is briiliant http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/stock/smiley-cool0020.gif

[ForeverAutumn]

As a Canadian, this whole gun control issue just boggles my mind. We have very strict laws regarding gun possession here. I don't know of anyplace that even sells guns, outside of sporting goods stores that specialize in hunting weapons.

Here's my take. First of all I don't agree with this "right to bare arms" bull****. Sure, there are people who feel the need to carry a gun for protection and, of course, those who hunt. So, maybe there is a need to be able to purchase a hand gun or a rifle. But NOBODY has a personal need for a semi-automatic weapon.

Frankly, legal or not, if someone wants a gun, they'll find a gun. We have our fair share of shootings here too. Even with strict gun laws, we are far from immune (although I think that the majority of our shootings are gang related and involve hand guns). But, if the news is to be believed, this killer's mother legally owned semi-automatic weapons. LEGALLY. That blows my mind.

[Feanor]

.... Here is what I say - maybe we cannot touch guns, but we can touch the bullets they require to work. Maybe we can place limits to their access without touching the right to own the gun. ....
Aggh ... can't resist comment ...

You won't have any better luck restricting ammo sales than gun sales. And if you could it wouldn't be effective. For every gun there is likely already a thousand rounds of ammo extent somewhere for it. I probably have 400-500 rounds right now for my Mini-14 -- more than adequate to perpetrate the likes of the Connecticut massacre. Hand-loading further complicates the issue.

Seems to me that the USA has two, complementary problems. First, a "gun culture" where people feel they need and have a right to a gun for "personal protection" or any other purpose that occurs to them. Secondly, far too many guns, especially lethal quasi-military types that have no real application for hunting or target shooting.

IMO the Second Amendment was never intended to entitle everybody to have a gun for "personal protection"; it was intended for the protection of the state, specifically against British invasion back then in 1792. The assumption was that a "well regulated", i.e. state-organized militia could be more easily raised against a foreign threat if citizens could provide their own firearm.

[ForeverAutumn]

Please read this article. It's a first hand account of a mother living with a mentally ill son. While access to guns is certaily a big part of the issue. This article illustrates how it's only a symptom of a larger problem...mental illness.

The article is a bit long to post the whole thing here, so I'm just posting the link. It's worth reading.

I Am Adam Lanza's Mother (http://gawker.com/5968818/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother)

[Hyfi]

Pretty tired of the issue being directed at Gun Ownership. 99.9% of gun owners are on the up and up and are not mentally ill. The problems of our society are more related to the declining family unit. Every time I hear these and similar stories, my first question is "Where is the father?"

The mother in this case should never have allowed the mental kid to touch her guns.

Violent video games where reset brings everyone back to life desensitized people from the realities of death and violence.

Hollywood pumps out movie after movie of senseless violence, murder and mayhem which only desensitizes people.

The news agencies give us around the clock coverage and keep showing and saying the same stuff which just gives whackos something to top.

We all know the names of these sickos but not one name of the victims. The guy who did the Movie Theater killings should have just had a bullet to the head when he was apprehended. There is no rehabilitation for these people and we should not waste tax money on keeping them alive and well fed. Same should go for any other that does not take their own life.

We should not make people get a license to get married, we should make them get a license to pro-create.
We also should make it a bit harder to get divorced. Too many people get married with the thought of "oh well, if it doesn't work, we get divorced" Thats just great because it just creates more of the same single parent problems of neglect and proper guidance from both parents.

This is not a Gun problem, it's a People problem. If guns were not available, these idiots would kill people with something else.

I am a gun owner and have a permit to carry. the only rifle I own is a BB-Pellet gun but my handguns range from .25, .380, .40. .357. I rarely do carry...very rarely but it's my right and I am glad it is. I just recently found out, that anywhere outside of the city of Philly, I can carry in the open. If enough people carried in the open, the criminals would have to think twice about their actions. There are places in the US where this has curbed crime to a point.

All that said, it is a sad time in our history and that we have so many mentally unstable children without a proper family unit or help when needed.

[Feanor]

Please read this article. It's a first hand account of a mother living with a mentally ill son. While access to guns is certaily a big part of the issue. This article illustrates how it's only a symptom of a larger problem...mental illness.

The article is a bit long to post the whole thing here, so I'm just posting the link. It's worth reading.

I Am Adam Lanza's Mother (http://gawker.com/5968818/i-am-adam-lanzas-mother)
That was a great article that illustrates fundamental issue around mental illness. The issue with the availability of guns in the USA is that facilitates the mentally lashing out in a particularly lethal way.

That said, you have a much better chance of being killed by lightning strike than you do by a deranged mass killer.

[Feanor]

I'm a gun owner myself. Our gun laws here in Canada a far stricter than they are in the USA. Personally I feel they are too strict and too arbitrary in certain ways, however gun deaths have declined since stricter laws were enacted, especially suicides.

The fact is that guns are more lethal weapons than other instruments. That is, an attempted murder or suicide with at gun is more likely to be successful than with, e.g., a knife.

[Hyfi]

I'm a gun owner myself. Our gun laws here in Canada a far stricter than they are in the USA. Personally I feel they are too strict and too arbitrary in certain ways, however gun deaths have declined since stricter laws were enacted, especially suicides.

The fact is that guns are more lethal weapons than other instruments. That is, an attempted murder or suicide with at gun is more likely to be successful than with, e.g., a knife.

Timothy McVey (or whatever his name was) was pretty successful with a large truck bomb and needed no handgun even thogh he was military and had them.

[ForeverAutumn]

The problems of our society are more related to the declining family unit. Every time I hear these and similar stories, my first question is "Where is the father?"

Do you really believe that if this guy's father was around that this wouldn't have happened (and I don't know that his father wasn't around...I haven't heard much about his father)? With a divorce rate greater than 50%, there are millions of children from divorced families or with absentee parents. They don't go out and shoot people. I think that linking stories like this to the declining family is a stretch that has no validation.

I don't believe that gun ownership itself is the problem. But I do believe that the types of guns that are legal to own in the US feed the problem. Would this guy have been able to kill 26 people so quickly and easily with a handgun?

[Hyfi]

Do you really believe that if this guy's father was around that this wouldn't have happened (and I don't know that his father wasn't around...I haven't heard much about his father)? With a divorce rate greater than 50%, there are millions of children from divorced families or with absentee parents. They don't go out and shoot people. I think that linking stories like this to the declining family is a stretch that has no validation.

I don't believe that gun ownership itself is the problem. But I do believe that the types of guns that are legal to own in the US feed the problem. Would this guy have been able to kill 26 people so quickly and easily with a handgun?

For every broken family I can show you a messed up child. Whether or not they are messed up enough to kill is a different question. Maybe they don't shoot people but they get into other trouble.

The main problem here is that the person who purchased the guns, did it correctly and jumped through all the hoops...BUT allowed the messed up son to get hold of them. If they were locked up as they should have been, we would not have had the ability to do what he did so puts the blame back on the parent/s.

We will just have to disagree as to the decline in the family unit being an issue but everywhere I look I see news stories similar to this and almost always, there is no father to be talked about.

The bottom line is that people should not get married and pump out children they are not going to raise properly along with all the people that pump them out without being married or even knowing who the father is.

There have always been guns around and I know plenty of parents that have taught the children the proper respect. They don't have a problem following the rules.

Keep in mind, he never used the rifle, only the handguns. Had the teachers been armed, the loss would have been much less.

Another problem is that anyone can just willy nilly walk into any school without being questioned. I guess we need metal detectors everywhere.

[markw]

My take on this is simply this:

The mother was a teacher. She's paid to deal with kids for a living. Do you mean to tell me she couldn't see that her kid was trouble waiting to happen? All reports coming in now is that the kid was, let's just say, a little "moody" and tended to avoid social situations, or was just a bit antisocial.

Maybe, just maybe, you CAN judge some books by the cover, or at least read the dust jacket to see what's going on inside.

Most people, particularly a trained professional like a teacher, might look at that as something to look into, no? Schools have psychologists on staff to look out for warning signs, no?

Given that, hoccum Mommy Dearest didn't take greater care to keep her dangerous toys locked up where her precious progeny couldn't get at them?

[Hyfi]

Given that, hoccum Mommy Dearest didn't take greater care to keep her dangerous toys locked up where her precious progeny couldn't get at them?

Thats the bottom line here. If he could not get to them, he would not have been able to use them.

That equals a Parenting problem, not a Gun problem

[E-Stat]

They {NRA} have resisted any attempt to regulate guns in any sane way.
Would you care to provide a specific example?



My confusion is how can you be pro-life, and still support a policy of no gun control, and all access?
My confusion is to exactly who you refer who wants "no gun control". Who wants to dismantle the collection of federal laws of the Gun Control Act found in this 242 page document (http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf) ?

[ForeverAutumn]

Thats the bottom line here. If he could not get to them, he would not have been able to use them.

That equals a Parenting problem, not a Gun problem

And if she couldn't own them, they might not have been there for him to get to.

That equals a gun problem, not a parenting problem.

[JohnMichael]

For every broken family I can show you a messed up child. Whether or not they are messed up enough to kill is a different question. Maybe they don't shoot people but they get into other trouble.




Bull****! I grew up in a one parent home and it was my father I had to overcome. Had he remained I would have been messed up. A bad parent is worse than no parent.

The school did lock their doors at a certain time each day. He forced his way in and began shooting. If he did not have an assault rifle he probably could not have killed so many so quickly.

[JohnMichael]

My take on this is simply this:

The mother was a teacher. She's paid to deal with kids for a living.

Given that, hoccum Mommy Dearest didn't take greater care to keep her dangerous toys locked up where her precious progeny couldn't get at them?


The mother was not a teacher and that was early information that we now know was incorrect. She did not work at the school. Her son was home schooled but she did not work at the school or trained as a teacher.

I would say Mommy Dearest paid for having those guns.

[ForeverAutumn]

Has there been confirmation that the guns were not locked up? Or is this just an assumption because he was able to access them?

[ForeverAutumn]

Keep in mind, he never used the rifle, only the handguns.

BTW, you're wrong about that. According to this article (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/17/bushmaster-assault-rifle-in-newtown-shootings/1772825/?dlvrit=206567) in today's USA today the primary weapon used was a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle - a semiautomatic assault rifle. The same weapon used in the D.C. Sniper shootings.


In the school shooting, Connecticut Chief Medical Examiner H. Wayne Carver said all 26 victims were hit multiple times, suffering "devastating" wounds, all apparently traced to the rifle.

Connecticut State Police Lt. Paul Vance said Sunday that the shooter used "multiple" 30-round rifle magazines in the attack.

...

"There's a reason why these types of weapons are useful for the military," Lowy said. "They have the capacity to massacre large numbers of human beings in a short amount of time. There is little or no use for these weapons for people who want to use them for self-protection or sport."



Had the teachers been armed, the loss would have been much less.

Oh that's a good idea. Then the kids won't need to acquire their own guns to bring to school. They can just steal the teacher's gun.

More guns is not the answer to having too many guns on the streets.

[markw]

Has there been confirmation that the guns were not locked up? Or is this just an assumption because he was able to access them?Locked or not, it's a truly cathrostrophic mistake on mom's part that he was able to access them at all. One she paid dearly for. ...as did many others.

[Poultrygeist]

Violent crimes are lower among people with mental illness than with the general population. That being said a person with mental illness can not be required to seek treament. It is perfectly legal to be insane and unless a person is declared harmful to self or others they can not be committed for treatment against their will. This is where the problem lies. I suspect the mother knew her son needed inpatient treatment but there is no way to make that happen as a 20 year old is an adult and must give their own consent. Our state hospitals stand empty as committment laws changed and sadly judges make committment decisions rather than clinicians.

[dean_martin]

You can pretty much substitute "rattlesnakes" for "guns" in every one of these posts.

[ForeverAutumn]

Locked or not, it's a truly cathrostrophic mistake on mom's part that he was able to access them at all. One she paid dearly for. ...as did many others.

Absolutely. I was just curious.

[Hyfi]

BTW, you're wrong about that. According to this article (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/17/bushmaster-assault-rifle-in-newtown-shootings/1772825/?dlvrit=206567) in today's USA today the primary weapon used was a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle - a semiautomatic assault rifle. The same weapon used in the D.C. Sniper shootings.






Oh that's a good idea. Then the kids won't need to acquire their own guns to bring to school. They can just steal the teacher's gun.

More guns is not the answer to having too many guns on the streets.

Ok so I can blame the media for delivering mis-information to me. I have not been glued to the tv around the clock traumatizing myself as they are doing to everyone.

Locked or unlocked, there is a code of safety among most gun owners. Unloaded, gun locks, safes and other precautions. I have no children so I don't need to worry as much. When I go away, they are locked in a safe so they may not be stolen and used by an Ahole or sold back to the city of Camden for $100 so the thief can get a no questions asked fix.

More guns is not the answer, proper education and safety is part of the answer. Less violent games and movies is part of the answer. Proper nutrition and paying attention to your own children and not playing the "oh no, not my child" card. Proper time spent as a family unit teaching children right from wrong instead of using Video Games and TV as a babysitter might help. I have way too many friends that just plopped their newborns in front of the TV so they can be occupied and not bother the parent. Don't have children if you don't plan to raise them properly, they can't raise themselves.

That said, I know there is no hard line and it surely does not apply to everyone, but it does for the majority. Not every single parent family has problems but more do than the normal family unit does.

Lets start looking at the REAL problems of society and not blame every mentally whacked out gun crime on guns alone. Like I said earlier, no gun....make a bomb and take out a whole Federal building and Day Care. Have we outlawed Fertilizer yet? Maybe we should so nobody can ever do that again. But we will just bury our heads in the sand and not take care of the real problems. We will just punish the 99.999% of gun owners that do EVERYTHING the proper way.

I do agree on one point, there is no real reason to have Military Assault Rifles or Uzis. There is nothing wrong with having the same capacity handgun as the crazy cops have.

[Hyfi]

BTW, you're wrong about that. According to this article (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/17/bushmaster-assault-rifle-in-newtown-shootings/1772825/?dlvrit=206567) in today's USA today the primary weapon used was a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle - a semiautomatic assault rifle. The same weapon used in the D.C. Sniper shootings.






Oh that's a good idea. Then the kids won't need to acquire their own guns to bring to school. They can just steal the teacher's gun.

More guns is not the answer to having too many guns on the streets.

Ok so I can blame the media for delivering mis-information to me. I have not been glued to the tv around the clock traumatizing myself as they are doing to everyone.

Locked or unlocked, there is a code of safety among most gun owners. Unloaded, gun locks, safes and other precautions. I have no children so I don't need to worry as much. When I go away, they are locked in a safe so they may not be stolen and used by an Ahole or sold back to the city of Camden for $100 so the thief can get a no questions asked fix.

More guns is not the answer, proper education and safety is part of the answer. Less violent games and movies is part of the answer. Proper nutrition and paying attention to your own children and not playing the "oh no, not my child" card. Proper time spent as a family unit teaching children right from wrong instead of using Video Games and TV as a babysitter might help. I have way too many friends that just plopped their newborns in front of the TV so they can be occupied and not bother the parent. Don't have children if you don't plan to raise them properly, they can't raise themselves.

That said, I know there is no hard line and it surely does not apply to everyone, but it does for the majority. Not every single parent family has problems but more do than the normal family unit does.

Lets start looking at the REAL problems of society and not blame every mentally whacked out gun crime on guns alone. Like I said earlier, no gun....make a bomb and take out a whole Federal building and Day Care. Have we outlawed Fertilizer yet? Maybe we should so nobody can ever do that again. But we will just bury our heads in the sand and not take care of the real problems. We will just punnish the 99.999% of gun owners that do EVERYTHING the proper way.

I do agree on one point, there is no real reason to have Military Assault Rifles or Uzis. There is nothing wrong with having the same capacity handgun as the crazy cops have.

[Poultrygeist]

I've worked with kids with Aspergers and violence was never an issue but personality disorders are a different matter. I have seen kids with Aspergers/autism become fixated and obsess over a single topic such as trains or the military. I wonder if the mom's gun hobby wasn't a way for her to connect with her son and his obsession?

She had to know he was prone to violence as this behavior does not come on overnight.

[Hyfi]

She had to know he was prone to violence as this behavior does not come on overnight.

+1
Thats why it is important to spend more time to know who your children are and what they need, including the proper help. Maybe daddy would have noticed had he stuck around.

[dean_martin]

Like I said earlier, no gun....make a bomb and take out a whole Federal building and Day Care. Have we outlawed Fertilizer yet? Maybe we should so nobody can ever do that again. But we will just bury our heads in the sand and not take care of the real problems. We will just punish the 99.999% of gun owners that do EVERYTHING the proper way.

I do agree on one point, there is no real reason to have Military Assault Rifles or Uzis. There is nothing wrong with having the same capacity handgun as the crazy cops have.

I agree with most of what you say, but try parking in front of a federal building since the OK City bombing and see if you don't wind up being questioned by the US Marshalls. You should also find barricades/posts surrounding most federal buildings since the OK City bombing. No, fertilizer was not banned, but measures were taken in the interest of safety and I suspect, but am not sure, that fertilizer purchases are tracked in some manner. (Admittedly, I could be wrong about tracking fertilizer purchases.)

My equating guns with rattlesnakes in an earlier cryptic post comes from seeing/learning of too many self-inflicted gun shot wounds and deaths and other accidental shootings. It's really a different topic but the results can be just as tragic, but with fewer numbers.

I am curious as to where you get your conclusion that 99.999% of gun owners do EVERYTHING the proper way. I agree that the percentage is probably high, but I cannot take it on faith that it's that high. We don't hear about the near misses from accidental discharges, for example. The fact that a former VP shot someone by accident suggests that the percentage is not quite that high.

I received a message from a former teacher/enthusiastic gun owner/self-proclaimed libertarian that a recording exists of an officer at the scene stating that a second gunman was subdued and handcuffed and the third gunman was being pursued through the woods. The message went on to state that two copycat shootings in Alabama were thwarted by armed citizens over the weekend. How do you debate crap like this? You don't. I kindly replied that I hadn't heard there were other shooters and I would look into it. As to the copycat attempts though, I replied that you can't really copy a school massacre during a weekend. Sometimes you just gotta call BS when you see it. Of course, his underlying premise for the copycat story was that armed citizens can stop these types of killing sprees. I don't see it/get it. I disagree.

[Hyfi]

I agree with most of what you say, but try parking in front of a federal building since the OK City bombing and see if you don't wind up being questioned by the US Marshalls. You should also find barricades/posts surrounding most federal buildings since the OK City bombing. No, fertilizer was not banned, but measures were taken in the interest of safety and I suspect, but am not sure, that fertilizer purchases are tracked in some manner. (Admittedly, I could be wrong about tracking fertilizer purchases.)

My equating guns with rattlesnakes in an earlier cryptic post comes from seeing/learning of too many self-inflicted gun shot wounds and deaths and other accidental shootings. It's really a different topic but the results can be just as tragic, but with fewer numbers.

I am curious as to where you get your conclusion that 99.999% of gun owners do EVERYTHING the proper way. I agree that the percentage is probably high, but I cannot take it on faith that it's that high. We don't hear about the near misses from accidental discharges, for example. The fact that a former VP shot someone by accident suggests that the percentage is not quite that high.

I received a message from a former teacher/enthusiastic gun owner/self-proclaimed libertarian that a recording exists of an officer at the scene stating that a second gunman was subdued and handcuffed and the third gunman was being pursued through the woods. The message went on to state that two copycat shootings in Alabama were thwarted by armed citizens over the weekend. How do you debate crap like this? You don't. I kindly replied that I hadn't heard there were other shooters and I would look into it. As to the copycat attempts though, I replied that you can't really copy a school massacre during a weekend. Sometimes you just gotta call BS when you see it. Of course, his underlying premise for the copycat story was that armed citizens can stop these types of killing sprees. I don't see it/get it. I disagree.

OK so parking next to a federal building is more difficult, but you can pull right up to a school or any other place of business. My main point again is that this is not really a gun control issue, it is a people control and parenting issue.

Most of the accidental shootings we hear about are children of gun owners, legal or otherwise, that get hold of the weapon and shoot their brother or sister. But again, if the gun was locked and not loaded it could not happen that easily.

Maybe my percentage is extreme but if you look at how many legal gun owners there are, and how many of these accidental shootings happen, you can get my point.

Accidental hunting accidents are another story. Some of these guys really should not own guns at all. When there are many hunters in the same area and everyone has a hair trigger and shoots at anything that moves, **** happens. I don't hunt and never did.

All the people I personally know who are owners have had some training, education and show the proper respect. I'm sure there are those who are lax. But you can't just go changing all the gun laws and screwing over the people who abide them because some whacko bought their deranged child assault weapons. If he didnt kill her, she should have went to jail for her part in the whole mess.

[dean_martin]

My main point again is that this is not really a gun control issue, it is a people control and parenting issue.



You're probably right to a large extent. When kids are having kids and more and more families appear to be "dysfunctional" and we are all exposed to so much more through various media, it's hard to argue with you. Using percentages, you're probably 90% right. BUT, what's the "fix"? Identifying the problem is only the first step. How do we solve parenting problems? How do we control people? Should "we" (or, our gov't) be doing either? When the solution is almost impossible to arrive at and implement, we have to treat the "symptoms" until we can get a handle on the "disease". Some reasonable restrictions on gun rights should be part of the solution. For example, who needs a 30-round magazine? Who needs an AR-15? I have two shotguns and a .22 rifle. Many years ago, when I used to hunt with my grandfather, I was told that if we removed the "plug" from our shotguns we would get in trouble with the game warden. The "plug" allowed the shotgun to hold 3 shells. Remove the plug and the gun could hold 5 shells. You could only load 3 rounds at a time for deer. How many rounds can you load for humans?

My feelings/thoughts may be a little extreme. I do not think a person needs to or should carry a concealed hand gun. A hand gun, if kept at all, should be kept in one's home to protect one's last place of retreat. "Stand your ground" laws are in contravention of the common law that required one to retreat or stop short of deadly force, if possible, while defending one's self or others. I think we've placed "self-defense" so far above preservation of human life that things are upside down now. What message does this send to impressionable young people, especially those who feel anxious, frustrated and picked on? They can almost justify lashing out and killing anyone who has ever wronged them simply by misinterpreting or twisting the law ever so slightly. Hell, they can develop a plan while playing the latest first-person shooter.

[ForeverAutumn]

All the people I personally know who are owners have had some training, education and show the proper respect. I'm sure there are those who are lax. But you can't just go changing all the gun laws and screwing over the people who abide them because some whacko bought their deranged child assault weapons.

And yet we all take our shoes off at airports all over North America (the world?) because one wacko unsuccessfully tried to blow up an airplane by smuggling explosives in his shoes. I'm not saying what is right and wrong, I'm just saying that priorities are confused.

[Hyfi]

And yet we all take our shoes off at airports all over North America (the world?) because one wacko unsuccessfully tried to blow up an airplane by smuggling explosives in his shoes. I'm not saying what is right and wrong, I'm just saying that priorities are confused.

I agree that there is no easy solution to all of this.

How about instead of needing a License to get Married, you need to get a License to have a child and you need to prove you can properly care for it after you have it?

Unrelated but same problem where instead of fixing the problem, the ones who follow the rules are punished.

I used to work in a shop and we started at 7am. There was a grace period til 7:07 and you would not be docked. Several people including the foreman were always punching in between 5 and 7 after and getting paid from 7, while the rest of us were there before 7 and actually working at 7 o'clock.

So instead of reprimanding the abusers and fixing the problem, the boss moved the time clock 10 minutes forward so now all the people who were always on time, were 10 minutes early and had to wait til the clock said 7 to start working AND the very same abusers just continued to come in later and never get docked.

This is the same insanity now where because there are a handful of very stupid people, there is a cry to screw over all the others who follow the rules.

There is nothing wrong with target shooting and a desire to protect one self and home. I don't need an assault weapon for that but don't dare tell me I should not be allowed to own a handgun as long as I follow the rules and the laws.

My County wants people to have permits to carry. They have a special desk setup at the Sheriffs Office just for permits. The more sane citizens with a gun, the more help the cops have in this crazy world. These are not the same people causing the problems. Mothers who buy their deranged children assault weapons are the problem.

[LeRoy]

Winston, thanks for the Mother Jones link. The shooting at McD's back in 84 and the day trader shootings in Atlanta in 99 really got me sick during their time of when those events happened. I am sick again with the theater shooting and now with the slaughter in Newtown.

A part of me feels kinda guilty due to my apathy over the years on the topic of gun control. After the Aurora,CO shootings I did sign the petition at the Brady Handgun Control Center. Now, I plan to actually write out my idea of what gun and ammo control legislation should look like and mail it in. I doubt that any or little of what I plan to write will actually be considered but at least I will be attempting to engage in the process rather than doing nothing as I have in the past.

Thanks again for the link, very helpful.

[Hyfi]

NRA responds

NRA Responds To Sandy Hook Massacre (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/nra-responds-sandy-hook_n_2325059.html)

And here is an interesting part of the page..

""It wasn't immediately clear what meaningful contributions the NRA plans.

But there may be some clues in the group's responses to prior mass shootings. In early 2011, following the mass shooting in Tucson, Ariz., that nearly killed former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, NRA chief executive Wayne LaPierre said the debate about how to prevent future gun massacres should focus on preventing the mentally ill from acquiring weapons.

“It shouldn’t be a dialogue about guns; it really should be a dialogue about dangerous people,” LaPierre told The New York Times.
""

Ever wonder why you really don't hear much from Gabby? She happens to carry the same model Glock that she was shot with. She does not want that right taken away from herself.


What I have noticed in discussions here and elsewhere, those who quickly jump on the more control bandwagon overlook is that the majority of these kinds of crimes are not committed by the legally registered owner of the gun. Most killers don't jump thru hoops and waiting periods if they want to go off on society, they steal one...buy a stolen one or any other means and get the job done now while they are still snapping. Yes, there are some who go the extra mile.

[ForeverAutumn]

those who quickly jump on the more control bandwagon overlook is that the majority of these kinds of crimes are not committed by the legally registered owner of the gun. Most killers don't jump thru hoops and waiting periods if they want to go off on society, they steal one...buy a stolen one or any other means and get the job done now while they are still snapping.

And exactly where do you think those stolen guns come from?

Hyfi, I don't blame the gun owners. Well, I don't blame the responsible gun owners. But I do think that there are too many guns available. Do you think that the victim of a violent crime or their family cares whether it was the gun owner who fired the bullet? The US has relatively easy access to weapons and a very high crime rate. I don't think that's just a coincidence.

Frankly, if the US doesn't want to make changes to gun laws, that's their business. Just make sure to keep your guns and your gun related violence in your own country. Unfortunately, many of those stolen guns make it over the border and affect others.

[Feanor]

There is something circular in the argument that people must have the right to own & carry guns to protect themselves from others own guns because they have the right to do so, and might misuse them.

It's not my definition of a civil society when civilians have to arm themselves against their fellow citizens -- even in the Wild West sheriffs would often insist that all guns be checked at the town limits.

It seems that 40% of US guns sales legally happen without any background checks. Apparently checks aren't required for online and gun show sales -- yet gun nuts insist they need to do something about crazy people, not guns.

Some gun restrictions that would helpful:


Require a thorough background check for all gun buyers -- better yet, require licencing of all gun owners
As above for ammo purchases
Prohibit semi-auto rifles with detachable magzines or a capacity of over 5 rounds
Prohibit handguns of over 6 round capacity
Institute government programs to purchase guns at fair market value
Combined with the above, offer a temporary amnesty on illegal guns turned in
And/or confiscate existing prohibited guns and magazines, compensating owners at fair market value; (as was done in Australia).

[ForeverAutumn]

I just read an article that stated some of the profits that gun manufacturers earn. Now it's making more sense. Firearms are a $32 billion industry. Guns are big money.

[E-Stat]

It seems that 40% of US guns sales legally happen without any background checks. Apparently checks aren't required for online and gun show sales -- yet gun nuts insist they need to do something about crazy people, not guns.
Sorry, but that is a ludicrous assertion. Where on earth did you get that figure?

Let's examine your speculation using facts. Last year, there were 16.5 million gun checks (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/05/us-usa-firearms-backgroundchecks-idUSTRE80407P20120105) according to the FBI. And that number does not include those who purchase guns who remain "pre-checked" (possessing a current carry license having been finger printed and checked). So, if your number were correct, that suggests that 11 million guns were sold casually at gun shows. That works out to over 30,000 each and every day! No, you cannot purchase firearms online unless you have a Federal Firearms License.

[Feanor]

40% was the number quoted on MSNBC's Morning Joe program this morning.

[E-Stat]

40% was the number quoted on MSNBC's Morning Joe program this morning.
Citation-free I'm sure.

Do you believe every outrageous thing that you read or hear?

[markw]

Citation-free I'm sure.

Do you believe every outrageous thing that you read or hear?When it suits his needs.

[ForeverAutumn]

I was thinking today how nice it is that we can discuss something so emotionally charged with reason and respect. Let's keep it that way, shall we?

[Feanor]

Sorry, but that is a ludicrous assertion. Where on earth did you get that figure?

Let's examine your speculation using facts. Last year, there were 16.5 million gun checks (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/05/us-usa-firearms-backgroundchecks-idUSTRE80407P20120105) according to the FBI. And that number does not include those who purchase guns who remain "pre-checked" (possessing a current carry license having been finger printed and checked). So, if your number were correct, that suggests that 11 million guns were sold casually at gun shows. That works out to over 30,000 each and every day! No, you cannot purchase firearms online unless you have a Federal Firearms License.
Like I said, I heard it on MSNBC: I don't recall or didn't hear the source citation. So suppose it's less than 40%. Is it not the case that guns are traded without checks at gun shows or private sales? What percentage of sales is acceptable without checks?

[Feanor]

It's OK. I'm back on sabbatical.

[markw]

Let’s fact it, we like our toys.

For whatever reason, some things just trigger the acquisitional lust in all of us. Even though we may never be able to experience them to their full potential, we still want them.

For some people its cars. If I could afford one I’d just love a Maserati Quattroporte even though I’d never see much above 90. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t want one just because I wanted one.

But, some bonehead dealer recently had one of his megabuck Italian prancers crash and kill some bewildered motorcyclist who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

And, some owners of these fast cars got together, taped over their license plates, and somehow talked some dimwitted state trooper into leading a convoy of them down the Garden State Parkway at speeds well in excess of 100 mph …through traffic.

I don’t see anyone railing to make these illegal and it’s a fact cars kill more people than guns.

As for guns, I personally don’t see the need, not possess toe desire, for these high capacity rifles but to some aficionados, they are merely a fine piece of hardware they want to own, not unlike a Rolex watch, some exotic pets, or even some megabuck stereo equipment.

Granted, just like with some dangerous pets, some controls need to be exercised by their owners but, since they are legal and most people are responsible stewards, in this country, we have the freedom to do many things.

Controls are in place. Granted, a few states could use a bit of tightening up and internet sales should be verboten but, if the controls were enforced and the criminals that used guns were met with serious punishment, perhaps some improvement could be realized.

Also, its now coming out that little Adam loved his shoot ‘em up video games and spent his time in the cellar playing them. Isn’t it strange that his actions in the classroom do seem to emulate the way one plays those games, what with shooting the victims multiple times for the sheer blood-lust involved when one bullet would have easily dispatched these tiny 7 year-olds. Maybe they should ban violent video games too, eh?

It’s also rumored that his mom was considering having him institutionalized but who knows? That would explain her. Who knows what he had against the kids? That’s just what the news is now saying. Tomorrow it could be something different.


In either case, guns are a scapegoat for deeper problems. Look at what a few Saudi Arabians did with just a few box-cutters about eleven years ago.

[blackraven]

I own several guns, a Navy issue M9 Baretta 9mm hand gun, a WWII Russian made Moisin Nagant rifle, a 12g shot gun and a .22 hunting rifle. All are unloaded, with a trigger lock and in a Gun Safe. You should be required to have all guns locked and stored in a Gun Safe of good quality to own a gun of any type. You should be required to take a gun safety course as well. With that being said, I would have no problem if they were to outlaw handguns , semi autos and assault type rifles. In addition, they should put gun owners in prison if any of their children get caught with their guns.

[ForeverAutumn]

What percentage of sales is acceptable without checks?

I agree with Feanor here. If it's true that you can buy a gun at a show without a license or security check, I think that's wrong. As for a private sale...the sale should require registration with the proper authorities for it to be legal. And there should be repercusions for both the seller and purchaser if licenses are not in place and confirmed before any guns change hands.

Just let me write your guns laws. I'd do a good job, I promise. :)

[Hyfi]

Some gun restrictions that would helpful:


Require a thorough background check for all gun buyers -- better yet, require licencing of all gun owners
As above for ammo purchases
Prohibit semi-auto rifles with detachable magzines or a capacity of over 5 rounds
Prohibit handguns of over 6 round capacity
Institute government programs to purchase guns at fair market value
Combined with the above, offer a temporary amnesty on illegal guns turned in
And/or confiscate existing prohibited guns and magazines, compensating owners at fair market value; (as was done in Australia).


I agree with most of these points above but the one thing I am not hearing from anywhere is Education. You surely cannot go back in time but how about for every new gun purchase while waiting for background check, the individual is required to take a Gun Safety Class as well as learn how to properly use and care for the weapon they are purchasing?

If they reduce all capacity to only 6 rounds, how will Hollywood show all it's senseless killing where all the guns have endless rounds between magazine swaps?

I did hear this morning that someone finally wants to see if Violent Video Games cause violence.

[Feanor]

I agree with most of these points above but the one thing I am not hearing from anywhere is Education. You surely cannot go back in time but how about for every new gun purchase while waiting for background check, the individual is required to take a Gun Safety Class as well as learn how to properly use and care for the weapon they are purchasing?

If they reduce all capacity to only 6 rounds, how will Hollywood show all it's senseless killing where all the guns have endless rounds between magazine swaps?

I did hear this morning that someone finally wants to see if Violent Video Games cause violence.
Yes, good point about education. Here in the Great White North you need a permit to own acquire a gun and to get that you need some sort of training course; (the exact requirement varies by province).

Up here too there are elaborated requirements for gun storage -- a big consequence of this is that guns, (especially hand guns), are virtually useless for home defence. There is certainly nothing like "concealed carry permits".

Do violent computer games inspire real violence among players? Yes, they do -- not for all but for the minority who are prone to it on account of personality disorders.

[Feanor]

I own several guns, a Navy issue M9 Baretta 9mm hand gun, a WWII Russian made Moisin Nagant rifle, a 12g shot gun and a .22 hunting rifle. All are unloaded, with a trigger lock and in a Gun Safe. You should be required to have all guns locked and stored in a Gun Safe of good quality to own a gun of any type. You should be required to take a gun safety course as well. With that being said, I would have no problem if they were to outlaw handguns , semi autos and assault type rifles. In addition, they should put gun owners in prison if any of their children get caught with their guns.
It's good to hear a gun owner with a rational perspective. I too own guns but would give them up if it came to that; (I would like reasonable compensation like was offered in Australia).

There is a certain strange parallel with today's air travel security. We all hate the intense security checks we need to endure to fly anywhere -- and let's face it, in a truly civilized world, nobody would threaten the lives of innocent people. But we don't have a truly civilized world.

Same with guns. We ought to be able to own any guns and use them with regard for our own and others safety. But not everybody uses them with regard to everyone's safety. So we have to put up with disagreeable restrictions that impinge on our rights to a necessary extent.

[E-Stat]

What percentage of sales is acceptable without checks?
When rational analysis of actual data shows any significant amount of criminal activity that should be addressed. "Feel good-do nothing" legislation serves no real purpose.

USA Today published an article (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/18/mass-killings-common/1778303/) recently showing that over a period of five years, there were 774 victims of mass murder committed by all means. Please read the last two sentences of the article.

[Hyfi]

When rational analysis of actual data shows any significant amount of criminal activity that should be addressed. "Feel good-do nothing" legislation serves no real purpose.

USA Today published an article (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/18/mass-killings-common/1778303/) recently showing that over a period of five years, there were 774 victims of mass murder committed by all means. Please read the last two sentences of the article.

My gosh, I think we now need a Bill and Legislation to block out the Sun too.

[Feanor]

When rational analysis of actual data shows any significant amount of criminal activity that should be addressed. "Feel good-do nothing" legislation serves no real purpose.

USA Today published an article (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/18/mass-killings-common/1778303/) recently showing that over a period of five years, there were 774 victims of mass murder committed by all means. Please read the last two sentences of the article.
Three things I agree with:


Make guns illegal and only criminals will have guns
Gun control is "feel good" legislation in as much as it allows politicians to seem to be doing something even if it isn't necessarily useful
You have better chance of being kill by lightning than randomly by a mass killer

But this isn't to say that reasonable gun control wouldn't help.

[thekid]

One Bullet -One Gun
If it was good enough for Mayberry its good enough for America........

[E-Stat]

One Bullet -One Gun
If it was good enough for Mayberry its good enough for America........
Aunt Bea's "Kerosene Cucumber" pickles were an effective deterrent...

[Mr Peabody]

LOL, there you go, legislation in a nutshell. And, don't forget the bullet stays in your pocket until needed.

Every one have a great holiday!


One Bullet -One Gun
If it was good enough for Mayberry its good enough for America........

[markw]

LOL, there you go, legislation in a nutshell. And, don't forget the bullet stays in your pocket until needed.Well, if Sheriff Andy said it's OK...