We don't need more gun control. We need more bullet control.

[detjetsfan]

No easy answers to this mess. Gun control, school prayer, free speech restrictions - are all insanely unconstitutional.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by Snell41

I have no politics in this. I'm not pro or anti gun. I am simply a parent. And rest assured if I was a gun fanatic and a parent of a mentally disturbed child, I promise you that my child will never, EVER see those guns or have access to them. Why? Because I'm a responsible parent. The funny thing is my point about this actually is in support of both sides. You can't blame responsible gun owners and you can't blame mentally ill people who don't have the right support group. This is a case of a horribly irresponsible mother. Period.

Again, we do not have enough details or timeline data, and I refuse to pass such decisive judgements on a murder victim, blaming them for thier own and 20+ other killings, based on the fractured and selective "reports" we're getting at current from FOX/CNN and their ilk.

Give your own life a quick thought, how many of your own decisions in life, without you here to defend them, could be judged harshly after the fact. I'm guessing plenty, same as me, same as everyone.

You could be right. Right now, I cannot agree based on what I know. She may be responsible, she may be as innocent as any of those kids. The details will eventually tell the tale, I hope. But some details may never be known.

[Snell41]

Originally Posted by Warfish

Again, we do not have enough details or timeline data, and I refuse to pass such decisive judgements on a murder victim, blaming them for thier own and 20+ other killings, based on the fractured and selective "reports" we're getting at current from FOX/CNN and their ilk.

Give your own life a quick thought, how many of your own decisions in life, without you here to defend them, could be judged harshly after the fact. I'm guessing plenty, same as me, same as everyone.

You could be right. Right now, I cannot agree based on what I know. She may be responsible, she may be as innocent as any of those kids. The details will eventually tell the tale, I hope. But some details may never be known.

Plenty, and they were all mistakes of mine. Thankfully none of them were life threatening to me or anyone else. But those mistakes were mine. And if I owned guns and they ended up in the wrong hands it's my fault. Period. If they ended up in the hands of a mentally ill person who lives in my home it's doubly my fault! She owned those guns, she is responsible for those guns. Period. I don't care the circumstance that put them in her son's hands. They were hers to care for and safeguard. Period.

You can not say that laws should be written for those who are responsible and turn around and defend an adult who was irresponsible.

[gunnails]

Originally Posted by Snell41

Plenty, and they were all mistakes of mine. Thankfully none of them were life threatening to me or anyone else. But those mistakes were mine. And if I owned guns and they ended up in the wrong hands it's my fault. Period. If they ended up in the hands of a mentally ill person who lives in my home it's doubly my fault! She owned those guns, she is responsible for those guns. Period. I don't care the circumstance that put them in her son's hands. They were hers to care for and safeguard. Period.

You can not say that laws should be written for those who are responsible and turn around and defend an adult who was irresponsible.

================================================== ===

What if???????????????????????????????????

She wore the key to the gun safe around her neck, and the shooter took it from her as she fought him with all her strength for her life, and the shooter beat her senseless,,,,, then took the key and gathered the guns pausing only to shoot her in the face on his way out the door?

Or maybe he knew the combo, or the safe was left unlocked, or there was no safe, or???????????????????????

We should wait, plenty of time left to cast blame if and when the facts come out.

[BushyTheBeaver]

Originally Posted by Snell41

Plenty, and they were all mistakes of mine. Thankfully none of them were life threatening to me or anyone else. But those mistakes were mine. And if I owned guns and they ended up in the wrong hands it's my fault. Period. If they ended up in the hands of a mentally ill person who lives in my home it's doubly my fault! She owned those guns, she is responsible for those guns. Period. I don't care the circumstance that put them in her son's hands. They were hers to care for and safeguard. Period.

You can not say that laws should be written for those who are responsible and turn around and defend an adult who was irresponsible.

I agree at least in part. I guess Warfish is thinking that maybe the guns were locked up safely and the kid stole the combination to his mom's safe. I think you can make a pretty good argument that it was irresponsible for most of those guns to have been in the house in the first place. These points have been reported on again and again:

1. The kid had issues. Serious ones, of social maladjustment, of which the mom was well aware. He was unable to make eye contact. He had public "episodes" and had been shunted from school to school. His mother was considering having him institutionalized (although this last bit I'd like to see more evidence of).

2. He had no friends, no social life. Whatever.

3. He lived in the darkened basement of the house, playing hour after hour of violent video games. Alone.

4. He had a dysfunctional obsession with weaponry.

And it was in this situation that the mom decided it was an OK idea to start collecting guns? Including assault rifles? And she took this son (whom she told baby sitters to never turn their backs on) to shooting ranges?

I'm a dad and I know often parents, especially moms, have a hard time seeing things they don't want to see in their kids. But this is also post-Columbine. It's not like parents haven't been warned. And clearly the kid's mom was very aware that he had severe issues, even if she did not understand their exact nature and the extent of what he was capable of.

I will grant that no parent could ever envision their kid doing what Adam Lanza did. But at the very least given his behavior she should have considered him a candidate for suicide. And considered that proximity to guns was not in her son's best interest. She showed horrific judgment in that respect.

If it turns out she left the weapons unsecured, or poorly secured, then in addition to horrific judgment many will argue, with justification, that she has the blood of 20 children on her hands. But that part I agree with Warfish we just don't know yet.

[BushyTheBeaver]

Originally Posted by detjetsfan

No easy answers to this mess. Gun control, school prayer, free speech restrictions - are all insanely unconstitutional.

School prayer unconstitutional? Rilly? What about the first amendment?

Not allowing blacks, indians, asians, women, the right to vote, now that was "insanely unconstitutional." But we did it, right?

[quantum]

Seems like there's a ****load of blame to spread around, and everyone who posted in here as mentioned one or two, but its really a combination of all of them:

-gun control should be renamed assault weapon control. disagree if you like, there is absolutely no reason to own that ****. same for large clips. even in a zombie apocalypse, the crossbow is the weapon of choice

-mental health care. lawyers who put the insane back on the street? not require them to take their meds? Parents who look the other way? STUPID and IMMORAL.

-lack of civility, et al - self-explanatory.

Having said that, the chances for a real solution are nil.

[Axil]

Originally Posted by Snell41

Plenty, and they were all mistakes of mine. Thankfully none of them were life threatening to me or anyone else. But those mistakes were mine. And if I owned guns and they ended up in the wrong hands it's my fault. Period. If they ended up in the hands of a mentally ill person who lives in my home it's doubly my fault! She owned those guns, she is responsible for those guns. Period. I don't care the circumstance that put them in her son's hands. They were hers to care for and safeguard. Period.

You can not say that laws should be written for those who are responsible and turn around and defend an adult who was irresponsible.

Does this just apply to guns, or were the pilot's whose plane's ended up in the wrong hands responsible for one of the greatest tragedy's in our nations history?

[Snell41]

Originally Posted by gunnails

================================================== ===

What if???????????????????????????????????

She wore the key to the gun safe around her neck, and the shooter took it from her as she fought him with all her strength for her life, and the shooter beat her senseless,,,,, then took the key and gathered the guns pausing only to shoot her in the face on his way out the door?

Or maybe he knew the combo, or the safe was left unlocked, or there was no safe, or???????????????????????

We should wait, plenty of time left to cast blame if and when the facts come out.

All of those are still ultimately her fault. You are responsible for your guns at all times. ALL TIMES!

[Snell41]

Originally Posted by Axil

Does this just apply to guns, or were the pilot's whose plane's ended up in the wrong hands responsible for one of the greatest tragedy's in our nations history?

Did the pilots knowingly take in dangerous terrorists? If so then yes, they are. Nancy Lanza knowingly had a dangerous young man in her home and knowingly had dangerous guns in her home. This is like lighting a campfire next to a stockpile of gasoline and crying "how could I have known" after it goes boom.

[freestater]

Geez. Poor Southside. He even takes abuse in the poli-sci forum.

[Axil]

Originally Posted by Snell41

Did the pilots knowingly take in dangerous terrorists? If so then yes, they are. Nancy Lanza knowingly had a dangerous young man in her home and knowingly had dangerous guns in her home. This is like lighting a campfire next to a stockpile of gasoline and crying "how could I have known" after it goes boom.

Human beings are dangerous, the degree to which they are dangerous varies according to the individual in question, the observer, and many other factors. I doubt this women believed her son would attempt to kill her and many others. Did she have reason to believe he could do something like that? Maybe, i don't believe enough evidence has been presented to make that case.

Your posts earlier indicated that she was irresponsible based on the outcome of her actions. Hence my question regarding the WTC. Sometimes irresponsible actions lead to negative outcomes, and sometimes bad things happen that are beyond the control of responsible individuals. Again, i don't know which this instance was a case of, and i do not believe you do either.

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by Snell41

Did the pilots knowingly take in dangerous terrorists? If so then yes, they are.

So it has to be knowingly, i..e a reasonable sane average person would expect such an outcome.

I would say we do not yet know that she (nor any reasonable person) would have known that this event was a possible or likely outcome of these circumstances.

Nancy Lanza knowingly had a dangerous young man in her home

We do not know that. We know he had social issues, we do not know the clinical extent. We know (supposedly) he had Aspergers, and we know Aspergers is NOT commonly associated with violence.

There are tens of millions of us with "social issues", **** I'm probably one of them. And plenty with Aspergers. None with this combo have ever mass murdered as far as I know.

So as yet we do not know she "knowingly" had a dangerous young man in her home. Facts not yet in evidence.

This is like lighting a campfire next to a stockpile of gasoline and crying "how could I have known" after it goes boom.

I truly am forced to wonder if you'd be so quick to take similar responsabillity if your own kids ever broke the Law.

In any event, you've made your mind up already across the board, you believe you know more than enough to pass full judgement on this murder victim and postumously lay all blame on her, so clearly I'm not going to change your mind.

Not that it makes a difference, she got the death penalty in the worst way, four bullets in the face from her own son. Guess you think she deserved it,

Sad all round.

[Snell41]

Originally Posted by Warfish

So it has to be knowingly, i..e a reasonable sane average person would expect such an outcome.

I would say we do not yet know that she (nor any reasonable person) would have known that this event was a possible or likely outcome of these circumstances.



We do not know that. We know he had social issues, we do not know the clinical extent. We know (supposedly) he had Aspergers, and we know Aspergers is NOT commonly associated with violence.

There are tens of millions of us with "social issues", **** I'm probably one of them. And plenty with Aspergers. None with this combo have ever mass murdered as far as I know.

So as yet we do not know she "knowingly" had a dangerous young man in her home. Facts not yet in evidence.



I truly am forced to wonder if you'd be so quick to take similar responsabillity if your own kids ever broke the Law.

In any event, you've made your mind up already across the board, you believe you know more than enough to pass full judgement on this murder victim and postumously lay all blame on her, so clearly I'm not going to change your mind.

Not that it makes a difference, she got the death penalty in the worst way, four bullets in the face from her own son. Guess you think she deserved it,

Sad all round.

As a parent fish if one of my kids broke the law or did something heinous I would blame myself. I would continuously wonder what I did wrong as a loving parent. And I never said she deserved to die. Fish you and I go waaay back to some seriously old days. Your jumping to alot of conclusions on me that are not fair and I know your better than that. I think she paid the ultimate price for a terribly careless mistake. That's my point in all this. Everyone jumps to conclusions on gun control and mental illness, how about more information on things to be aware of when owning a gun? I own a boat. Had to take classes on boating awareness and safety. Do you even have to take a test to own a gun?

[gunnails]

Originally Posted by Snell41

As a parent fish if one of my kids broke the law or did something heinous I would blame myself. I would continuously wonder what I did wrong as a loving parent. And I never said she deserved to die. Fish you and I go waaay back to some seriously old days. Your jumping to alot of conclusions on me that are not fair and I know your better than that. I think she paid the ultimate price for a terribly careless mistake. That's my point in all this. Everyone jumps to conclusions on gun control and mental illness, how about more information on things to be aware of when owning a gun? I own a boat. Had to take classes on boating awareness and safety. Do you even have to take a test to own a gun?

=================================================

Only gun training I ever had was a hunters safety class taken as a PE elective in my HS freshman year, in the gun range below my HS auditorium instructed by my PE teacher Mr Webb, with about 20 other students shooting live rounds of .22lr in single shot rifles.

I owned a boat but did not have to take a test to buy it, as I understand now captains trainng is required.

More to the point, it is established that police do not have to protect you, your individual security is up to you, and you are suggesting that before my wife can defend herself only if she takes a government training program. I can't live with that.

I am all for training, just not for training as a prerequisite to defending ones life.

They should make hunters safety mandatory in HS, and gun safety mandatory in first grade.

[BushyTheBeaver]

Originally Posted by gunnails

=================================================


They should make hunters safety mandatory in HS, and gun safety mandatory in first grade.

How do you square that with your philosophy of you and only you are responsible for your own safety?

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by Snell41

As a parent fish if one of my kids broke the law or did something heinous I would blame myself. I would continuously wonder what I did wrong as a loving parent. And I never said she deserved to die. Fish you and I go waaay back to some seriously old days. Your jumping to alot of conclusions on me that are not fair and I know your better than that.

I apologize if you feel I'm being unfair old friend, I do. It's not personal, it's more theory what I'm speaking of.

You're more than likely right, that the Mother made one or more serious mistakes or lapses in judgement. I simply don't like to pass judgement on a mother, with a troubled child, with who knows what other issues involved, that was herself the victim of a brutal murder of the worst kind, killed by her own beloved offspring.

Do you even have to take a test to own a gun?

I've always believed there is more than enough room in the middle to honor gun rights and still have limitations designed arounf reasonable public safety. I don't think any of it would "stop" things like Conn., but they'd stop some things, and more importantly, they're logical and reasonable.

Same core reasons why I support Voter ID requirements for voting.

What I find most interesting (politically) is that those mort ardent to stop gun contrl are the same who are most ardent to support voter ID laws, and vice versa. Seems the ideas of "rights" are rather flexable, to both sides.

[gunnails]

Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver

How do you square that with your philosophy of you and only you are responsible for your own safety?

================================================

Not sure I see the contradiction, and it's not my philosophy alone, it also the philosophy of the SCOTUS.

I was thinking for 1st graders teach them basic gun safety, treat all guns as if they were loaded, never point a gun at someone, if you find a gun, tell an adult, if you know of another child with a gun or someone you think should not have a gun tell an adult,maybe show a video of how guns operate and blowing up some melons. Just real basic stuff.

And then in HS teach the 4 basic laws of firearm safety, specificly how guns work and operate, federal, local, and state fire arm laws. Safe handling of guns, a trip to the gun range could also be in order.

Children really can't protect themselves always, that's why were here.

[BushyTheBeaver]

Originally Posted by gunnails

================================================

Not sure I see the contradiction, and it's not my philosophy alone, it also the philosophy of the SCOTUS.

I was thinking for 1st graders teach them basic gun safety, treat all guns as if they were loaded, never point a gun at someone, if you find a gun, tell an adult, if you know of another child with a gun or someone you think should not have a gun tell an adult,maybe show a video of how guns operate and blowing up some melons. Just real basic stuff.

And then in HS teach the 4 basic laws of firearm safety, specificly how guns work and operate, federal, local, and state fire arm laws. Safe handling of guns, a trip to the gun range could also be in order.

Children really can't protect themselves always, that's why were here.

I could see the schools possibly offering gun safety instruction as an optional thing. But mandatory? Never happen. It'd be a political lightening rod from the get go. Gun advocates would accuse schools of making guns scarey. Gun control advocates would accuse the schools of doing the exact opposite. Parents on both sides of the issue would pull their kids from the classes in protest. And the private schools, of course, would be under no obligation to teach it one way or the other.

This is something best left to parents.

[gunnails]

Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver

I could see the schools possibly offering gun safety instruction as an optional thing. But mandatory? Never happen. It'd be a political lightening rod from the get go. Gun advocates would accuse schools of making guns scarey. Gun control advocates would accuse the schools of doing the exact opposite. Parents on both sides of the issue would pull their kids from the classes in protest. And the private schools, of course, would be under no obligation to teach it one way or the other.

This is something best left to parents.

==================================================

I think your right on this Bushy, best left to parents.

Just thinking if the schools are going o teach stranger danger, that maybe we could take it a step farther.

But you are right, this is a parents job.