I had it pointed out to me

[nakdsub]

Actually I car very much...

I have granddaughters the same age as those who were killed, and I actually do believe in some forms of control, but what most people are referring to when they say gun control, is the ban of firearms. I would be the first to give up all in my possession if you could promise me all the guns of the world would be eradicated; of course that's impossible.

Violence is not caused by the instrument with which it is carried out; it is a disease and until we start examining the cause we'll never find the cure.

"It takes a village to raise a child." Ever hear that before; it's true. Unfortunately most kids today don't even have two parents. Between both adults having to work in most households and the divorce rate, kids are left on their own a lot. Instead of being guided and taught by caring adults they are influenced by their peers. 'Buy the kid the latest violent video game and he'll stay out of our hair,' horrifically, is the attitude of a lot of the parents of today.

 

[njlauren]

Remember prohibition, when we decided to outlaw alcohol? How'd that work out?

After our 35 year, 'war on drugs,' have we stopped the use of illegal drugs? I find it ironic that some legislators are discussing legalizing drugs to keep the violence down, but outlawing guns.

Gun control is a fantasy; like Claudia Schiffer giving up her career to become my love slave...pure fantasy. At last count there were 300,000,000 guns in the U.S. That's one for every man, woman, and child in this country.

When I was a kid we worried about Russia sending over an atomic bomb; we never worried about someone coming into our school and shooting us; yet, per capita, there were just as many guns then as there are now, and they were much more easily obtained. I bought my first gun, as 22 rifle, at the age of 12 for $3.00 at an auction. It is hanging on my wall today. In fact, I am looking at it right now.

Could there possibly be more involved here than the availability of guns?

There is an interesting analogy with guns and alcohol, and a valid one. The problem with prohibition was it was an outright ban, in response to a very real problem, which was unregulated drinking, there were major problems, you had bars and taverns opening anywhere they wished, you had alcohol being served that had methanol in it (yes, folks, before prohibition that was true, not just during it), but the problem was the bible thumpers and the carrie nationesque types claimed banning it was the answer and I suspect the same is true of guns.

What the real answer is what came after prohibition, which was regulation. State liquor laws regulated where bars could operate, and bar owners and liquor stores had to follow rules as part of their licenses, which including not serving inebriated people, min age laws, and also the quality and strength of the booze. That regulation meant it was harder to buy alcohol, it meant you didn't have pubs and taverns selling to whom whenever they wanted , and it made a differnce.

It is the same with guns, banning all guns won't work (and also is illegal under the 2nd amendment, even liberal scholars agree). What is needed are good regulations, the ones we have now are crap, they are too porous to be effective. In many states, you don't have to register guns, which means joe billy bob can fill a trunk up with weapons, including military style semi automatic assault weapons like ak47's and the like, can drive to some big city that has gun control laws, and make a killing selling to the black market, and if it ever comes back to them, they are like "oh, I lost it", or "Oh, it was stolen". When you own a car, you are responsible for its use, and if someone used it committing a crime and you didn't report it stolen, you would be arrested. The NRA seems to think there is no responsibility with gun ownership. otherwise, they would be pressing for laws requiring that, requiring that gun owners be responsible, and this would shut off the spigots from the states where most of these weapons come from (75% of the guns pulled off the streets of NYC, DC and other big cities that have strict control laws, were purchased legally in a handful of states down south). Likewise, we don't allow people to have fully automatic weapons (you want one as a collector, has to be disabled from firing), we don't allow civilians to buy C4 or dynamite, so why do we allow civilians to buy weapons whose only purpose were as military weapons? What need outweighs the harm of owning an AK47? The second amendment does not say people have the right to own guns of any kind any more then it says they should be able to buy them like buying a pound of nails, it says people have the right to own weapons subject to the burdens all rights have, where public good factors in rights can and will be limited, and that applies to every right in the constitution.

 

[njlauren]

I have granddaughters the same age as those who were killed, and I actually do believe in some forms of control, but what most people are referring to when they say gun control, is the ban of firearms. I would be the first to give up all in my possession if you could promise me all the guns of the world would be eradicated; of course that's impossible.

Violence is not caused by the instrument with which it is carried out; it is a disease and until we start examining the cause we'll never find the cure.

"It takes a village to raise a child." Ever hear that before; it's true. Unfortunately most kids today don't even have two parents. Between both adults having to work in most households and the divorce rate, kids are left on their own a lot. Instead of being guided and taught by caring adults they are influenced by their peers. 'Buy the kid the latest violent video game and he'll stay out of our hair,' horrifically, is the attitude of a lot of the parents of today.

I personally don't think the answer is banning guns, I think the answer is in regulating them, which includes having laws deciding which guns people can own. We do that with so many other things, go and try and buy C4 or Dynamite and see what happens. The reason you cannot buy them is on the grounds that a civilian has no legitimate use for them and the harm of having them is great. So called assault weapons like AK47's have no civilian use either, justifiable use, they are not hunting or sporting weapons, and their primary use is not self defense, and more importantly, using them for self defense is likely to cause more deaths then it protects (for example, in home defense, can you imagine the richocets if some dumb ass shot an ak47 inside?). Those weapons are vanity weapons, more designed to make some lout feel tough then legitimate uses, and given the downside to them, that you can put large capacity clips on them and have something that can kill 10's of people in a couple of minutes, not worth the risk. Hunting rifles, shotguns, handguns, all have their legitimate uses, and as long as in buying them people are held acountable, they should be allowed to have them, but not like buying candy in walmart and not where they can buy them and then sell them into the black market and not have to worry.

 

[4glory6]

but what most people are referring to when they say gun control, is the ban of firearms.

You have no evidence of that. You have no idea what "most" people are referring to. I posit that these "most" people want to at least start moving toward a sane gun control system that saves at least some lives and starts changing a demented blood-thirsty attitude existing in American society.

You're just saying this to take a hard line and make it sound reasonable, which it isn't. Once again, what exists is not working. We are having massacres in public places on an increasing basis. Anyone with half a brain knows this has to change--and not toward having massacres on a daily basis.

What we need is for people to look for the level and possibilities of gun control measures that cut down on the problem--and then help lead the attitude of wanting to massacre people, which seems to be an American specialty, to change enough so that this rarely happens. Countries that have restricted access to guns to any degree have experienced a proportional decrease in death by guns. We need the NRA to stop saying "not an inch" toward sane control. We need you to stop pretending what doesn't exist too. Gun control and gun prohibtion are not the same thing--you presented them as the same thing. You need to stop doing that and get some sense going in that head of yours. The Fox News technique of brinkmanship isn't working anywhere in the American system--not in politics, not on the economy, and not on "game" our young, video-game/reality shot-'em-up show imprinted men want to play out in our schools, theaters, and shopping malls.

 

[Accretionist]

I've seen data showing every combination of high/low gun prevalence and high/low gun crime. The general impression I've gotten is that current laws in most US states are adequate and that increased enforcement in those states is sufficient.

Also, access to mental health services could stand to be improved.

 

[4glory6]

Well, yes, except for all of those pesky dead bodies laying around with bullet holes in them in schools, malls, and theaters.

Why am I thinking "Wizard of Oz" here?

 

[Bramblethorn]

That a similar incident happened in China. A man went to a school and using a knife he wounded twenty something children. The point is, I guess that if the guy in Ct had used a knife instead of two guns, the children would have merely been wounded instead of dead.

I say that makes little sense. The kid in Ct could've used an ax and he would've killed a lot of people.

Since Columbine, there've been at least 30 mass shootings in the USA: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...mass-shootings-in-the-US-since-Columbine.html

How many mass axe-murders has the USA seen in that time?

As for the murders by machete that you reference: if you're referring to Rwanda etc, I think you'll find that the guys using the machetes were generally backed up by guys with AK-47s.

 

[DeeZire]

There is a difference between gun control and a gun ban.

In Australia in 1996, a mass killing of 35 people galvanized the nation’s conservative prime minister to ban certain rapid-fire long guns. The “national firearms agreement,” as it was known, led to the buyback of 650,000 guns and to tighter rules for licensing and safe storage of those remaining in public hands.

The law did not end gun ownership in Australia. It reduced the number of firearms in private hands by one-fifth, and they were the kinds most likely to be used in mass shootings.

In the 18 years before the law, Australia suffered 13 mass shootings — but not one in the 14 years after the law took full effect. The murder rate with firearms has dropped by more than 40 percent, according to data compiled by the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, and the suicide rate with firearms has dropped by more than half.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/opinion/sunday/kristof-do-we-have-the-courage-to-stop-this.html

 

[mikey2much]

I am a small man. I am not lovecraft68

I don't practice marshal arts and I am not the sort to be fighting all the time. But I am a man and a father, my family depends on me to be there for them.

One night back when I still weighed in at one hundred and sixty lbs, I was sleeping beside my wife and was awakened by something in the middle of the night. I lay there in bed listening and heard a loud noise and then I heard the front door opening.

I was frantically thinking what could I use to defend my family, as the footsteps crossed the living room, heavy big footsteps. There was nothing but coat hangers, belts, curtain rods but nothing that I thought could help me. I woke my wife and told her what was going on, told her to get the kids out if she could while I went out to meet this unknown invader harmed with nothing.

It turned out to be a friend who had gotten drunk and couldn't drive home. But in those few moments of laying there needing to stand between my family and this unknown threat, I reached a conclusion. I would get a gun.

I did and I kept it for years, it was a gun I picked up for a hundred bucks, a Beretta 22 automatic pistol. I later gave it to a friend that was going to face problems of his own down in New Orleans. With the instructions that if he had to use it he should lose it. Afterwards I kept a rifle in the bedroom closet.

The point of this is that sometimes a gun might be all that stands between you and an unpleasant fate. I would never want to be the blame for some young woman having to face those frightening moments like I did that night.

This is something that you should think about before you start to take away people's guns.

On the other side of the coin, the american people are being pressured into a decline in their living standards, People are under a lot of stress these days and more and more are going to be snapping like this young man did.

It seems that Pilot and 4glory6 seem to think that I am against gun control, I am not against it. I will have a gun if I want one just like I smoke pot and do other drugs if I want to. I do pretty good at ignoring the laws that I think are wrong .

So really in the deepest sense of the word I don't care what they do about gun control, it won't affect me. I just think that this is going to be happening more as things continue to go downhill for the working men and women of america,

Everybody knows who the bad guys are. They drive the big nice cars and live in the big nice gated communities. They would all sleep better if they knew we didn't have guns. It would be so much easier to steal our money from us and take our houses and jobs if we are unarmed.

They and the people who want to believe in the goodness of mankind want gun control. I don't care. I just think that as more and more people are pushed against the wall, that more of this is going to be happening. I think we should be on the lookout for these guys and try to help them before they start killing us when they snap.

That is a mental health issue not a gun control issue. That is all I have to say about it. You guys can continue to argue, I 've said what I had to say.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

Remember prohibition, when we decided to outlaw alcohol? How'd that work out?

After our 35 year, 'war on drugs,' have we stopped the use of illegal drugs? I find it ironic that some legislators are discussing legalizing drugs to keep the violence down, but outlawing guns.

Gun control is a fantasy; like Claudia Schiffer giving up her career to become my love slave...pure fantasy. At last count there were 300,000,000 guns in the U.S. That's one for every man, woman, and child in this country.

When I was a kid we worried about Russia sending over an atomic bomb; we never worried about someone coming into our school and shooting us; yet, per capita, there were just as many guns then as there are now, and they were much more easily obtained. I bought my first gun, as 22 rifle, at the age of 12 for $3.00 at an auction. It is hanging on my wall today. In fact, I am looking at it right now.

Could there possibly be more involved here than the availability of guns?

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/381995_528059167205066_461775211_n.jpg

I was frantically thinking what could I use to defend my family, as the footsteps crossed the living room, heavy big footsteps. There was nothing but coat hangers, belts, curtain rods but nothing that I thought could help me. I woke my wife and told her what was going on, told her to get the kids out if she could while I went out to meet this unknown invader harmed with nothing.

It turned out to be a friend who had gotten drunk and couldn't drive home.

And what if you HAD had a gun?

You would have grabbed it, run downstairs half-asleep, and more than likely, shot your stupid friend.

I have nothing against guns. I have a gigantic irrational hatred of automatic guns. This? This is a hunting gun.

http://www.centerlineofcalhoun.org/images/hunting_rifle.gif

This? This is a handgun, that could be used for shooting practice, or you could have one as part of your line of work.

http://cdn.madamenoire.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Handgun.jpg

This? This is what was used on 27 innocent kids and teachers.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wWoUzuRVAF4/TeNVrloD7hI/AAAAAAAACJo/2YtOfS0JVIo/s1600/weapons+6.jpg


That is a MURDER machine. It had NO other purpose in this world, but to spray HUNDREDS of rounds and commit murder. This isn't a show weapon, a hunting weapon, or a weapon you use at your job. This weapon belongs in the military, and NO WHERE ELSE.

That's what I'm fighting against. I don't think that you should be able to walk into a gun store, or raid uncle Yosimite's gun closet, and find this.


And to LC and the rest of you gun-nuts?

You are all saying that he could have done the same damage with an axe or a knife. You guys are talking about this weapon-weilding insane super-predator. and you are all right, to a small degree. There will always be murderous people. Even if at this moment, every gun in the US turned into marshmellows, there would still be people capable of horrible violence. Like the knifeman, in china who stabbed those 22 children.

But so much of the violence, so many of the deaths in america, are not from these super-predators. They are from weak mentally-ill cowards. They are from kids who don't know what they are doing. Bullied teens who are too weak to fight back so they find daddy's gun. The death count is from weak people trying to make one last defiant murderous shout. Not the killers who would take lives in any way that they could.

 

[TxRad]

One small problem with the automatic weapons deal in this case. The semiautomatic ar-15 type rifle he had was in the trunk of his car, not in the school. All the shooting as far as i have heard was with the two pistols he had on him.

Also what was said, his mother had the guns because the family went to the local gun range to shot targets.

Crazy people will find guns one way or another and anyone who shoots thier own mother is crazy in my book.

 

[mikey2much]

I thought that I had said all I had to say.

But then I read this, and it seemed to say it so much better and from a point of view that breaks my heart.

http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.com/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.html

Take a minute and read this, or you lose your right to bitch over the Shady Hook killings.

IMHO

 

[PennLady]

But then I read this, and it seemed to say it so much better and from a point of view that breaks my heart.

http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.com/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.html

Take a minute and read this, or you lose your right to bitch over the Shady Hook killings.

IMHO

I was just about to post this myself.

 

[oggbashan]

Even in the UK, with its National Health Service, there are many families struggling with family members with mental health problems that can cause them to become violent.

As disturbed teenagers become stronger, the parents' options reduce. Once the teenager turns 18 and becomes adult, the previous limited safety net from Social Services is almost non-existent. Many caring parents dread getting old because the only alternative for their disturbed but adult child is an institution - if space is available.

Too many such disturbed adults are in inadequate care-in-the-community with no emergency secure accommodation available if they become uncontrollable. They walk around as ticking time bombs.

 

[sr71plt]

But then I read this, and it seemed to say it so much better and from a point of view that breaks my heart.

http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.com/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.html

Take a minute and read this, or you lose your right to bitch over the Shady Hook killings.

IMHO

Why should this make anyone need to stop "bitching" over the Connecticut school killings--which I take it is your attempt to pull the mental issue in front of the gun control issue?

Yes, yes, we really should stop the emptying out of state-supported sanitariums and all of their programs that started in the Bush administration and hasn't been reversed because of all of the opposition to the Obama administration health care coverage attempts.

But the mental health problem doesn't obliterate the gun control issue. They are both bad, they go hand in hand on equal ground, and as TE999 pointed out up the line, the same people digging in their heels on gun control dig in their heels on more comprehensive mental health care.

Maybe the start of a solution is to redirect who these crazies are popping off--maybe we need them to erase enough of the heel draggers to actually get moving on solutions.

 

[topace]

If gun control works, then why are people still using handguns to kill?

They've been 'controlled' since 1934, and they are still used in 3/4 of the gun homicides, the other 1/4 being other types of guns (rifles, machine guns, etc.).

Gun control doesn't work period. Firearms education does.

 

[sr71plt]

If gun control works, then why are people still using handguns to kill?

They've been 'controlled' since 1934, and they are still used in 3/4 of the gun homicides, the other 1/4 being other types of guns (rifles, machine guns, etc.).

Gun control doesn't work period. Firearms education does.

Well, because the controls haven't been strict enough. Because the NRA and buddies block them being strict enough. Duh. Was this a trick question?

I declare that America is letting the dummies pull it around by the nose.

 

[njlauren]

I've seen data showing every combination of high/low gun prevalence and high/low gun crime. The general impression I've gotten is that current laws in most US states are adequate and that increased enforcement in those states is sufficient.

Also, access to mental health services could stand to be improved.

You have to be careful with that, the statistics don't tell the whole picture.For example, the standard claim of the NRA is that when people have easy access to guns and easy carry rights, that crime drops or is low. Statistically, if you looked at states like Montana and the Dakotas, which have relatively easy gun laws, it would look to be true...but take a look sometime at the violent crime stats for states like Texas and Florida, take a look at the crime stats in Dallas versus NYC and you will see something interesting.....Texas and Florida are both up there in terms of violent crime stats, both are top 10, and states with relatively strict gun laws are much, much lower. States like Montana have the stats they do, not because of guns, but because they are low population density and their largest towns are small.

The other thing you are totally ignoring is stats on gun usage in states that have tough gun laws, and that is key. Mayor Bloomberg of NYC has been on a tear with this, and rightfully so, when most of the guns bought off criminals were purchased legally in a handful of states, namely virginia (land of the virginia tech shooting, where a loony tunes was allowed to buy guns), georgia and florida I believe, and maybe alabama as well. They joke about the route 95 gun corridor but it is no joke, especially not to the cops.

The point being we allow people to buy high powered assault style weapons, the top of the heap (not to mention hunting weapons, handguns and shotguns), in many places with basically zero requirements. You buy a car, you have to prove you know how to drive (try registering a car without a driver's license), you have to show you have insurance, that the car has been maintained, all these burdens; you own a boat and use it on navigable waters, you legally have to register it and get id numbers for it. Guns? Lot of states, you walk into a gun store and show a DL, and you get a quick background check, and you can buy what you want. No proof you have taken gun safety lessons, on how to handle and store them, no need to register them or have insurance on them. The states I am talking about where the legal guns are turning up in criminals hands, the owner legally has zero responsibility for the guns, they are used in a crime, the original purchaser has no responsibility, no one can do anything to them, and gun store owners and the rednecks who do this stuff make sure no one changes it. Meanwhile, in all 50 states, with a car if it is used in committing a crime and you have not reported it stolen (obviously, if it is stolen overnight and used a couple of hours later, no but if it was 'stolen' a couple of days before, believe me).

Yes, the ban all guns idea is crazy and I don't support that, but the NRA is just as crazy and a lot more powerful. Their idea is total libertariansm with guns, they have proposed laws where people should be forced to keep guns (on the idea it improves safety), they have fought laws banning the sale of teflon bullets (that have only 1 use, cutting through bullet proof vests), they are of the rural, crazy, going to fight the black helicopter/government mentality, that anything goes, and that is idiotic.

As with boats and cars, the driving force has to be federal policy while the laws are local. The coast guard forces states to register boats, for example. For example, I don't care what macho men say, the assault rifle bans we had were effective, it took a lot of those weapons off the streets, stopped legal purchases from fueling it (one of the thing the pro gun people with their 'if you take guns away from legitimate people, only criminals will have them' is if legitimate gun sales cannot easily feed illegal purchases, the price of black market guns will soar) and the second amendment does not say you have the right to buy any gun you wish, try buying a 20 cal machine gun and see what happens.
'

Likewise states should be forced to have rules requiring liability insurance and proof you have taken gun safety courses, and have laws about the proper way to keep weapons and ammunition, to make sure they don't fall into the hands of children or someone in the home. Conservatives talk about individual responsibility, when it comes to guns it is time they put their money where their mouth is.

Likewise, the exemption for gun show sales is idiotic, it has to be one of the biggest jokes going. Being able to buy guns at a show without a background check is stupid, I have heard that it is 'collectors' and private sales going on, but guess what, that is meaningless, arguing you have the right to sell something yourself and not follow the rules is idiotic. For example, it is illegal for someone to make their own alcoholic beverages and sell it, I cannot make wine and then sell it to a neighbor (can give it to them, though), so why should people be allowed to sell guns to anyone they choose? If people want to sell guns to others, then they other should be required to do it through some sort of broker (who can run background checks) or have some sort of mechanism where if they want to see the gun to someone, they have the person go to a state office to have a background check run, and that when they sell the weapon they have to file a proof of sale/transfer that shows everything was followed including a copy of the background check. Wont stop every case but would make it a lot harder.


Problem is, people want to be able to buy guns like they are toys, and they aren't, and while I respect people's rights to own them, I don't respect the idiocy that they should be allowed to buy what they want, when they want, with no restrictions, that isn't an adult position, that is like a kid who wants to eat candy until they get sick.

 

[njlauren]

I don't practice marshal arts and I am not the sort to be fighting all the time. But I am a man and a father, my family depends on me to be there for them.

One night back when I still weighed in at one hundred and sixty lbs, I was sleeping beside my wife and was awakened by something in the middle of the night. I lay there in bed listening and heard a loud noise and then I heard the front door opening.

I was frantically thinking what could I use to defend my family, as the footsteps crossed the living room, heavy big footsteps. There was nothing but coat hangers, belts, curtain rods but nothing that I thought could help me. I woke my wife and told her what was going on, told her to get the kids out if she could while I went out to meet this unknown invader harmed with nothing.

It turned out to be a friend who had gotten drunk and couldn't drive home. But in those few moments of laying there needing to stand between my family and this unknown threat, I reached a conclusion. I would get a gun.

I did and I kept it for years, it was a gun I picked up for a hundred bucks, a Beretta 22 automatic pistol. I later gave it to a friend that was going to face problems of his own down in New Orleans. With the instructions that if he had to use it he should lose it. Afterwards I kept a rifle in the bedroom closet.

The point of this is that sometimes a gun might be all that stands between you and an unpleasant fate. I would never want to be the blame for some young woman having to face those frightening moments like I did that night.

This is something that you should think about before you start to take away people's guns.

On the other side of the coin, the american people are being pressured into a decline in their living standards, People are under a lot of stress these days and more and more are going to be snapping like this young man did.

It seems that Pilot and 4glory6 seem to think that I am against gun control, I am not against it. I will have a gun if I want one just like I smoke pot and do other drugs if I want to. I do pretty good at ignoring the laws that I think are wrong .

So really in the deepest sense of the word I don't care what they do about gun control, it won't affect me. I just think that this is going to be happening more as things continue to go downhill for the working men and women of america,

Everybody knows who the bad guys are. They drive the big nice cars and live in the big nice gated communities. They would all sleep better if they knew we didn't have guns. It would be so much easier to steal our money from us and take our houses and jobs if we are unarmed.

They and the people who want to believe in the goodness of mankind want gun control. I don't care. I just think that as more and more people are pushed against the wall, that more of this is going to be happening. I think we should be on the lookout for these guys and try to help them before they start killing us when they snap.

That is a mental health issue not a gun control issue. That is all I have to say about it. You guys can continue to argue, I 've said what I had to say.

So tell me, mikey, what if your friend you gave the baretta to used it to knock over a liquor store and kill 3 people, would you be so smug about giving a gun away like that? And in your original story, so you drunk friend came inside because he was too drunk to drive, and you had a gun, and for whatever reasons he was so drunk he didn't id himself and you shot him dead, what would you think then?

Most of the people I know are not talking about taking away people's guns,they are talking about laws controlling guns, not banning them. Someone owning an assault weapon isn't doing so for self defense, they are doing so . If you want to have a gun in your house, fine, you should, but you should also have to show you know how to use it and are responsible for it, and you should also be allowed to buy weapons appropriate to that (an AK47 is not appropriate for home defense, unless you are a drug dealer fighting off rival gangs), and you should be responsible for it, too, giving a gun away to someone is quite frankly stupid.

 

[njlauren]

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/381995_528059167205066_461775211_n.jpg



And what if you HAD had a gun?

You would have grabbed it, run downstairs half-asleep, and more than likely, shot your stupid friend.

I have nothing against guns. I have a gigantic irrational hatred of automatic guns. This? This is a hunting gun.

http://www.centerlineofcalhoun.org/images/hunting_rifle.gif

This? This is a handgun, that could be used for shooting practice, or you could have one as part of your line of work.

http://cdn.madamenoire.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Handgun.jpg

This? This is what was used on 27 innocent kids and teachers.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wWoUzuRVAF4/TeNVrloD7hI/AAAAAAAACJo/2YtOfS0JVIo/s1600/weapons+6.jpg


That is a MURDER machine. It had NO other purpose in this world, but to spray HUNDREDS of rounds and commit murder. This isn't a show weapon, a hunting weapon, or a weapon you use at your job. This weapon belongs in the military, and NO WHERE ELSE.

That's what I'm fighting against. I don't think that you should be able to walk into a gun store, or raid uncle Yosimite's gun closet, and find this.


And to LC and the rest of you gun-nuts?

You are all saying that he could have done the same damage with an axe or a knife. You guys are talking about this weapon-weilding insane super-predator. and you are all right, to a small degree. There will always be murderous people. Even if at this moment, every gun in the US turned into marshmellows, there would still be people capable of horrible violence. Like the knifeman, in china who stabbed those 22 children.

But so much of the violence, so many of the deaths in america, are not from these super-predators. They are from weak mentally-ill cowards. They are from kids who don't know what they are doing. Bullied teens who are too weak to fight back so they find daddy's gun. The death count is from weak people trying to make one last defiant murderous shout. Not the killers who would take lives in any way that they could.

While I agree with you, please, please use the right terminology, these were not automatic weapons, they are semi automatic and there is a world of difference. With an automatic weapon, like a machine gun, you hold down the trigger and it keeps firing; A semi automatic you have to squeeze and release the trigger, so instead of 'brrrrrrrrr' of continuous fire, you get "her-ap, ber-al, her-ap'. Semi's can fire pretty quickly, and combined with the large capacity clips can cause a lot of deaths. I think these kind of guns should be banned along with fully automatic ones, but we need to differentiate, among other things, fully automatic weapons are illegal for civilians to own.

 

[njlauren]

One small problem with the automatic weapons deal in this case. The semiautomatic ar-15 type rifle he had was in the trunk of his car, not in the school. All the shooting as far as i have heard was with the two pistols he had on him.

Also what was said, his mother had the guns because the family went to the local gun range to shot targets.

Crazy people will find guns one way or another and anyone who shoots thier own mother is crazy in my book.

sorry, TX, all the kids were short with the ar-15, that trunk report was wrong. Each of the 20 kids was shot multiple times, and the handguns wouldn't have given him time to do that, it was over in a couple of minutes. You try firing at 20 kids (+6 adults) using two handguns with 10 round clips, and see if you could get off close to 100 rounds in a couple of minutes..only thing that could do that was the ar-15 with the large clip.

 

[njlauren]

But then I read this, and it seemed to say it so much better and from a point of view that breaks my heart.

http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.com/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.html

Take a minute and read this, or you lose your right to bitch over the Shady Hook killings.

IMHO

Theplight of mentally ill kids is real...but there is a big difference between this mom and this case:

1)She doesn't have her troubled 13 year old around guns, like Nancy Lanza, so far there is no indication at all that she kept the weapons secured, or that she made an effort to keep them away from Adam.

2)The Lanza family had significant means, Nancy Lanza lived in an expensive house, didn't work, and apparently didn't lack money and her ex husband was a very high level executive with GE, the type that makes millions a year, so they weren't waiting for public health beds, they had the means to try and get hi m treated but as far as anyone knows, they never did, there is no sign he was every in treatment, on medications, or the like.

The thing is, they had the means to get him treatment and didn't, something a lot of parents with troubled kids don't have the luxury for, so she was absolutely stupid on 2 counts.

 

[NekoParks]

Your information is inaccurate...

One small problem with the automatic weapons deal in this case. The semiautomatic ar-15 type rifle he had was in the trunk of his car, not in the school. All the shooting as far as i have heard was with the two pistols he had on him.

Also what was said, his mother had the guns because the family went to the local gun range to shot targets.

Crazy people will find guns one way or another and anyone who shoots thier own mother is crazy in my book.

The gunman DID have the bushmaster in the school. It was found along with the pistols next to his body.

 

[njlauren]

If gun control works, then why are people still using handguns to kill?

They've been 'controlled' since 1934, and they are still used in 3/4 of the gun homicides, the other 1/4 being other types of guns (rifles, machine guns, etc.).

Gun control doesn't work period. Firearms education does.

Gun control doesn't stop people from using guns, it stops guns from flooding the market and also helps stop criminals from getting them. There are over 300,000,000 guns in circulation in the US, 1 for every man, woman and child, and what that shows is that the 'gun control' we have is a joke, quite frankly. The problem is that gun control is mostly state thing, and some states gun control is non existent, it isn't uniform, and federal standards are weak. Keep in mind-

-Background checks were only mandatory within the last 25 years, and the ones they have are lax
-In more then a few states, there is very little you have to do to buy a weapon, you basically sign a form, say you will be a good ole boy, they run a quick background check (that has more holes then a piece of swiss cheese), and you can buy what you want, including an AR15 with a 200 shot magazine, or 10 of them, you could then run to your nearest big city, sell your haul to the black market, and not worry
-You can sell guns at gun shows without background checks
-Most of the guns that are used in crimes were purchased legally, in nyc and dc 75% of the guns they pull off the streets were purchased legally in one of several states.

The key is responsible gun ownership is having rules for it, that stops bubba and joe billy bob from selling guns they bough legally into the black market, that limits gun sales to what people have legitimate use for (sorry, all you rambo dudes an ar-15 is not a sporting rifle, it is a military weapon that has one purpose, killing a lot of people quickly), and it is when people own guns, they have responsibility and liability to keep the weapons secure and locked away. Among other things, Nancy Lanza apparently was the type of person who went around bragging about the guns she had (which in comments on the article gun owners were pissed about, how fucking stupid she was), which is irresponsible because guess what, some kids hear about that or some dumb fuck local lowlife criminal, and when she is not home they break in to steal the weapons...and end up used in crime.

 

[mikey2much]

No, it is not stupid to support a friend

So tell me, mikey, what if your friend you gave the baretta to used it to knock over a liquor store and kill 3 people, would you be so smug about giving a gun away like that? And in your original story, so you drunk friend came inside because he was too drunk to drive, and you had a gun, and for whatever reasons he was so drunk he didn't id himself and you shot him dead, what would you think then?

Most of the people I know are not talking about taking away people's guns,they are talking about laws controlling guns, not banning them. Someone owning an assault weapon isn't doing so for self defense, they are doing so . If you want to have a gun in your house, fine, you should, but you should also have to show you know how to use it and are responsible for it, and you should also be allowed to buy weapons appropriate to that (an AK47 is not appropriate for home defense, unless you are a drug dealer fighting off rival gangs), and you should be responsible for it, too, giving a gun away to someone is quite frankly stupid.

I was a rifleman guard on a machine gun while I served in the 82nd airborne division, I have been in combat and would not shoot anything that I couldn't ID.

As for giving a friend a gun when he thought he needed it. I said he was a friend, someone I knew well. Someone I trusted not to rip off anybody, I guess that I am a better friend than you would have been.

As for the gun itself, it was totally off the books nobody knew I had it as far as the government was concerned. I would not have a gun if they knew I had it. It would just serve to bring my enemy to my door, who needs that.

So you just go on about your little life and let me do without your advice. We look at life from two far different perspectives, your advice wouldn't allow me to live my life.

As far as the mental health issue goes, I will not be convinced that it isn't the biggest issue here.