Page 16 of 41 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 320 of 820

Thread: Revisiting Gun Laws in the U.S.

  1. #301
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    26,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver View Post
    Of course. But let's be honest here too, without semi-auto weapons there would not be 26 people dead right now. Maybe six, maybe 12, but there is no way to argue that the weapons this kid had did not factor into the high casualty count.
    Do you know what happened? The kids were huddled around the teacher because the teacher tried to protect them. He fired over 100 rounds meaning he reloaded. Whatever weapon he had, all those kids would be dead.

    Look, I understand people are upset, and people want to ban assault weapons thinking this wont happen again, but those people are wrong. Regardless of what law is in place, bad things will happen.

    More people die from alcohol in one way or another. Why not ban that? Drugs? Arrest and severely punish those who use them as an example to others instead of giving a slap on the wrist.

    Place the responsibility on the individuals, and stop blaming the other 300 million people who are responsible. Good people, responsible people, deserve to have whatever they want.

  2. #302
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    凸(⊙▂⊙✖ )
    Posts
    30,881
    Post Thanks / Like
    This talk of arming teachers is ridiculous.

    What if there is a student in the class that is unstable and somehow gets access to this teachers weapon? Obviously I'm talking about older kids, but this is a situation where you are already putting a gun in a school where we are trying so very hard to keep them out.

    I am, however, in favor of teachers and school administrators being trained in the use of various non-lethal methods, such as using stun guns, pepper spray, rubber bullets etc.

    The whole point of 'locking down' a school is being able to 'slow down' the perp's advances from classroom to classroom until the police arrive. I would think that blinding someone with pepper spray or taking them out with a stun gun or cattle prod would also do the trick.

  3. #303
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    26,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    Aren't most guns semi-auto? I mean, unless you're talking about a pump shotgun or a bolt action rifle -- or an old 19th century cowboy revolver -- almost every gun is a semi-auto.

    It seems like the media is using the term "semi-automatic" in the same way as "assault rifle". It doesn't really mean anything but it sounds menacing and scary.
    Semi auto: one round expended with one trigger pull.

    Full auto: more than one round expended with one trigger pull.

    Assault weapon: no agreement on exact definition. Each state has its own, but generally any m4 style weapon with a detachable magazine with capacities over 20 rounds.

    You can not acquire a full auto firearm that was made after 1986 unless you are a class 3 dealer or police/military.

    Full auto firearms pre1986 are available, but run in the tens of thousands of dollars, and require strict ATF class 3 approval.

    Media just throwing terms out to make its point.

  4. #304
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    26,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Fishooked View Post
    This talk of arming teachers is ridiculous.

    What if there is a student in the class that is unstable and somehow gets access to this teachers weapon? Obviously I'm talking about older kids, but this is a situation where you are already putting a gun in a school where we are trying so very hard to keep them out.

    I am, however, in favor of teachers and school administrators being trained in the use of various non-lethal methods, such as using stun guns, pepper spray, rubber bullets etc.

    The whole point of 'locking down' a school is being able to 'slow down' the perp's advances from classroom to classroom until the police arrive. I would think that blinding someone with pepper spray or taking them out with a stun gun or cattle prod would also do the trick.
    Unfortunately, if someone wants to get to you and cause harm, you are on the defensive. Nothing can save you in most cases.

    Visual deterrents keep most of these people from acting in the first place.

  5. #305
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wildcat Country
    Posts
    4,887
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    Reading is fundamental.
    LOL. Got me. I missed that.

    Still, not even close to enough for me. No police reports have mentioned this guy. It's only his word.

    Biggest:

    "I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself."

    You mean the shot he fired five minutes later? Ten minutes later?

    Like I said, anecdotal evidence is useless. It always reminds me of those angry woman in Oprah Winfrey audiences who declare that the guy on stage must be a bad husband because "My man wuz trash!"

  6. #306
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    26,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver View Post
    LOL. Got me. I missed that.

    Still, not even close to enough for me. No police reports have mentioned this guy. It's only his word.

    Biggest:

    "I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself."

    You mean the shot he fired five minutes later? Ten minutes later?

    Like I said, anecdotal evidence is useless. It always reminds me of those angry woman in Oprah Winfrey audiences who declare that the guy on stage must be a bad husband because "My man wuz trash!"
    I can tell you from speaking with officials from Oregon that what he said is true and minimized the devastation done.

    They don't want to encourage civilians carrying all over the place.

  7. #307
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wildcat Country
    Posts
    4,887
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by John_0515 View Post
    Do you know what happened? The kids were huddled around the teacher because the teacher tried to protect them. He fired over 100 rounds meaning he reloaded. Whatever weapon he had, all those kids would be dead.

    Look, I understand people are upset, and people want to ban assault weapons thinking this wont happen again, but those people are wrong. Regardless of what law is in place, bad things will happen.

    More people die from alcohol in one way or another. Why not ban that? Drugs? Arrest and severely punish those who use them as an example to others instead of giving a slap on the wrist.

    Place the responsibility on the individuals, and stop blaming the other 300 million people who are responsible. Good people, responsible people, deserve to have whatever they want.
    Disagree. You are speculating to suit your mindset. Now being fair, maybe I am too. But time is a critical factor in killing and if the kid had, say a single 38 snub nose revolver there is no way you can claim he'd have killed the same number of people in the time he had with an AR 15.

    "Good people, responsible people, deserve to have whatever they want."

    Here you really lose me. Answer this: was Adam Lanza's mother "Good people, responsible people?"

  8. #308
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    3,597
    Post Thanks / Like
    Guns in school classrooms. Madness.

  9. #309
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,459
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Soberphobia View Post
    Guns in school classrooms. Madness.
    Quite.

  10. #310
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    26,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver View Post
    Disagree. You are speculating to suit your mindset. Now being fair, maybe I am too. But time is a critical factor in killing and if the kid had, say a single 38 snub nose revolver there is no way you can claim he'd have killed the same number of people in the time he had with an AR 15.

    "Good people, responsible people, deserve to have whatever they want."

    Here you really lose me. Answer this: was Adam Lanza's mother "Good people, responsible people?"
    Listen, my profession is related to this. We can sit here and debate it, but I'm telling you what my experience with pre, during, and post shooting situations are about. Believe what you want, but banning assault weapons wouldn't and won't make a difference.

    Yes, she deserved the rights everyone else does. Se neglected to keep those weapons from her mentally ill son, however. I bring back up the fact that more people have died from alcohol related deaths than firearms. Small we prioritize?

    I have weapons in my house. You'll never find them or get into them unless you know where to look and the combination to get in. Should I be punished for that?

    Again, look to the individuals and put the responsibility there. This "everyone needs to be treated the same" when it comes to this is unfair, and wrong.

    If I want to kill someone, and you took my weapons away, but neglected the fact that I was mentally ill and let me operate my daily life in the way I sought fit, I'd find a way to wreak havoc. You can't stop that.

  11. #311
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wildcat Country
    Posts
    4,887
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by John_0515 View Post
    I can tell you from speaking with officials from Oregon that what he said is true and minimized the devastation done.

    They don't want to encourage civilians carrying all over the place.
    Weren't just arguing a few posts back that crazy people aren't detered by threats?

    No need to respond J. Actually, I think your'e a decent guy. And I'm a big Al Bundy fan myself. We all have loved ones e care for and we're doing our best to safeguard them best on our own judgement.

  12. #312
    All League
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cape Cod, MA
    Posts
    3,347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver View Post
    So your point is we wouldn't be talking about guns if this guy hadn't used a gun to kill 27 people? I cannot but agree.
    C'mon.

  13. #313
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    26,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver View Post
    Weren't just arguing a few posts back that crazy people aren't detered by threats?
    Mentally I'll people target who they perceive as non-threatening. They'll find a way to hurt those people. Put an armed police officer there, and they think twice. Police don't want civilians acting like heroes, thinking they should arm themselves and patrol the streets. That's what I said. Stop trying to go off on tangents to support your cause.

  14. #314
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    26,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver View Post
    Weren't just arguing a few posts back that crazy people aren't detered by threats?

    No need to respond J. Actually, I think your'e a decent guy. And I'm a big Al Bundy fan myself. We all have loved ones e care for and we're doing our best to safeguard them best on our own judgement.
    Do you own a firearm?

  15. #315
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    26,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by BushyTheBeaver View Post
    Weren't just arguing a few posts back that crazy people aren't detered by threats?

    No need to respond J. Actually, I think your'e a decent guy. And I'm a big Al Bundy fan myself. We all have loved ones e care for and we're doing our best to safeguard them best on our own judgement.
    No worries. Touchy subject these days. We're all friends here when it's all said and done.

  16. #316
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No.


    In the wake of the unthinkable massacre in Connecticut, pro-gun ideologues are once again calling for ordinary citizens to arm themselves as a solution to mass shootings. If only the principal at Sandy Hook elementary had possessed a M-4 assault rifle she could've stopped the killer, they say. This latest twist on a long-running argument isn't just absurd on its face; there is no evidence to support it. As I reported recently in our in-depth investigation, not one of the 62 mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years has been stopped this way. More broadly, attempts by armed civilians to intervene in shooting rampages are rare—and are successful even more rarely. (Two people who tried it in recent years were gravely wounded or killed.) And law enforcement overwhelmingly hates the idea.

    Those pesky facts haven't stopped the "arm America more!" crowd from pressing the argument with alleged examples of successful armed interventions. The problem is, the few examples they keep using—in which they depict plain old folks acting heroically and with definitive results—fall apart under scrutiny. Here are five of them and why they don't work:

    Appalachian School of Law shooting in Grundy, Virginia
    Gun rights die-hards frequently credit the end of a rampage at the law school in 2002 to armed "students" who intervened. They conveniently ignore that those students also happened to be current and former law enforcement officers, and that the killer, according to police investigators, was out of ammunition by the time they got to him.

    Middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania
    An ambiguous case from 1998, in which the shooter may well have already been done shooting: After killing a teacher and wounding three others, the 14-year-old perpetrator left the dance venue. The owner of the venue followed him outside with a shotgun, confronting and subduing him in a nearby field until police arrived. The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, who himself recently argued for more guns as an answer to gun violence, told me this week that one police source he talked to about this case said that it was "not clear at all" whether the kid had intended to do any further shooting after he'd left the building.

    High school shooting in Pearl, Mississippi
    Another case, from 1997, in which the shooting was apparently already over: After killing two and wounding seven inside Pearl High School, the 16-year-old perpetrator left the building and went outside near the parking lot. The assistant principal—who was also a commander in the Army reserves—ran out to his own vehicle, grabbed a handgun he kept there, and then approached the shooter, subduing him at gunpoint until authorities arrived.

    New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs
    In 2007 a gunman killed two people and wounded three others before being shot himself; the pro-gun crowd likes to refer to the woman who took him out in the parking lot as a "church member." Never mind that she was a security officer for the church and a former cop, and that the church had put its security team on high alert earlier that day due to another church shooting nearby.

    Bar shooting in Winnemucca, Nevada
    In 2008, a gunman who killed two and wounded two others was taken out by another patron in the bar, who was carrying with a valid permit. But this was no regular Joe with a concealed handgun: The vigilante, who was not charged after authorities determined he'd committed a justifiable homicide, was a US Marine.

    And what about cases in which citizens try to use their guns and things go terribly wrong? There are at least two examples of ill-fated attempts that you won't see mentioned by those arguing for your kid's teacher to start stashing a loaded Glock in her classroom:

    Shopping mall shooting in Tacoma, Washington
    As a rampage unfolded in 2005, a civilian with a concealed carry permit named Brendan McKown confronted the assailant with his handgun. The shooter pumped several bullets into McKown, wounding six people before eventually surrendering to police after a hostage standoff. A comatose McKown eventually recovered after weeks in the hospital.

    Courthouse shooting in Tyler, Texas
    In 2005, a civilian named Mark Wilson, who was a firearms instructor, fired his licensed handgun at a man on a rampage at the county courthouse. Wilson was shot dead by the body-armored assailant, who wielded an AK-47.

    Such actions in chaotic situations don't just put the well-intentioned citizen at risk, of course. According to Robert McMenomy, an assistant special agent in charge in the San Francisco division of the FBI, they increase the danger for innocent bystanders. They also make law enforcement officers' jobs more difficult. "In a scenario like that," he told me in a recent conversation, "they wouldn't know who was good or who was bad, and it would divert them from the real threat."

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...mass-shootings

  17. #317
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Here is an interesting comment from a reader of the article above;

    I can imagine a gun shot going off in a dark movie theater and everyone pulls out their weapon - how do you differentiate the good guy from the bad guy? Or imagine a fully armed university where someone decides to go on a rampage. When your life is in danger you're going to shoot at the person with a gun.

    It's pretty scary that our country is controlled by people who've been educated by Disney fairytales and the bible.

  18. #318
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,708
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    Aren't most guns semi-auto? I mean, unless you're talking about a pump shotgun or a bolt action rifle -- or an old 19th century cowboy revolver -- almost every gun is a semi-auto.

    It seems like the media is using the term "semi-automatic" in the same way as "assault rifle". It doesn't really mean anything but it sounds menacing and scary.
    Yes, almost every modern firearm is some form of "semi-automatic", i.e. fires one bullet per one squeeze of the trigger mechanicsm until it is out of bullets.

    The only exception I can think of are single-shot firearms (pretty rare generally) and old-school single-action revolvers that require the hammer to be manually cocked each time in order to fire each round.

    "Assault Weapon" and "Millitary Style Weapons" are pure political terms, used for political reasons. By definition, all firearms can and have been "millitary weapons" and all can be used to assault someone or multiple somones.

    It may also be relevant to point out the "Knee jerk reaction" to events like these. For example, no one is discussing banning the Federal Govt., despite the fact that more poeple died because of teh actions fo Fast and Furious (in Mexico, with american Govt. issued firearms) than did in Conn.

    I'd also like to pass on the funniest "reason" I heard last night, on progressive radio (Sirius Left): The host claimed that ANY desire to own a firearm was a phallic-related issue due to either a small dick, or a perception of having a small dick. He went on to say that "whites" have an intrinsic inferiority complex about the dicks, and often buy a "big car or big gun" to make up for it, and that most of those cars and guns are black, hint hint, nod, nod, racist whitey needs a big fake black dick to feel like a real man.

    Good stuff that.

  19. #319
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,708
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    Here is an interesting comment from a reader of the article above;

    I can imagine a gun shot going off in a dark movie theater and everyone pulls out their weapon - how do you differentiate the good guy from the bad guy? Or imagine a fully armed university where someone decides to go on a rampage. When your life is in danger you're going to shoot at the person with a gun.

    It's pretty scary that our country is controlled by people who've been educated by Disney fairytales and the bible.
    Almost as much a fantasy as the idea that banning guns legislatively will make all guns dissapear fromt he face of teh Earth, and no one will ever die again.

    As usual, the answer is usually well away from far-left and far-right, and in the logical middle.

  20. #320
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    26,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    Here is an interesting comment from a reader of the article above;

    I can imagine a gun shot going off in a dark movie theater and everyone pulls out their weapon - how do you differentiate the good guy from the bad guy? Or imagine a fully armed university where someone decides to go on a rampage. When your life is in danger you're going to shoot at the person with a gun.

    It's pretty scary that our country is controlled by people who've been educated by Disney fairytales and the bible.
    I understand your sentiment, and it's received, but for every instance that people advocate gun control or a weapons ban, I point out that there are those of us who serve or have served this country in one capacity or another, are responsible, and don't deserve the collateral damage from a shooter such as this guy. I can further discuss that people who have served, currently serve and/or are veterans should be first in line to discuss/advocate/repel weapon bans. If you haven't contributed to uphold the freedoms that we have in this country, should you make the decisions as to take away people's (mostly good people) rights? That may be extreme, but theres a point to be made.

    How about alcohol? Why not ban alcohol since it is one of the major (more so than guns) causes of death in the United States?

    Leave the law alone, and go after the individuals and hold them to a higher standard, not punish those who abide by the law in order to make people feel vindicated. That's what's happening here. Gun control, and everything will be fine. I'm sorry, it will only make things worse. America is too large of a country and in too deep with firearms to back out. Perhaps partially, but the industry will adapt and find legal loopholes (like it did in 94).

    Hold people accountable. If someone is mentally ill, why leave him/her unsupervised? The "everybody deserves a trophy" attitude that a lot of places have adopted has contributed to the "woe is me" mentality.

    I'm sorry for the long winded monologue and I don't mean to offend (this is a touchy subject), I just don't agree that a knee jerk reaction to ban a certain type of gun, video game or movie is the answer.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us