China is a great example of schools have to arm themselves period.Guns or no guns.
Gun laws I read as a person can defend themselves from a intruder for example not the government.Hopefully.
I don't care what happens.
Either we don't have enough gun laws or we have too many.
Something's gotta give. This is f*cking ridiculous. Something is seriously f*cking wrong in this country.
There shouldn't be any assault weapons. But this goes beyond guns. We have become a morally corrupt society.
I own 2 handguns...I see NO, ZERO reason why I can't. I wasn't required to but took private lessons THEN an required 8 hr safety course so I can carry concealed. I don't, but I can.
I would be in favor of required safety training but that would NOT have stopped the latest few incidents of horror.
What would be your suggested policy limit/regulatory ban, specificly, to solve the problem? The problem in this issue always lies in the specifics.
So, how about a more accurate desriptor. What weapons specificly should we ban? What types, what styles, etc.Assault weapon is a political term, often used by gun control advocates, typically referring to firearms "designed for rapidly firing at human targets from close range," sometimes described as military-style features useful in combat.
I'm open to regulation, I really am. But open-ended langauge without specificity is not going to get us there, nor is political terms like "assault weapon". We need specifics to agree on before we can agree.
Other than a 100% ban, or a ban on say, all guns that carry more than one singel round within them, I'm not sure how to "stop" events like today. Even a bagful of old Colt single-action revolvers can be used to kill multiple people, you just need to bring more than one with you. An average guy could probably carry 4 loaded easily, and a number fo speed-loader reloads. Say 30-40 total bullets, without a problem. Thats still 30-40 possible kills, with the most basic and old school handguns you can get.
So is the answer no Guns that fire more than one shot?
Last edited by Warfish; 12-14-2012 at 06:13 PM.
I agree, i don't think gun control stops violence. Some level of gun control may reduce gun violence, but overall, violent behavior will be unaffected. In addition, since law abiding citizens are more affected by gun control than criminals, your going to decrease the instances of successful defense against criminal violent behavior, and thus decrease one of the disincentives towards criminal violent behavior.
That said, given the tragedy that took place today, I'm not sure this is an environment conducive to rational discourse. Human beings do horrible things to one another. It would be wonderful if we could eliminate these instances through governance, but i do not believe that is possible.
Tougher gun laws won't prevent people from obtaining guns...period. Did Prohibition prevent people from buying liquor? Which brings me to ask another question. Do you really think tougher liquor laws would prevent people from driving drunk? More people are killed by drunk drivers then with guns.
I don't have any answers as to how to prevent what happened to today, happening again. I am from a different generation and these types of things did not happen when I was a kid...it's society that is ****ed up and how do you fix that?
I,m starting to get a bit fat, so is the rest of the US, should we outlaw forks?
If drunks didn't have easy access to cars then they would not be able to drink,drive, kill innocents, should we outlaw cars?
More people are killed by falls then guns, should we outlaw ladders?
Lets outlaw trampolines, bikes, swimming pools, rivers and lakes, Drano,
Ski Resorts, etc.
Or we could get serious about how we deal with mental illness.
The whole fake cowboy argument of the right that guns should be made more available as a preventive measure is asinine. I've seen highly trained and experienced members of the military have all kinds of accidents/negligent discharge etc. So some teacher with no military or law enforcement background, a 10 safety course and maybe 1 trip to an indoor range should be packing heat?
I am opposed to gun control and believe in the Constitutionally mandated right to bear arms but making guns more available than they already as some sort of safety measure is stupid is as stupid does.
Outright banning of guns and even some gun control laws are unconstitutional. 2nd amendment is what it it is. That said, I love how conservatives are more outraged about people calling for gun control then they are about 26 innocent people getting killed.
I agree with your points, I do not think this will prevent these tragedies from happening but at this point I think we should just try it out. There is very little downside to this. People can still hunt and buy regular rifles or shotguns for home defense.
Last edited by DDNYjets; 12-14-2012 at 07:21 PM.