PDA

View Full Version : Dialogue, Serious Dialogue.


Pages : [1] 2

USMCM16A2
12-14-2012, 11:57 AM
Folks,


Here we are as a nation facing another mass shooting, it is time for the politicizing, the banter, the us versus them bull**** needs to stop. I understand we as gunowners are maligned in the press. But a serious dicussion is needed now from all sides to minimize these occurances. A2

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 12:00 PM
The closest thing to a discussion I'm willing to have at this point is asking why they'll strip people of the right to defend themselves in an insecure area. :mad:

My supply of tact is starting to run low.

bwiese
12-14-2012, 12:00 PM
Engaging in dialogue is not needed. We already know what the antis will say.

Why do you want input from "all sides"? Never give your enemy an opportunity.

Ctwo
12-14-2012, 12:05 PM
Perhaps the schools should take a serious look at how they are going to protect the children in today's society.

SoCal Bob
12-14-2012, 12:11 PM
Hopefully the focus will be on how to treat mental illness and not the tool(s) used: http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/14/world/asia/china-knife-attack/index.html?hpt=hp_bn2

WnP
12-14-2012, 12:15 PM
Engaging in dialogue is not needed. We already know what the antis will say.

Why do you want input from "all sides"? Never give your enemy an opportunity.

Calling other Americans "enemies" is one of the problems,we are not at war. Things do need to change now. Mental evaluations need to be done.

briankk
12-14-2012, 12:17 PM
Folks,


Here we are as a nation facing another mass shooting, it is time for the politicizing, the banter, the us versus them bull**** needs to stop. I understand we as gunowners are maligned in the press. But a serious dicussion is needed now from all sides to minimize these occurances. A2

Well, the MSM is going to make this yet another oppertunity to pull the gun control lever, but they are ignoring a recurring background issue.

Pretty much all of the recent nutso shooters have very similar prior histories, young men of HS/Collage age, getting on with their life, when in a matter of a few weeks, they go schizo, buy a Glock, and start shooting up some place, a school, a theater, a political meeting. I think there a much broader psychiatric issue here. There seems to be a sub-set of young men that experience a sudden insanity that makes 'em go out and shoot 'em up. Of course, to discuss this could lead to enforced custodial care for obviously(and less obviously) nuts, all the homeless advocates would scream for gun control, not freedom-to-be-a-bum control..

And, liberalism is obviously a mental disorder..

bk

Kukuforguns
12-14-2012, 12:20 PM
I think everyone here wants to prevent these types of tragedies. However, we do not yet know how/why this particular tragedy occurred. For example, if the shooter turns out to have been mentally ill, I am all for discussing the circumstances under which it is appropriate to involuntarily commit someone for treatment/evaluation prior to a violent act (given the AZ shooting and the CO shooting, I think this is an important conversation to have anyway). But, until we know more, we don't know what to discuss.

LMTluvr
12-14-2012, 12:21 PM
The anti side is not interested in discussion or dialogue. They're going to be full force ban everything semi auto. Their way or the highway. Tragedies like this , in their eyes are only " proof" that nobody should be allowed to own firearms.

johnthomas
12-14-2012, 12:23 PM
OP, you are feeling like I am, I assume you are a Marine or vet, I a an Army vet. Our mission first and foremost is to protect our nation, our babies, the innocent. We sit here with so many questions. We want to stop this kind of thing, where do we go from here?
2A is at risk, If we give up our guns, we are at the mercy of the government.
The president just spoke, fighting back tears, as we all our. Emotions are high, and may result in the demise of many of our rights. OP, I cant be more serious than this.

hornswaggled
12-14-2012, 12:24 PM
Dialogue about gun control has ALWAYS been serious. The anti's haven't completely won yet, which is why they don't think it's been serious.

American Samurai
12-14-2012, 12:25 PM
The anti side is not interested in discussion or dialogue. They're going to be full force ban everything semi auto. Their way or the highway. Tragedies like this , in their eyes are only " proof" that nobody should be allowed to own firearms.

This. Exactly right. What they will be satisfied with is if all guns are banned. Unfortunately what they will never acknowledge is that it will only be banned for law abiding citizens, because criminals don't give a sh*t about laws.

jrwhitt
12-14-2012, 12:28 PM
How about NOT disarming the adults in the schools.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 12:34 PM
We are not at war.

You must be part of a different movement than I am.

Letitrip
12-14-2012, 12:34 PM
It's not the guns, it's the people. Someone carrying concealed might have saved some kids.
Stuff like this happens, and it's not only with guns. Today in China a man went on a rampage but with a knife. Check it out:
Man slashes 22 children near China school

BEIJING -- A man with a knife slashed 22 children and one adult outside an elementary school in Henan province Friday morning, the worst such incident in more than a year.

The full story can be viewed at:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/la-man-slashes-22-children-near-china-school-20121214,0,7747067.story?track=latiphoneapp

teebiss
12-14-2012, 12:37 PM
No discussion is necessary. The antis have already made up their minds, and nothing we say or do will change that.

deebix
12-14-2012, 12:38 PM
Calling other Americans "enemies" is one of the problems,we are not at war. Things do need to change now. Mental evaluations need to be done.

You need a mental evaluation before expressing your speech. k thx bai

Wade65
12-14-2012, 12:39 PM
Calling other Americans "enemies" is one of the problems,we are not at war. Things do need to change now. Mental evaluations need to be done.

And who would you suggest do the evaluations? Who should be evaluated? What happens with the results?

My wife is a therapist and I have two children in elementary school - this shooting makes me sick to my stomach, but lets find out what actually happened and then we'll see what we can do to keep this from happening in the future.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 12:43 PM
This is not, I repeat NOT even a 2A related problem. This is a problem resulting from the unravelling of the moral thread of America and humanity in general. We in this country, were a nation of values. We had principles, and were generous and sensible as a nation.

Obviously this is not an easy balance to maintain. The people who are generous, are "not generous enough". The people who are sensible, are "too logical to have a heart". And the people who just can't get their *** together for whatever reason are "victims", not idiots.

Now we are a nation of fat, impulsive, mouth-breathing thugs. We can't even raise our own children, yet we patrol the world to tell everyone else how to. Coincidentally, we'll be out of money for both activities before long...

My point is that we are poisoned as a society, for a lot of reasons. And our two-party political system is not working. They just takes turns selling us out to their master of choice. I can only hope that we begin to revert to morality and personal responsibility in my lifetime. I'll die happier.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 12:43 PM
This is not, I repeat NOT even a 2A related problem. This is a problem resulting from the unravelling of the moral thread of America and humanity in general. We in this country, were a nation of values. We had principles, and were generous and sensible as a nation.

Obviously this is not an easy balance to maintain. The people who are generous, are "not generous enough". The people who are sensible, are "too logical to have a heart". And the people who just can't get their *** together for whatever reason are "victims", not idiots.

Now we are a nation of fat, impulsive, mouth-breathing thugs. We can't even raise our own children, yet we patrol the world to tell everyone else how to. Coincidentally, we'll be out of money for both activities before long...

My point is that we are poisoned as a society, for a lot of reasons. And our two-party political system is not working. They just takes turns selling us out to their master of choice. I can only hope that we begin to revert to morality and personal responsibility in my lifetime. I'll die happier.

Schlyme
12-14-2012, 12:45 PM
How about NOT disarming the adults in the schools.

Better yet, require armed security at all exclusion zones! If you're going to make me leave my gun behind, you are now responsible for having more then adequate armed security to protect me. Otherwise let me defend myself.

13withinfinity
12-14-2012, 12:47 PM
As non religious as I am, I think God does need to make a comeback here. At least it gave people a path to follow if they are unable to forge one themselves, and promoted proper morals for the most part. (excluding the fringe)

Nick Justice
12-14-2012, 12:49 PM
We have been having the "dialogue" for decades now. My dialogue is "Let me shoot back." Nothing else seems to be working.

My heart goes out to the Conn. victims and families.

CEDaytonaRydr
12-14-2012, 12:52 PM
Perhaps the schools should take a serious look at how they are going to protect the children in today's society.

...more to the point: How they DON'T protect the children in today's society. It's another example of the failure of a government socialized program.

We've been through Vtech, Columbine, Cleveland School, etc. before. This will clear the news cycle as soon as Lindsay Lohan gets in trouble again. :rolleyes:

Falstaff
12-14-2012, 12:54 PM
How about we start the "dialogue" with the fact that the overwhelming majority of mass shooting *******s are on psychotropic drugs?

The aurora guy was in a post graduate psychiatric program, at a military affiliated hospital/pscyh center, he says now that he was under "mind control" and is on Haldol, prozac and many other drugs.

How about we start questioning the timing of these events?

The answer is not "arming teachers" or banning semi autos. THe answer is refusing to allow the people who stage these events to further their agenda with them.

dixieD
12-14-2012, 12:54 PM
"Dialog" is a code word for enacting executive order, bureaucratic regulation, and possibly legislative change. It does not mean having a conversation complete with honest pros and cons, and statistics, as well as honest acknowledgement that people who are armed are in fact safer.

What we don't hear today is 1) 200 million guns were not used to kill anyone today, and 2) 60 million lawful gun owners did not criminally kill anyone yesterday, two days ago, and probably tomorrow.

USMCM16A2
12-14-2012, 12:54 PM
Folks,


There is not even a mention of the 2A, giving the antis any opportunityin my original post. These situations that keep occuring, the diaglogue must be from all sides, from gunowners, antigunners, law enforcement, the medical establishment. EVERYBODY, who has the urge to prevent this **** from happening again to our babies, or minimizing the threat of it occuring. Bill you can go ahead and stay isolated in your bunker, and chase imaginary enemies, but I do not believe in giving one inch of ground for our cause. Despite what I might have said in the past. Wake up people, A2

Hoshnasi
12-14-2012, 12:55 PM
Folks,


Here we are as a nation facing another mass shooting, it is time for the politicizing, the banter, the us versus them bull**** needs to stop. I understand we as gunowners are maligned in the press. But a serious dicussion is needed now from all sides to minimize these occurances. A2

I only see this as code for "More restriction must be accepted".

American Samurai
12-14-2012, 12:56 PM
"Dialog" is a code word for enacting executive order, bureaucratic regulation, and possibly legislative change. It does not mean having a conversation complete with honest pros and cons, and statistics, as well as honest acknowledgement that people who are armed are in fact safer.

What we don't hear today is 1) 200 million guns were not used to kill anyone today, and 2) 60 million lawful gun owners did not criminally kill anyone yesterday, two days ago, and probably tomorrow.


Dam right.

TimRB
12-14-2012, 12:56 PM
We have been having the "dialogue" for decades now. My dialogue is "Let me shoot back." Nothing else seems to be working

Exactly! And guess what happens next--the dialogue stops because as soon as someone points out that guns in the hands of the law-abiding can be a crime-fighting tool, he's dismissed as a lunatic.

Tim

pHredd9mm
12-14-2012, 12:59 PM
America (U.S. of A.) has become a land of soft targets. We saw that on 9-11 with the airline policies and now the policies/laws which keep law-abiding people from defending themselves and those in their charge. I believe the Israelis had this problem with terrorists many years ago. Their solution was to arm/train a few teachers and staff in each school. That stopped the terrorism in schools because THE BAD GUYS KNEW THE SCHOOLS WERE NO LONGER SOFT TARGETS.

Hoshnasi
12-14-2012, 12:59 PM
Folks,

There is not even a mention of the 2A, giving the antis any opportunityin my original post. These situations that keep occuring, the diaglogue must be from all sides, from gunowners, antigunners, law enforcement, the medical establishment. EVERYBODY, who has the urge to prevent this **** from happening again to our babies, or minimizing the threat of it occuring. Bill you can go ahead and stay isolated in your bunker, and chase imaginary enemies, but I do not believe in giving one inch of ground for our cause. Despite what I might have said in the past. Wake up people, A2

How do you "minimize" this from happening?

American Samurai
12-14-2012, 12:59 PM
Its just an endless cycle whenever something like this happens.

WnP
12-14-2012, 1:00 PM
You must be part of a different movement than I am.


Completely different. A fellow American is never an enemy. The enemy are the people who blew up the towers.

American Samurai
12-14-2012, 1:01 PM
America (U.S. of A.) has become a land of soft targets. We saw that on 9-11 with the airline policies and now the policies/laws which keep law-abiding people from defending themselves and those in their charge. I believe the Israelis had this problem with terrorists many years ago. Their solution was to arm/train a few teachers and staff in each school. That stopped the terrorism in schools because THE BAD GUYS KNEW THE SCHOOLS WERE NO LONGER SOFT TARGETS.


Political Correctness is the death of America. Everywhere you turn.

TimRB
12-14-2012, 1:01 PM
...but I do not believe in giving one inch of ground for our cause.

Okay, so in light of that statement, what sort of dialog with anti-gunners do you envision?

Tim

pHredd9mm
12-14-2012, 1:02 PM
This sort of thing was another reason we pulled our daughter out of school and homeschooled her. Now she is an honor student in college and she was always well adjusted, well socialized, with many other homeschooled kids. Now, I do fear for her safety in college, but she goes to school in a very conservative state with many, many CCWs issued.

WnP
12-14-2012, 1:02 PM
This is not, I repeat NOT even a 2A related problem. This is a problem resulting from the unravelling of the moral thread of America and humanity in general. We in this country, were a nation of values. We had principles, and were generous and sensible as a nation.

Obviously this is not an easy balance to maintain. The people who are generous, are "not generous enough". The people who are sensible, are "too logical to have a heart". And the people who just can't get their *** together for whatever reason are "victims", not idiots.

Now we are a nation of fat, impulsive, mouth-breathing thugs. We can't even raise our own children, yet we patrol the world to tell everyone else how to. Coincidentally, we'll be out of money for both activities before long...

My point is that we are poisoned as a society, for a lot of reasons. And our two-party political system is not working. They just takes turns selling us out to their master of choice. I can only hope that we begin to revert to morality and personal responsibility in my lifetime. I'll die happier.

Exactly.

Damn True
12-14-2012, 1:06 PM
Let me preface this by saying that I am as staunch a 2A advocate as any. I have owned guns all my life will continue to do so, and will not ever willingly surrender them.

That said, I think it is high time for the gun rights advocacy community to become the offeror of solutions. To become proactive in addressing the shortcomings in the existing laws regarding gun ownership rather than just being reactive to further restriction.

I'm currently co-writing an article with a LEO acquaintance of mine regarding the roadblocks to database entry for those diagnosed mentally ill. This is IMO an issue that "we" should be leading the charge on. There has to be a way that Fed, State & Local LE can better share this data and there has to be a way to compel healthcare entities to provide it in a way that does not deter reporting for fear of stigmatizing mental illness.

Beyond that, IMO the face to face private transfer should be abolished. I know this is a touchy subject for many of you and I understand your reasoning. But man, you can't get a prescription for vicodin without a paper trail. I don't think it's too much to have every transfer go through an FFL. My justification for this point is this; If we can establish that all guns owned by law abiding citizens are purchased legally, with appropriate background checks and are actually legal to own. Then in all cases where someone uses an illegal firearm to commit a crime we have a stronger argument that criminality is the cause, and not merely the presence of a firearm. I'm not sure I explained that very well.....

I'd love to hear the thoughts of the forum leadership and legal team on this premise.

Loubot10
12-14-2012, 1:07 PM
Perhaps the schools should take a serious look at how they are going to protect the children in today's society.

There are probably half a million schools in the U.S.

There's what 1 of these every couple of years?

Everyone needs to understand that you cannot protect society from one individual hellbent on going out with as much innocent blood as possible.

You can't lock it down like the green zone and still have freedoms. Besides, even the green zone was susceptible.

WnP
12-14-2012, 1:09 PM
And who would you suggest do the evaluations? Who should be evaluated? What happens with the results?

My wife is a therapist and I have two children in elementary school - this shooting makes me sick to my stomach, but lets find out what actually happened and then we'll see what we can do to keep this from happening in the future.


What happened was a psycho killed his family and twenty kids. Both my sister's are teachers and they can tell who are gonna be the psychos when they grow up and they've been right so far.


Ant trained medial professional can do evaul's. They do them on cops.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 1:13 PM
Let me preface this by saying that I am as staunch a 2A advocate as any. I have owned guns all my life will continue to do so, and will not ever willingly surrender them.

That said, I think it is high time for the gun rights advocacy community to become the offeror of solutions. To become proactive in addressing the shortcomings in the existing laws regarding gun ownership rather than just being reactive to further restriction.

I'm currently co-writing an article with a LEO acquaintance of mine regarding the roadblocks to database entry for those diagnosed mentally ill. This is IMO an issue that "we" should be leading the charge on. There has to be a way that Fed, State & Local LE can better share this data and there has to be a way to compel healthcare entities to provide it in a way that does not deter reporting for fear of stigmatizing mental illness.

Beyond that, IMO the face to face private transfer should be abolished. I know this is a touchy subject for many of you and I understand your reasoning. But man, you can't get a prescription for vicodin without a paper trail. I don't think it's too much to have every transfer go through an FFL. My justification for this point is this; If we can establish that all guns owned by law abiding citizens are purchased legally, with appropriate background checks and are actually legal to own. Then in all cases where someone uses an illegal firearm to commit a crime we have a stronger argument that criminality is the cause, and not merely the presence of a firearm. I'm not sure I explained that very well.....

I'd love to hear the thoughts of the forum leadership and legal team on this premise.

The solution (short of fixing the attitudes and ***holes problem) is arming the teachers and providing proper security. If a government takes away the rights of citizens entering it's facilities, then it has a duty and responsibility to protect those that now cannot protect themselves.

Infringing on the rights of free men is not the way to prevent further tragedy. That paper trail you're talking about, ala "the war on drugs", we've spent over a trillion dollars on that, 2 trillion if debt and interest are factored in. And I know people who buy Vicodin off the street right now. What the hell are you talking about? Advocate?! For whom sir?

American Samurai
12-14-2012, 1:15 PM
Arming lefty anti-gun teachers? They wouldn't agree with that.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 1:16 PM
Arming lefty anti-gun teachers? They wouldn't agree with that.

Then maybe the lefties won't be teachers:43:

nicki
12-14-2012, 1:16 PM
Our side really needs to jump to emotional based arguments, solutions and focus blame squarely where it belongs.

The blame of course should be primarily on the shooter, that is a given, but there are other factors we must consider.

Over 90 percent of these shooters in the past were on various psych meds. Many psych meds have a side effect of causing homicidal and suicidal thought processes.

Guns are tools, a person 's brain is their weapons systems. A gun doesn't by itself make someone violent because it doesn't warp brain function, however medications do.

We are emotional beings, one thing humans need is significance. These shooters are typically insignificant loner losers, how do they get significance? Easiest way to do that is with violence and the MSM plays are role by blasting their name and face all over the country.

They become immediately significant. If the media was responsible, they wouldn't post name or face of these shooters, in other words, deny them their 15 mins of fame. That would go a long way in reducing these shootings.

With freedom of the press comes responsibility for what you broadcast. Considering that we have had these type shootings for decades, I would find it unbelievable that this issue has not been brought to the attention of the MSM by FBI profilers.

For the press not to step up on this means that they are willing to shed the blood of our children for ratings. I believe that soccer mommies would side with us on this point.

We need to play out how America would be if we banned guns. In fact, let's play out the following.

Imagine that to morrow that all guns were banned and all law abiding citizens turned in all their guns and ammo, we had 100 percent compliance, even the buried guns were dug up and turned in. We will even ban guns for cops and the US military will have securely stored guns that no one could steal.

Now, prohibition has a great record of success in this country, doesn't it. I mean it worked real well with alcohol and is having outstanding results with drugs.

If we had our ban, a black market would come into existence almost immediately and the guns would either be smuggled in from other countries as easily as drugs and illegal aliens enter our country or they would be illegally manufactured.

The black market would produce guns with lowest cost per unit and highest profit potential just like it did with alcohol during the 20s and with drugs today. I would expect that full auto Mac 10s and tec 9 type guns would be the pistols of choice and I probably variations of the AK47 rifle.

Barrels are easier to make if you don't bother with rifling, kept them smooth bore. Now while you would lose some accuracy, you wouldn't leave ballistic marks on your bullets either. A gun with a brass catcher would leave little evidence police could use from/ crime scenes.

The end result of a gun ban would be creation of a massive national black market in military type arms that are fully automatic versus semi automatic.

I have made this point to non bunnies and their jaws drop because I usually am the only person that has made this point to them.

I don't have all the answers, but what we need to do is go on offense on this.

IMHO the pharmacy industry and the MSM have blood on their hands and the way they shift attention from them is to point it at us.

Nicki

American Samurai
12-14-2012, 1:16 PM
Then maybe the lefties won't be teachers:43:


lol.. would it were so.

Damn True
12-14-2012, 1:21 PM
Then maybe the lefties won't be teachers:43:

This and your previous post indicate that you are clearly operating from a place of dispassionate reason & thoughtfulness. Thanks for your contribution.

FullMetalJacket
12-14-2012, 1:23 PM
I'd drop the "let's arm the teachers" line. IT'S NOT GOING TO PLAY ANYWHERE and anyone who publicly proposes it is going to be branded a fool and an extremist.

Whatever the solution is, that isn't going to be it. You're not going to convince the people who are among the hardest pushing for gun control to arm themselves. That's a fantasy.

And to people who don't/can't think dispassionatley and objectively about firearms (sadly, a majority of the population) it comes off as a ridiculous idea.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 1:24 PM
This and your previous post indicate that you are clearly operating from a place of dispassionate reason & thoughtfulness. Thanks for your contribution.

Hey, I'm not mad at you. The truth is I almost started crying this morning. But a wise friend reminded me that tragedy is no excuse for tyranny.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 1:27 PM
I'd drop the "let's arm the teachers" line. IT'S NOT GOING TO PLAY ANYWHERE and anyone who publicly proposes it is going to be branded a fool and an extremist.

Whatever the solution is, that isn't going to be it. You're not going to convince the people who are among the hardest pushing for gun control to arm themselves. That's a fantasy.

And to people who don't/can't think dispassionatley and objectively about firearms (sadly, a majority of the population) it comes off as a ridiculous idea.

Okay, so then what is the solution? The government has created hunting grounds basically, and has not bothered to secure those grounds. The government is to blame here.

Look!

https://www.google.com/search?q=gun+toting+teacher&oq=gun+toting+teacher&sugexp=chrome,mod=19&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Everytime one of them even tries to exercise the right to defend themselves or their students, they get fired. Like Washington, if it's got everybody this upset, it must be a good idea. UNLESS, you have something better...

sarabellum
12-14-2012, 1:30 PM
The anti side is not interested in discussion or dialogue. They're going to be full force ban everything semi auto. Their way or the highway. Tragedies like this , in their eyes are only " proof" that nobody should be allowed to own firearms.

I agree with the OP that the firearms matter has been politicized and turned into a partisan issue. We do our fair share of politicizing. The 2nd Amendment is not a partisan issue. We as gun owners tend to buy into the idea that some constitutional rights are acceptable but no others. For example, gun owners in online forums berate the ACLU for advocating on behalf of the 1st Am, criminal defense attorneys for standing up for the 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments, etc. We should be the first in line to affirm all of the provisions of the constitution, including calling into question the unconstitutional monopoly of political discourse by two parties representing the same set of values.

We also tend to stigmatize anyone who critizes gun ownership as "antis."

USMCM16 hit the nail on the head. We as gun owners should be the first in line to show concern for parents, whose children are harmed by stray bullets from gang thugs or by deranged individuals, and to be active in correcting those social problems. Good for you USCMSM16 for starting this thread.

stix213
12-14-2012, 1:30 PM
Folks,


Here we are as a nation facing another mass shooting, it is time for the politicizing, the banter, the us versus them bull**** needs to stop. I understand we as gunowners are maligned in the press. But a serious dicussion is needed now from all sides to minimize these occurances. A2

I completely disagree. This is exactly the time to politicize the issue, call out the gun free killing zones that attract these killers for what they are, call out who through their idiocy put these laws and policies into place that once again have resulted in more deaths, and call out flaws in our mental health system if they are found yet again to be a contributing factor.

All of the above is completely political, and as such requires politicizing. Allowing "all sides" their fair say, allowing the anti opinion to go unchallenged as if gun free zones actually make areas gun free, is the same thing as giving up rather than finding a serious solution.

American Samurai
12-14-2012, 1:34 PM
Exactly right stix. I don't want to hear this sh*t from people "Now is not the time for politics" all the while they are politicizing their agenda to take advantage of people's emotional vulnerability.

Damn True
12-14-2012, 1:34 PM
Hey, I'm not mad at you. The truth is I almost started crying this morning. But a wise friend reminded me that tragedy is no excuse for tyranny.

I'm not advocating anything like that. I'm saying that we as stewards of the 2A need to take a proactive stance in addressing the shortcomings of existing laws. That people who are diagnosed mentally ill or have prescribed psychotropics are not uniformly reported and are not uniformly prevented from purchasing a firearm is a massive problem (that both sides of the issue happen to agree on). It is low hanging fruit that I believe we should go after and push for legislation to resolve.

I fully recognize that the F2F thing is a touchy subject, but ensuring that every gun buyer is not a felon, not mentally ill or on psychotropics provides defensibility for law abiding citizens against future attempts at restriction and ads weight to our assertions that gun crimes are the fault of criminals, not guns since a criminal or one who is mentally ill would only be able to attain a gun by illegal means.

CrazyPhuD
12-14-2012, 1:34 PM
Dialog? What more dialog do you want? If the current reports are accurate the shooter was 20 years old and used a Sig and a Glock handguns. In both NJ and CT at under 21 he would have been denied the permit to buy or posses handguns.

Considering he already couldn't legally own them what additional dialog do people want? Every aspect of what he did was already illegal. What more are we going to do, make it more illegal?

frankm
12-14-2012, 1:36 PM
Ok, tell you what. I'll agree to mental health testing for all guns buyers if you agree to guaranteed national CCW to anyone who passes the test.

MudCamper
12-14-2012, 1:36 PM
I believe the Israelis had this problem with terrorists many years ago. Their solution was to arm/train a few teachers and staff in each school. That stopped the terrorism in schools because THE BAD GUYS KNEW THE SCHOOLS WERE NO LONGER SOFT TARGETS.

Is this true? I mean that the Israelis actually did this?

Regardless, it's a really good idea, and it's a suggestible solution that would actually work, unlike more useless gun control laws. Not only does this offer the possibility to mitigate the deaths in an actual attack, but it would dramatically cut down or even eliminate the attacks. These kinds of sociopaths are obviously cowards and would avoid "hard targets".

But can anyone show actual proof that the Israelis did this? It would give some empirical evidence that we could use to contribute to the discussion.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 1:37 PM
I completely disagree. This is exactly the time to politicize the issue, call out the gun free killing zones that attract these killers for what they are, call out who through their idiocy put these laws and policies into place that once again have resulted in more deaths, and call out flaws in our mental health system if they are found yet again to be a contributing factor.

All of the above is completely political, and as such requires politicizing. Allowing "all sides" their fair say, allowing the anti opinion to go unchallenged as if gun free zones actually make areas gun free, is the same thing as giving up rather than finding a serious solution.

+1. It might be in poor taste, but all the good sentiment in the world and $1 will buy you nothing more than a bag of chips.

Change isn't effected by hand wringing.

American Samurai
12-14-2012, 1:38 PM
America is not Israel. The Israelis aren't ruled by Politically Correct liberals and political correctness, America is. And America will continue to suffer for that.

Damn True
12-14-2012, 1:39 PM
Ok, tell you what. I'll agree to mental health testing for all guns buyers if you agree to guaranteed national CCW to anyone who passes the test.

The former is a bit hyperbolic don't you think in that it'd be bloody impossible to implement? I think getting those actually diagnosed mentally ill and those on prescribed psychotropics uniformly entered into the background check database is an attainable goal.

mvpatriot
12-14-2012, 1:39 PM
America is not Israel. The Israelis aren't ruled by Politically Correct liberals and political correctness, America is. And America will continue to suffer for that.

qft. + 100000000

Coded-Dude
12-14-2012, 1:40 PM
Is this true? I mean that the Israelis actually did this?

Regardless, it's a really good idea, and it's a suggestible solution that would actually work, unlike more useless gun control laws. Not only does this offer the possibility to mitigate the deaths in an actual attack, but it would dramatically cut down or even eliminate the attacks. These kinds of sociopaths are obviously cowards and would avoid "hard targets".

But can anyone show actual proof that the Israelis did this? It would give some empirical evidence that we could use to contribute to the discussion.

In Israel, teachers and parents who serve as school aids are armed with semi-automatic firearms whenever they are on school grounds. Since the country adopted this policy in the 1970s, attacks by gunmen at Israeli schools have become non-existent.

http://www.wnd.com/2009/03/91528/

USMCM16A2
12-14-2012, 1:42 PM
Folks,


I WILL REPEAT myself, for those paranoids out there. DISCUSSION, there is NO CODE in MY statements. It takes discussion to get things resolved, talk about the issue/issues and implement solutions. These are general statements, no hidden meanings.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 1:43 PM
I'm not advocating anything like that. I'm saying that we as stewards of the 2A need to take a proactive stance in addressing the shortcomings of existing laws. That people who are diagnosed mentally ill or have prescribed psychotropics are not uniformly reported and are not uniformly prevented from purchasing a firearm is a massive problem (that both sides of the issue happen to agree on). It is low hanging fruit that I believe we should go after and push for legislation to resolve.

I fully recognize that the F2F thing is a touchy subject, but ensuring that every gun buyer is not a felon, not mentally ill or on psychotropics provides defensibility for law abiding citizens against future attempts at restriction and ads weight to our assertions that gun crimes are the fault of criminals, not guns since a criminal or one who is mentally ill would only be able to attain a gun by illegal means.

But what is really "illegal means"?

The right to defend ones life doesn't disappear because he or she was a felon. If that person can't be trusted to own a weapon and obey the laws, then why are we letting them out of jail? If someone is crazy, who decides? If a impartial panel of ones peers hears the case to adjudicate someone as incompetent to own a firearm, but then turns that person loose on the street to drive themselves home, then... lol, WTF?!

The point is that laws exist to control the law-abiding. The fact that murder is illegal (more so than anything else really except maybe treason) should have been plenty of deterrent to stop this man if the law was going to work. BUT LAW DOESN'T WORK TO STOP LAW BREAKERS.

The reality is that we as gun owners are weaker and of less character than our predecessors also. Do you think Patrick Henry or Thomas Jefferson or any of the other "heroes" of our culture who actually went to war for this right and others would have balked at telling it like it was? LOL, not likely.

Either secure the schools or allow those working there to secure themselves. That is the solution.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 1:43 PM
The former is a bit hyperbolic don't you think in that it'd be bloody impossible to implement? I think getting those actually diagnosed mentally ill and those on prescribed psychotropics uniformly entered into the background check database is an attainable goal.

Who sets the standard for mentally ill? Does my depression mean I don't have a right to my rights?

Anything more than prohibiting people who have been adjudicated to be a danger to others, and including some kind of an appeals process for such a prohibition, is untenable. Even us defectives ought to have a right to due process.

a ban on guns will definitely be on the table after this tragedy. as always, no middle ground will be met in the "guns in America" discourse.

i believe that a federal mandate should be enacted, that any US citizen seeking to purchase a firearm should be required to pass a psychological examination and an interview by local police officials (both in-person), before he or she is allowed to legally purchase a firearm. the cost should be covered by the purchaser and follow-up examinations/interviews should occur every year or two. it would boost state revenue and deter any person with undocumented mental illness or personality disorders from legally purchasing firearms.

i'm sure many here will disagree with me, but i don't care anymore. ~20 dead elementary school children really is the last straw.

Putting it crassly, 20 dead kids is a small statistical anomaly that doesn't make a dent in the overall homicide rate and cannot be ethically used to restrict rights, in addition to such a scheme essentially keeping the poor from possessing firearms due to cost.

If you really want to defend schools, you should support some kind of program that physically defends schools. Bad laws and outrage won't stop someone intent to hurt people from hurting people, making sure someone is on hand to put them down will.

Coded-Dude
12-14-2012, 1:43 PM
a ban on guns will definitely be on the table after this tragedy. as always, no middle ground will be met in the "guns in America" discourse.

i believe that a federal mandate should be enacted, that any US citizen seeking to purchase a firearm should be required to pass a psychological examination and an interview by local police officials (both in-person), before he or she is allowed to legally purchase a firearm. the cost should be covered by the purchaser and follow-up examinations/interviews should occur every year or two. it would boost state revenue and deter any person with undocumented mental illness or personality disorders from legally purchasing firearms.

i'm sure many here will disagree with me, but i don't care anymore. ~20 dead elementary school children really is the last straw.

the problem i see with things like this........ someone will get a firearm legally though these channels. They will subsequently snap and go on a killing spree. Each time this happens the rules will become more and more strict until the rule is ban guns.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 1:44 PM
a ban on guns will definitely be on the table after this tragedy. as always, no middle ground will be met in the "guns in America" discourse.

i believe that a federal mandate should be enacted, that any US citizen seeking to purchase a firearm should be required to pass a psychological examination and an interview by local police officials (both in-person), before he or she is allowed to legally purchase a firearm. the cost should be covered by the purchaser and follow-up examinations/interviews should occur every year or two. it would boost state revenue and deter any person with undocumented mental illness or personality disorders from legally purchasing firearms.

i'm sure many here will disagree with me, but i don't care anymore. ~20 dead elementary school children really is the last straw.

FAIL.

I was just going to leave it at fail, but dear lord man, you sound like an imbecile. Do you really think that the right to defend your life should depend on the subjective review of another person? Maybe you should move to another country that has already "progressed" to the point you "feel" comfortable.

vantec08
12-14-2012, 1:45 PM
There are two requirements for meaningful "dialogue" -- honesty and taking responsibility for what one says. A whole LOT of people arent capable of one or the other, and some both. Here in calguns, we agree to disagree but maintain a semblance of honesty. With society at large, we passed the point of honest, responsible discussion over 20 years ago.

USMCM16A2
12-14-2012, 1:47 PM
vantec,


I agree..........A2

elSquid
12-14-2012, 1:56 PM
a ban on guns will definitely be on the table after this tragedy. as always, no middle ground will be met in the "guns in America" discourse.

i believe that a federal mandate should be enacted, that any US citizen seeking to purchase a firearm should be required to pass a psychological examination and an interview by local police officials (both in-person), before he or she is allowed to legally purchase a firearm. the cost should be covered by the purchaser and follow-up examinations/interviews should occur every year or two. it would boost state revenue and deter any person with undocumented mental illness or personality disorders from legally purchasing firearms.

i'm sure many here will disagree with me, but i don't care anymore. ~20 dead elementary school children really is the last straw.

It would probably make sense to wait for details of the event before we start passing laws.

If the shooter stole the firearms, your proposal would not have helped. In that case, perhaps we would be better served by requiring that all gun owners have safe storage and allow police to do warrantless unscheduled searches of gun owners homes, in order to verify same. Of course, since there is no national registry of guns or owners, we should assume that guns could be present in any residence.

Although, it does appear that the target of the rage was the shooter's mother. Perhaps we should require that CPS audit each family every year in order to determine if there are issues between family members that need to be resolved with the state acting as a facilitator.

If it saves just one life...

-- Michael

Coded-Dude
12-14-2012, 1:58 PM
4th best gun-control state in the nation (per Brady): http://www.ibtimes.com/connecticut-gun-laws-no-permit-needed-buy-shotguns-rifles-938576

CrazyPhuD
12-14-2012, 2:01 PM
4th best gun-control state in the nation (per Brady): http://www.ibtimes.com/connecticut-gun-laws-no-permit-needed-buy-shotguns-rifles-938576

and he came from NJ which is #2

MudCamper
12-14-2012, 2:02 PM
http://www.wnd.com/2009/03/91528/

Thank you!

As to the "dialogue", this thread is one, and it's giving me some great points to bring up in the inevitable dialogue I'll have with less 2A-freindly folks, specifically 2 realistic solutions to school shootings:

First, the Israeli Solution, which we have proof that it works.

Second, nicki's (indirect) suggestion, a media blackout on the names of the attackers. Take away their notoriety and you take away some of their motive. Sure this one is nowhere near full-proof, but it would work better than another gun ban. Look how well Connecticut's restrictive gun control laws helped stop today's maniac...

American Samurai
12-14-2012, 2:05 PM
I think the politically correct crowd that want to ban guns are more concerned with "feeling better" about Utopian legislation rather than the actual effectiveness and results of that legislation.

"WE NOW DECLARE THAT ALL GUNS WILL BE BANNED!" see, it feels good. Effectiveness is irrelevant.

HowardW56
12-14-2012, 2:05 PM
The solution (short of fixing the attitudes and ***holes problem) is arming the teachers and providing proper security. If a government takes away the rights of citizens entering it's facilities, then it has a duty and responsibility to protect those that now cannot protect themselves.

Infringing on the rights of free men is not the way to prevent further tragedy. That paper trail you're talking about, ala "the war on drugs", we've spent over a trillion dollars on that, 2 trillion if debt and interest are factored in. And I know people who buy Vicodin off the street right now. What the hell are you talking about? Advocate?! For whom sir?

Arming lefty anti-gun teachers? They wouldn't agree with that.


If 1/3 were willing to be trained and be armed, schools would no longer be the sort target that they now are... Who would know which teacher is armed?

nothinghere2c
12-14-2012, 2:06 PM
This is not, I repeat NOT even a 2A related problem. This is a problem resulting from the unravelling of the moral thread of America and humanity in general. We in this country, were a nation of values. We had principles, and were generous and sensible as a nation.

Obviously this is not an easy balance to maintain. The people who are generous, are "not generous enough". The people who are sensible, are "too logical to have a heart". And the people who just can't get their *** together for whatever reason are "victims", not idiots.

Now we are a nation of fat, impulsive, mouth-breathing thugs. We can't even raise our own children, yet we patrol the world to tell everyone else how to. Coincidentally, we'll be out of money for both activities before long...

My point is that we are poisoned as a society, for a lot of reasons. And our two-party political system is not working. They just takes turns selling us out to their master of choice. I can only hope that we begin to revert to morality and personal responsibility in my lifetime. I'll die happier.

this is exactly the problem imo. We've become a nation of self-indulged instant-gratification pigs. I smile and say hi to my neighbors and they look at me weird. We feed ourselves toxic doses of movie violence, graphic games, and other stuff like pornography thinking it doesn't have any affect on our minds.

the tool is not the issue, its what we've become as a people. Society doesn't even want to sacrifice their time anymore to interact with their children and raise them with standards. The tv, classroom, and street now raises them.

donny douchebag
12-14-2012, 2:09 PM
What a stupid and needless thread. And for people who're always whining about how the antis deal in emotion instead of fact more than a few here need to get a grip.

Fatgunman
12-14-2012, 2:13 PM
Folks,


Here we are as a nation facing another mass shooting, it is time for the politicizing, the banter, the us versus them bull**** needs to stop. I understand we as gunowners are maligned in the press. But a serious dicussion is needed now from all sides to minimize these occurances. A2

That's ridiculous there are laws to not hurt others, what is there to discuss what guns we can have o not have, I'm sorry for the families, but for this to be used to steal my / our god given rights away is BS! This is a problem with our society not a problem with freedoms psychos will be psychos and that's that.

bluebear
12-14-2012, 2:13 PM
Some believe the solution is to give the government control over who is determined mentally unfit. Soon enough, if you believe in God, speak out against the government or believe in a free market you will be labeled mentally unfit. They are already trying to label us extremists... with a terrorist label not far behind.

Those of you who are begging for daddy government to save you/protect you need to read up on the history of Germany, the Soviet states, etc. Government has proven to be the worst option for protecting safety and liberty throughout history. Reason and logic need to rule the day.

Bad people are going to kill until the Lord returns. It tears my heart out every time I see it. I pray God will comfort those who are dealing with unimaginable hurt right now.

FullMetalJacket
12-14-2012, 2:16 PM
Okay, so then what is the solution? The government has created hunting grounds basically, and has not bothered to secure those grounds. The government is to blame here.
The first thing a solution has to do is not make the problem worse. Proposing solutions that are so far from the political center only serves to marginalize us. Undecideds hear these proposals and decide we're all lunatics.
Everytime one of them even tries to exercise the right to defend themselves or their students, they get fired. Like Washington, if it's got everybody this upset, it must be a good idea. UNLESS, you have something better...
While I might nominally agree that more guns in the right hands would help, that solution isn't going to fly if those very hands DON'T WANT GUNS AROUND in the first place. You're not going to get teachers and administrators--the CORE of liberal institutions--to accept your reasoning or embrace your values. It's just not going to happen, so it's pointless to discuss.

Anyone who thinks that the proposal to arm teachers--in grade schools, no less--is going to be treated with anything other than scorn, ridicule, and dismissal is politically tone deaf.

I think we'd be better off proposing that the local police place an officer (or other qualified security personnel) on the grounds while school is in session.

elSquid
12-14-2012, 2:20 PM
this is exactly the problem imo. We've become a nation of self-indulged instant-gratification pigs. I smile and say hi to my neighbors and they look at me weird. We feed ourselves toxic doses of movie violence, graphic games, and other stuff like pornography thinking it doesn't have any affect on our minds.

the tool is not the issue, its what we've become as a people. Society doesn't even want to sacrifice their time anymore to interact with their children and raise them with standards. The tv, classroom, and street now raises them.

Violent crime rates have been dropping for the last 20 years, fwiw.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/29/justice/us-violent-crime/index.html

Aberrations are not the rule, and in a population of 320 million (!!!) people some individuals will commit horrific crimes. They are the ones that get the publicity. It's a mistake to infer that they are representative of the larger population...because they are not.

-- Michael

nothinghere2c
12-14-2012, 2:26 PM
Violent crime rates have been dropping for the last 20 years, fwiw.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/29/justice/us-violent-crime/index.html

Aberrations are not the rule, and in a population of 320 million (!!!) people some individuals will commit horrific crimes. They are the ones that get the publicity. It's a mistake to infer that they are representative of the larger population...because they are not.

-- Michael

I agree on the statistics. But I also believe society in general has become much too self centered. People aren't willing to help out others and just think of nothing but themselves.

I also believe that while all the violence we expose ourselves to doesn't turn people into killers, it can exacerbate the violent acts of already imbalanced individuals.

balgor
12-14-2012, 2:27 PM
The best course of action in regards to a mass shooting is to do nothing. These are extremely rare events. How many people die a year in mass shooting 50, 100? Lets say we arm every teacher in the US with a Glock (ignoring costs or training. psychological externalities, etc) there are about 7 million teachers in US, 7X10^6 X 6X10^2 ($600 cost glock) 4.2 X 10^9 or a cost of 420 billion, lets just arm 10% of teachers for a cost of 42 billion. 4.2 X 10^8/10^2 = 4.2 X 10^6 cost/life saved or $4.2 million per life saved. Vaccines, seat belts, aspirin, etc. save lives $10-$20 per life saved. So where should social funds be allocated, super rare events or super common events that cause fatalities?

jdmcgee
12-14-2012, 2:31 PM
For all of you that are saying that we don't need to have a dialog about this topic because the "enemy" (not my word, quoting another poster) won't listen or they have already made up their minds need those mental evaluations that were brought up earlier in the thread.

How many problems have ever been solved by not having a dialog with the opposition. I'm sure many think we could have an unnecessary civil war or revolution but most of us wouldn't back it at this time. I'll pick diplomacy any day.

War is a result of failed diplomacy.

akira
12-14-2012, 2:32 PM
please watch this, spread this video
It’s the medias fault why these shootings are happening.
Giving these dirtbags ideas of glory and fame from the constant media attention.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4&feature=player_embedded

mysak
12-14-2012, 2:33 PM
Alot of this mental health BS needs to be thrown out the window too many people get off the hook for heinous acts for saying they're unstable so just stop the crap right now.

Mental evals another STUPID idea I know for a fact in CA it is harder to get a firearm legally than illegally so theres that to chew on.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 2:37 PM
Calling other Americans "enemies" is one of the problems,we are not at war. Things do need to change now. Mental evaluations need to be done.


You need to reevalute that statement, anyone trying to take your rights, freedoms, or liberty is an enemy to freedom.



Alot of this mental health BS needs to be thrown out the window too many people get off the hook for heinous acts for saying they're unstable so just stop the crap right now.

Mental evals another STUPID idea I know for a fact in CA it is harder to get a firearm legally than illegally so theres that to chew on.

Thats the MO for all of these massacres. Don't hold the individual responsible, blame the guns. Don't hold the individual responsible, he was mentally unstable. Don't direct anger at the psychopath who did this, ABC CBS NBC etc. and the POTUS brainwashed me to be a good little sheep and sign my freedom away because guns are bad. I think I'll pass on the koolaid there Jim.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 2:40 PM
Engaging in dialogue is not needed. We already know what the antis will say.

Why do you want input from "all sides"? Never give your enemy an opportunity.

This

slick44
12-14-2012, 2:40 PM
This is not, I repeat NOT even a 2A related problem. This is a problem resulting from the unravelling of the moral thread of America and humanity in general. We in this country, were a nation of values. We had principles, and were generous and sensible as a nation.

Obviously this is not an easy balance to maintain. The people who are generous, are "not generous enough". The people who are sensible, are "too logical to have a heart". And the people who just can't get their *** together for whatever reason are "victims", not idiots.

Now we are a nation of fat, impulsive, mouth-breathing thugs. We can't even raise our own children, yet we patrol the world to tell everyone else how to. Coincidentally, we'll be out of money for both activities before long...

My point is that we are poisoned as a society, for a lot of reasons. And our two-party political system is not working. They just takes turns selling us out to their master of choice. I can only hope that we begin to revert to morality and personal responsibility in my lifetime. I'll die happier.

EXACTLY!!! I could not say it better! Our nation across the board is in moral decay and unfortunately is so far gone that recovery is virtually impossible. I contribute and help in every way I can but I also have chipped away at my corner of my world and teach as many young people as I can the values and principles I was taught along with firearm safety, management and responsibility.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 2:57 PM
Then maybe the lefties won't be teachers:43:



Let me know when that happens :D. I don't think I'd want some lefty teacher trying to take down a shooter and having a weapon jam because they are limp wristing it whilst shielding their face from the loud noise with their other hand.

Incompetent.

Ford8N
12-14-2012, 2:59 PM
Let me preface this by saying that I am as staunch a 2A advocate as any. I have owned guns all my life will continue to do so, and will not ever willingly surrender them.

That said, I think it is high time for the gun rights advocacy community to become the offeror of solutions. To become proactive in addressing the shortcomings in the existing laws regarding gun ownership rather than just being reactive to further restriction.

I'm currently co-writing an article with a LEO acquaintance of mine regarding the roadblocks to database entry for those diagnosed mentally ill. This is IMO an issue that "we" should be leading the charge on. There has to be a way that Fed, State & Local LE can better share this data and there has to be a way to compel healthcare entities to provide it in a way that does not deter reporting for fear of stigmatizing mental illness.

This is a good start! Good luck on getting it past the ACLU lawyers.



Beyond that, IMO the face to face private transfer should be abolished. I know this is a touchy subject for many of you and I understand your reasoning. But man, you can't get a prescription for vicodin without a paper trail. I don't think it's too much to have every transfer go through an FFL. My justification for this point is this; If we can establish that all guns owned by law abiding citizens are purchased legally, with appropriate background checks and are actually legal to own. Then in all cases where someone uses an illegal firearm to commit a crime we have a stronger argument that criminality is the cause, and not merely the presence of a firearm. I'm not sure I explained that very well.....

I'd love to hear the thoughts of the forum leadership and legal team on this premise.

I disagree on this point. As a prisoner of California, I can't buy certain firearms in other states because they look "scary". It has nothing to do with if I've ever been hospitalized as a nut. The truth of the matter, I'm clean as new snow. To look at my background, I walk on water like Jesus Christ. Yet I can't be trusted to buy a "scary looking" firearm in another state because I'm a prisoner of the rulers of this state.

What happened was a psycho killed his family and twenty kids. Both my sister's are teachers and they can tell who are gonna be the psychos when they grow up and they've been right so far.

100% right.


Ant trained medial professional can do evaul's. They do them on cops.

But you will never hear what they find out about those cops who have psychological eval's, Union protects them pretty good.

Ok, tell you what. I'll agree to mental health testing for all guns buyers if you agree to guaranteed national CCW to anyone who passes the test.

100%, also you can buy anything that is legal in 50 states.

Ringer
12-14-2012, 3:00 PM
I think we should try adopting what the Israeli school teachers do. I think they have a more effective idea.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 3:00 PM
The solution (short of fixing the attitudes and ***holes problem) is arming the teachers and providing proper security. If a government takes away the rights of citizens entering it's facilities, then it has a duty and responsibility to protect those that now cannot protect themselves.

Infringing on the rights of free men is not the way to prevent further tragedy. That paper trail you're talking about, ala "the war on drugs", we've spent over a trillion dollars on that, 2 trillion if debt and interest are factored in. And I know people who buy Vicodin off the street right now. What the hell are you talking about? Advocate?! For whom sir?

Not to mention that after all that money was wasted we are legalizing drugs that we previously included in the "war on drugs". " We're losing the war on drugs sir, what should we do?" "Legalize it and tax our way into more debt!"

paul0660
12-14-2012, 3:02 PM
The closest thing to a discussion I'm willing to have at this point is asking why they'll strip people of the right to defend themselves in an insecure area. :mad:

My supply of tact is starting to run low.

Yeppers.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 3:08 PM
For all of you that are saying that we don't need to have a dialog about this topic because the "enemy" (not my word, quoting another poster) won't listen or they have already made up their minds need those mental evaluations that were brought up earlier in the thread.

How many problems have ever been solved by not having a dialog with the opposition. I'm sure many think we could have an unnecessary civil war or revolution but most of us wouldn't back it at this time. I'll pick diplomacy any day.

War is a result of failed diplomacy.

True, but its easy to send people to war when you dont know or give a **** about em. Right BHO?

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Thomas Jefferson

IVC
12-14-2012, 3:13 PM
That said, I think it is high time for the gun rights advocacy community to become the offeror of solutions. To become proactive in addressing the shortcomings in the existing laws regarding gun ownership rather than just being reactive to further restriction.

This shows the major problem - the gun control fallacy. You already attributed the problem to guns and gun laws.

People believed it and created gun free Chicago. They banned not just "assault weapons," but any handguns. Didn't work. People believed it and created "gun free zones" such as schools, places of worship, military bases, shopping malls, movie theaters. Didn't work.

At what point in time is the discussion about violence in this country going to address the real source of violence? How many times does it have to be proven that more or less gun control has no effect on violence?

paul0660
12-14-2012, 3:13 PM
War is a result of failed diplomacy.

It has been a while since I had heard that ABOMINATION. Diplomacy is actually just a sensitivity to another's opinion. Sort of depends on who the "other" is.

Mac Attack
12-14-2012, 3:14 PM
Now is a time to Pray for those affected by this senseless tragedy. It is not a time to politicise it.

Fatgunman
12-14-2012, 3:18 PM
Now is a time to Pray for those affected by this senseless tragedy. It is not a time to politicise it.

One would think, but no good crisis can be wasted

GrizzlyGuy
12-14-2012, 3:20 PM
I'm saying that we as stewards of the 2A need to take a proactive stance in addressing the shortcomings of existing laws. That people who are diagnosed mentally ill or have prescribed psychotropics are not uniformly reported and are not uniformly prevented from purchasing a firearm is a massive problem (that both sides of the issue happen to agree on). It is low hanging fruit that I believe we should go after and push for legislation to resolve.

Do you and the LEO you're co-writing your article with realize that your misguided anti-liberty proposal would prohibit about 25% of all Americans (http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-numbers-count-mental-disorders-in-america/index.shtml) from possessing firearms, and that's just in any given year?

Mental disorders are common in the United States and internationally. An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year.1 When applied to the 2004 U.S. Census residential population estimate for ages 18 and older, this figure translates to 57.7 million people.2


Or that 50% of Americans would end up getting prohibited at some point in their lifetimes (http://www.myhealthnewsdaily.com/1640-mental-illness-strikes-half-us-adults.html)?

Half of the adults in the United States will develop a mental illness during their lifetime, a new report says. The most common are depression and anxiety.

Let me preface this by saying that I am as staunch a 2A advocate as any. I have owned guns all my life will continue to do so, and will not ever willingly surrender them.

I'm sorry, but you simply are NOT as staunch of a 2A advocate as any. Far from it.

:facepalm:

Oh, and if your proposal comes to fruition and you happen to fall into that 50% who gets diagnosed with a mental illness in the future, and you will not ever willingly surrender your guns... are you going to be the next cop-killing shooter we hear about on the news?

Guntech
12-14-2012, 3:22 PM
+1 grizzly

Snake Eyes USA
12-14-2012, 3:23 PM
I am getting beat up at work and on facebook defending our precious rights. Im taking a licking. For the most nobody is coming with logical reason for gun banning and 2nd repealing. They act of the emotion of the tragedy. My logic does not compute or accepted. Its a failing society. Not the guns.

frankm
12-14-2012, 3:24 PM
I've thought of a solution. First we ban all guns. Then we make it death for being caught with one. Then we put jack-booted thugs on every street corner with automatic submachineguns so they can mow down violaters.
/thread

frankm
12-14-2012, 3:25 PM
I am getting beat up at work and on facebook defending our precious rights. Im taking a licking. For the most nobody is coming with logical reason for gun banning and 2nd repealing. They act of the emotion of the tragedy. My logic does not compute or accepted. Its a failing society. Not the guns.

Ask them when they're going to allow sane people to defend themselves and little children.

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 3:27 PM
The rest of the states followed California's smog laws for sales of new automobiles. Maybe it is time for the rest of the states to accept 10 round mags and bullet buttons. Could be worse.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 3:30 PM
I've thought of a solution. First we ban all guns. Then we make it death for being caught with one. Then we put jack-booted thugs on every street corner with automatic submachineguns so they can mow down violaters.
/thread

Sounds like a plan, when can I expect to see my neighborhood jack booted thug? Hope he gets here soon to stop all the dangerous gun owners who get background checks to own firearms legally which IMO infringes upon their constitutional rights. Not like they should have any rights or be trusted since they along with millions of other gun owners support the economy of our welfare state.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 3:32 PM
The rest of the states followed California's smog laws for sales of new automobiles. Maybe it is time for the rest of the states to accept 10 round mags and bullet buttons. Could be worse.


I've got a bridge to sell you my friend.

Better watch out pretty soon they will throw you a shovel and ask you to start digging before you know it they will be kicking the dirt in on top of you.

glbtrottr
12-14-2012, 3:36 PM
Dialogue. OK.

One of the people in this house works in child abuse; another is frequently involved with the criminal element by occupation. I also dabble in selling criminal digital forensic solutions.

I also left the Marine Corps after 10 years with 3 combat tours.

The problem at hand, specifically the problem of mass school shootings, is not a gun control problem, an availability problem, even a mental health problem, in my opinion.

There is no longer a deterrent in people's minds to not commit these kinds of crimes; instead, any punishment that would be given to criminals has been deemed by the media and the more sensible american media as "too harsh", "draconian", "barbarian" and many other equally outlandish terms. Not all mass murder is a mental illness, in my opinion. Some of it is carried out by perfectly sane individuals who happen to have a grudge - means, motive and opportunity. Mass murder simply does not automatically equate insanity.

The problem is societal; this nation is disabled by its soft heart, its lack of determination, its lack of common identity, and a blatant desire to "be liked", which any means of punishment simply does not pass muster with.

Those bleeding hearts are so driven to be liked, from minorities, to women, to others with point agendas, that they elect people who are simply anti-traditional American values. Those to blame can never be touched or seen, but it can never be the actual criminal. It's usually the parents, a bad upbringing, the gun lobby...quite a bit like saying it's "Bush's Fault".

And so they go on, continuing to blame someone else, and trying to get at "the root of the problem" (guns) and making it difficult or impossible to have access to bullets, or guns.

A tyrant never misses an opportunity to capitalize on the weak. We've seen it time and again. Pol Pot, Hitler, and many more. The most recent president will capitalize on this event, like he did Sandy and many others, to get his way:

http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2012/11/01/316913.jpg

This will be nothing more than another photo op, and another way to ram additional restraints on citizens to increase the amount of gun control and subsequent seizure.

http://www.newsdaily.com/photos/2012-12-14T204732Z_1_CBRE8BD1LRD00_RTROPTP_3_USA-SHOOTING-CONNECTICUT.JPG

This is the serious dialogue that people in Obama's court engage in:

“The only thing left for Barack Obama to do is to work like a third world dictator and just put all these guys in jail.”


A quick definitional reminder:


tyr·an·ny [tir-uh-nee] noun, plural tyr·an·nies.
1. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.
2. the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler.
3. a state ruled by a tyrant or absolute ruler.
4. oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler.
5. undue severity or harshness.

Why couldn't a teacher put a stop to this?

Gun control and softer sensibilities - that's what allows this corrupt government to keep people from defending themselves.

Safety1st
12-14-2012, 3:47 PM
I fully recognize that the F2F thing is a touchy subject, but ensuring that every gun buyer is not a felon, not mentally ill or on psychotropics provides defensibility for law abiding citizens against future attempts at restriction and ads weight to our assertions that gun crimes are the fault of criminals, not guns since a criminal or one who is mentally ill would only be able to attain a gun by illegal means.

Absolutely not true. New laws would provide no such "defensibility" against more restrictive legislation. Look at CA. One of the most restrictive states and legislators constantly push for more onerous restrictions. Or Bloomberg and his coalition. They want nothing less than a total ban of civilian firearm ownership.

Safety1st
12-14-2012, 3:51 PM
The rest of the states followed California's smog laws for sales of new automobiles. Maybe it is time for the rest of the states to accept 10 round mags and bullet buttons. Could be worse.

And from there it would get worse. What makes people think it will stop with 10rd magazines? Ever heard of the frog in the pot?

Guntech
12-14-2012, 3:53 PM
Dialogue. OK.

One of the people in this house works in child abuse; another is frequently involved with the criminal element by occupation. I also dabble in selling criminal digital forensic solutions.

I also left the Marine Corps after 10 years with 3 combat tours.

The problem at hand, specifically the problem of mass school shootings, is not a gun control problem, an availability problem, even a mental health problem, in my opinion.

There is no longer a deterrent in people's minds to not commit these kinds of crimes; instead, any punishment that would be given to criminals has been deemed by the media and the more sensible american media as "too harsh", "draconian", "barbarian" and many other equally outlandish terms. Not all mass murder is a mental illness, in my opinion. Some of it is carried out by perfectly sane individuals who happen to have a grudge - means, motive and opportunity. Mass murder simply does not automatically equate insanity.

The problem is societal; this nation is disabled by its soft heart, its lack of determination, its lack of common identity, and a blatant desire to "be liked", which any means of punishment simply does not pass muster with.

Those bleeding hearts are so driven to be liked, from minorities, to women, to others with point agendas, that they elect people who are simply anti-traditional American values. Those to blame can never be touched or seen, but it can never be the actual criminal. It's usually the parents, a bad upbringing, the gun lobby...quite a bit like saying it's "Bush's Fault".

And so they go on, continuing to blame someone else, and trying to get at "the root of the problem" (guns) and making it difficult or impossible to have access to bullets, or guns.

A tyrant never misses an opportunity to capitalize on the weak. We've seen it time and again. Pol Pot, Hitler, and many more. The most recent president will capitalize on this event, like he did Sandy and many others, to get his way:

http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2012/11/01/316913.jpg

This will be nothing more than another photo op, and another way to ram additional restraints on citizens to increase the amount of gun control and subsequent seizure.

http://www.newsdaily.com/photos/2012-12-14T204732Z_1_CBRE8BD1LRD00_RTROPTP_3_USA-SHOOTING-CONNECTICUT.JPG

This is the serious dialogue that people in Obama's court engage in:




A quick definitional reminder:


tyr·an·ny [tir-uh-nee] noun, plural tyr·an·nies.
1. arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.
2. the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler.
3. a state ruled by a tyrant or absolute ruler.
4. oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler.
5. undue severity or harshness.

Why couldn't a teacher put a stop to this?

Gun control and softer sensibilities - that's what allows this corrupt government to keep people from defending themselves.


Very well said, Glbtrottr.

DvlFig
12-14-2012, 3:55 PM
Completely different. A fellow American is never an enemy. The enemy are the people who blew up the towers.

IBTD but: "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

That did not end with my enlistment.

Coded-Dude
12-14-2012, 3:55 PM
don't think i have ever seen a sextuple post......

Excelsior
12-14-2012, 3:56 PM
Folks,

Here we are as a nation facing another mass shooting, it is time for the politicizing, the banter, the us versus them bull**** needs to stop. I understand we as gunowners are maligned in the press. But a serious dicussion is needed now from all sides to minimize these occurances. A2

Amen.

You are exactly right. The worst part of the us vs. them is that it spawns feel-good measures like gun-free zones and added gun control laws for responsible citizens AND IN THE PROCESS the real problems are never faced.

DvlFig
12-14-2012, 3:56 PM
Completely different. A fellow American is never an enemy. The enemy are the people who blew up the towers.

IBTD but: "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

That did not end with my enlistment.

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 3:57 PM
The rest of the states followed California's smog laws for sales of new automobiles. Maybe it is time for the rest of the states to accept 10 round mags and bullet buttons. Could be worse.

I've got a bridge to sell you my friend.

Better watch out pretty soon they will throw you a shovel and ask you to start digging before you know it they will be kicking the dirt in on top of you.

I'm not sure why you think this is unreasonable, or the "give an inch, take a mile" issue. Auto manufactures have adapted and you can buy a 600 Hp vehicle, smog legal.

The firearm nation could adapt also; think featureless, 80% lowers, etc., things these screwballs won't know about. As I said, could be worse. Maybe laws in CA wouldn't have to change this way.

Excelsior
12-14-2012, 3:58 PM
Engaging in dialogue is not needed. We already know what the antis will say.

Why do you want input from "all sides"? Never give your enemy an opportunity.

Because if all inputs are not listened to there will be limited "buy-in" to the proposed solutions, guaranteeing failure.

Safety1st
12-14-2012, 3:59 PM
The rest of the states followed California's smog laws for sales of new automobiles. Maybe it is time for the rest of the states to accept 10 round mags and bullet buttons. Could be worse.

And from there it would get worse. What makes people think it will stop with 10rd magazines? Ever heard of the frog in the pot?

Guntech
12-14-2012, 4:05 PM
It wouldn't stop with 10 rnd mags they wont be content until every gun has been struck from the face of the earth and then they will probably go after bb guns or something more menacing and evil like rubber band guns.

bwiese
12-14-2012, 4:08 PM
For all of you that are saying that we don't need to have a dialog about this topic because the "enemy" (not my word, quoting another poster) won't listen or they have already made up their minds need those mental evaluations that were brought up earlier in the thread.

How many problems have ever been solved by not having a dialog with the opposition. I'm sure many think we could have an unnecessary civil war or revolution but most of us wouldn't back it at this time. I'll pick diplomacy any day.

War is a result of failed diplomacy.



And when a war is being won there is no need for pre-surrender.

The antis are screaming about dialogue and 'we need to have a conversation' because THEY ARE LOSING. (See: court decisions.) In addition, we have a pro-gun shift in Congress [we actually increased numbers in the House and are didn't really lose anything much in Senate].

Dialog with a weak/fragmented enemy only boosts their position.

Half the people in this thread will get their face in the press with a conniving reporter and be "Another NRA member that supports more gun controls."

STFU and let the NRA handle this. They're pretty good with PR. Last time they actually turned a tragedy into the NICS Improvement Act that allowed some prohibited-for-poor-reason people to actually be able to recover their rights.

Some of us are our own enemy. Remember how SASS sold us out to protect their single-action revolvers and brought us the Roster? Remember how CA Reeps wanted to appear 'tough on crime' and sold out and brought us the Roberti-Roos AW law? That's 'dialogue'.

TimRB
12-14-2012, 4:11 PM
Let's not forget these words, spoken by one of California's two US Senators in 1995: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."

Let the dialog begin.

Tim

Guntech
12-14-2012, 4:14 PM
And when a war is being won there is no need for pre-surrender.

The antis are screaming about dialogue and 'we need to have a conversation' because THEY ARE LOSING. (See: court decisions.) In addition, we have a pro-gun shift in Congress [we actually increased numbers in the House and are didn't really lose anything much in Senate].

Dialog with a weak/fragmented enemy only boosts their position.

Half the people in this thread will get their face in the press with a conniving reporter and be "Another NRA member that supports more gun controls."

STFU and let the NRA handle this. They're pretty good with PR. Last time they actually turned a tragedy into the NICS Improvement Act that allowed some prohibited-for-poor-reason people to actually be able to recover their rights.

Some of us are our own enemy. Remember how SASS sold us out to protect their single-action revolvers and brought us the Roster? Remember how CA Reeps wanted to appear 'tough on crime' and sold out and brought us the Roberti-Roos AW law? That's 'dialogue'.


Amen. Stonewall the mfers. Dont throw em a lifeline let em drown.

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 4:22 PM
With what has happened in the last few months, the anti's WILL be coming after us. This thread is about serious dialogue. My point is this;

when is the last time something like Columbine, Aurora, Oregon, Connecticut, etc. happened in California? Maybe our laws ARE working. We CGNers need to ensure CA doesn't feel the need for further regulation, so maybe a national effort to update laws in other states is the way. Maybe these horrible events would be less frequent in these OTHER states if they had laws like CA, and hence, less attention for the anti's.

I'm not an anti. I came here recently to finalize the security end of my SHTF prepping. I would love to have a few 60 round mags for my future AR in a SHTF scenario. I don't want my guns taken from me in a SHTF scenario, such that those with guns illegally find me and my prepared family easy prey. Given recent events, I'm certain something has to give, and pointing out that the CA laws, AS THEY STAND TODAY, appear to be effective.

CA is the most populous state in the union. Percentage-wise, unspeakable events like that in CT today should happen more in CA than anywhere in the US, but ***EDIT IT IS NOT does not appear to be***. THe dialogue I speak is that CA does not need new regulations, OTHER states do. Again, I am NOT an anti, so if you live in a free state, go ahead and flame me, but realize I am trying to protect MY freedoms here in CA, and maybe even yours (what if a federal ban happened) and possibly protect innocent people, elsewhere in this country.

USMCM16A2
12-14-2012, 4:23 PM
Folks,



As Bill W sits in his ivory tower, and continually spews about that dialogue=giving in. I started this post with the intention of getting different perspectives on what could OUR community can offer as PERHAPS a way to limit these occurances from taking place. Bill, like it or not YOU will have to deal with this subject, all of us will. A2

FreshTapCoke
12-14-2012, 4:35 PM
How many problems have ever been solved by not having a dialog with the opposition.
War is a result of failed diplomacy.

There have been TONS of problems in this world and country solved by not having a dialogue with the opposition.

War is not a result of failed diplomacy; war is valid form of diplomacy conducted with physical force instead of dialogue.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 4:45 PM
There have been TONS of problems in this world and country solved by not having a dialogue with the opposition.

War is not a result of failed diplomacy; war is valid form of diplomacy conducted with physical force instead of dialogue.

Or rather, war can be a result of failed diplomacy, but isn't always.

Unfortunately two ideologies being fundamentally incompatible is a possibility.

elSquid
12-14-2012, 4:47 PM
CA is the most populous state in the union. Percentage-wise, unspeakable events like that in CT today should happen more in CA than anywhere in the US, but IT IS NOT.

Based on what data?

I'll just toss this out there fwiw...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/us/fatal-shootings-at-oikos-university-in-oakland-calif.html?_r=0

-- Michael

Cnynrat
12-14-2012, 4:50 PM
a ban on guns will definitely be on the table after this tragedy. as always, no middle ground will be met in the "guns in America" discourse.

i believe that a federal mandate should be enacted, that any US citizen seeking to purchase a firearm should be required to pass a psychological examination and an interview by local police officials (both in-person), before he or she is allowed to legally purchase a firearm. the cost should be covered by the purchaser and follow-up examinations/interviews should occur every year or two. it would boost state revenue and deter any person with undocumented mental illness or personality disorders from legally purchasing firearms.

i'm sure many here will disagree with me, but i don't care anymore. ~20 dead elementary school children really is the last straw.

The end result of this sort of discretion by local LEOs will be just like CCW in LA County. The parts of the country where most people live will become defacto gun ban zones. Ironically, its those very areas where crime is highest and therefore the need to be prepared to defend yourself is most vital.

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 4:50 PM
Based on what data?

I'll just toss this out there fwiw...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/us/fatal-shootings-at-oikos-university-in-oakland-calif.html?_r=0

-- Michael

Good point, I will edit.

otteray
12-14-2012, 4:52 PM
when is the last time something like Columbine, Aurora, Oregon, Connecticut, etc. happened in California? Maybe our laws ARE working.



Fresno 11/06/12, 8 shot, 2 killed
April 2, 2012: Oakland, Oikos University, 7 killed
The Covina massacre occurred on December 24, 2008, 9 dead.
I'll stop there.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 4:52 PM
With what has happened in the last few months, the anti's WILL be coming after us. This thread is about serious dialogue. My point is this;

when is the last time something like Columbine, Aurora, Oregon, Connecticut, etc. happened in California? Maybe our laws ARE working. We CGNers need to ensure CA doesn't feel the need for further regulation, so maybe a national effort to update laws in other states is the way. Maybe these horrible events would be less frequent in these OTHER states if they had laws like CA, and hence, less attention for the anti's.

I'm not an anti. I came here recently to finalize the security end of my SHTF prepping. I would love to have a few 60 round mags for my future AR in a SHTF scenario. I don't want my guns taken from me in a SHTF scenario, such that those with guns illegally find me and my prepared family easy prey. Given recent events, I'm certain something has to give, and pointing out that the CA laws, AS THEY STAND TODAY, appear to be effective.

CA is the most populous state in the union. Percentage-wise, unspeakable events like that in CT today should happen more in CA than anywhere in the US, but IT IS NOT. THe dialogue I speak is that CA does not need new regulations, OTHER states do. Again, I am NOT an anti, so if you live in a free state, go ahead and flame me, but realize I am trying to protect MY freedoms here in CA, and maybe even yours (what if a federal ban happened) and possibly protect innocent people, elsewhere in this country.


Our laws are working? Give me a ****ing break! We are up **** creek and you want to start heaving buckets of it on everyone else to save yourself? I sure wouldn't want you on my team. If you think our gun laws are so effective you should head on over to Oakland, Richmond, Vallejo, or any number of other cities and then tell me our gun laws are a "model for the country". What country?? China?

TempleKnight
12-14-2012, 4:54 PM
Folks,



As Bill W sits in his ivory tower, and continually spews about that dialogue=giving in. I started this post with the intention of getting different perspectives on what could OUR community can offer as PERHAPS a way to limit these occurances from taking place. Bill, like it or not YOU will have to deal with this subject, all of us will. A2

Bill is right. Our community isn't responsible for this problem. We shouldn't give up any rights so that law makers can be seen "doing something". An AW ban wouldn't have changed anything today, but that's what Chris Mathews on Hardball was calling for this afternoon. Carolyn McCarthy called us all zealots. That's the dialog they want to have with us.

Bob Schaefer on CBS wants "somebody to do something"; then he went off on keeping guns on a high shelf. I'm all for having a discussion regarding prevention of violence, but all that I'm hearing is what kind of addl gun laws they want passed.

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 4:57 PM
Fresno 11/06/12, 8 shot, 2 killed
April 2, 2012: Oakland, Oikos University, 7 killed
The Covina massacre occurred on December 24, 2008, 9 dead.
I'll stop there.

Less people per event than the tragedies in the other states.

Jet Setter
12-14-2012, 5:01 PM
I think everyone here wants to prevent these types of tragedies. However, we do not yet know how/why this particular tragedy occurred. For example, if the shooter turns out to have been mentally ill, I am all for discussing the circumstances under which it is appropriate to involuntarily commit someone for treatment/evaluation prior to a violent act (given the AZ shooting and the CO shooting, I think this is an important conversation to have anyway). But, until we know more, we don't know what to discuss.

I agree about being mentally unfit. There is no way to know or tell when a seemingly "normal" person will suddenly flip and just lose it. We definitely all have to work together to minimize this type of occurrence. I don't believe more strict gun control is the answer (in CA).

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 5:02 PM
Our laws are working? Give me a ****ing break! We are up **** creek and you want to start heaving buckets of it on everyone else to save yourself? I sure wouldn't want you on my team. If you think our gun laws are so effective you should head on over to Oakland, Richmond, Vallejo, or any number of other cities and then tell me our gun laws are a "model for the country". What country?? China?

You are misinterpreting my message, which is; better to have access to firearms with restrictions, than no access at all. I am not an anti.

The cities you speak of are crime-ridden, and have been for decades, have they not? Guns in these cities likely have been around for many years, and newer guns could likely be acquired illegally.

hornswaggled
12-14-2012, 5:04 PM
Gonna go with Bill on this too.

The antis don't need any more help from us in taking away our rights. They will try to whether we offer an olive branch or not. And if they succeed, no points will be given to us for being open to dialog.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 5:07 PM
California has two top 10 highest murder rate cities in the country Oakland and Stockton. Gangbangers using illegally purchased weapons shooting eachother and selling drugs. Not John Doe who bought his AR at his local gun shop and works 9 to 5.

otteray
12-14-2012, 5:09 PM
Less people per event than the tragedies in the other states.

You are a moron. This is not a pissing contest.

craig58
12-14-2012, 5:09 PM
Agree with you USMC. Interesting idea Motorious.
I have to say that while all of these recent mass shootings are upsetting, this one hit me particularly hard because of the children. I disagree with whoever said these events are rare. This is happening with increasing regularity and we do need to talk about how to prevent it. I don't intend on giving up any of my gun rights for ineffective solutions, but I'm willing to discuss and defend my ownership rights. What I'm not willing to do anymore is simply hunker down and tell the "antis" to just p*ss off and assume that there is nothing to be done. I think this may be a watershed event and it will help our cause to maintain our freedoms as much as possible by representing our side reasonably and be willing to listen to the reasonable ideas from other viewpoints. Regurgitating the we're good, they're bad paranoid crap isn't going to help anything.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 5:10 PM
You are misinterpreting my message, which is; better to have access to firearms with restrictions, than no access at all. I am not an anti.

The cities you speak of are crime-ridden, and have been for decades, have they not? Guns in these cities likely have been around for many years, and newer guns could likely be acquired illegally.

I can currently access firearms with restrictions, I see no reason in talking about why we need more.

USMCM16A2
12-14-2012, 5:10 PM
Folks,



No more gun-control.........working together.....................ideas................ ................no..................paranoia. Further the cause of the 2A................................................ .non-shooter.................education. Change.....................perspectives........... .................change ...................votes. Perception................................A2

USMCM16A2
12-14-2012, 5:14 PM
craig,



You put it better than I did. A2

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 5:14 PM
Less people per event than the tragedies in the other states.

You are a moron. This is not a pissing contest.

This is a dialogue thread, correct? I'm not trying to be callussed, but I am pointing out that possibly 10 round mags and mag locks ACTUALLY HELPED in these tragedies that happened in CA.

elSquid
12-14-2012, 5:15 PM
Less people per event than the tragedies in the other states.

It would be nice if you actually presented some meaningful data, 'cause it seems to appear that you are just making things up in order to support your conclusions.

-- Michael

drkft
12-14-2012, 5:15 PM
One facet they never seem to mention in these tragedies is the Psycho-pharmacological effects of SSRI's that it turns out many if not most of these killers are prescribed. At least one of the Columbine shooters comes to mind. Selective Serotonin Re-uptake inhibitors. Prozac being the most recognized Med in this class. Big Pharma is at least warning not to give these to teenagers, but the effects are the same for young adults. Thoughts of Suicide, aggression, sociopathic tendencies. The brain is not supposed to be flooded with serotonin 24/7. Screwing with the brain's chemistry has consequences.

Interesting also that Big Pharma settles so many of these cases when lawsuits arise following these mass murders for untold sums and as part of the settlement, plaintiffs agree to never discuss the terms of the settlement and court records are sealed so we never hear about the details.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 5:15 PM
I'm willing to discuss why they'll forcibly disarm folks under penalty of law in a given area, and then provide no real security for them.

We need to talk about why they let these people die for an infantile sentiment, not open up a dialogue about compromising on guns.

I'm done with playing nice on the issue, and I'm done saving face. Guns didn't kill these kids, a psychopath aided by a system fueled by a poison ideology did.

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 5:17 PM
I can currently access firearms with restrictions, I see no reason in talking about why we need more.

Exactly my point. CA restrictions, applied nationwide, like the anti-smog laws were, may help MINIMIZE these tragedies around the country. No need to change things in CA.

...and the countdown to being flamed by those non-CA folks starts in 4.... 3..... 2..... 1.....

Guntech
12-14-2012, 5:18 PM
Agree with you USMC. Interesting idea Motorious.
I have to say that while all of these recent mass shootings are upsetting, this one hit me particularly hard because of the children. I disagree with whoever said these events are rare. This is happening with increasing regularity and we do need to talk about how to prevent it. I don't intend on giving up any of my gun rights for ineffective solutions, but I'm willing to discuss and defend my ownership rights. What I'm not willing to do anymore is simply hunker down and tell the "antis" to just p*ss off and assume that there is nothing to be done. I think this may be a watershed event and it will help our cause to maintain our freedoms as much as possible by representing our side reasonably and be willing to listen to the reasonable ideas from other viewpoints. Regurgitating the we're good, they're bad paranoid crap isn't going to help anything.



Good idea, Craig, try to reason with unreasonable people. You all aren't getting it, every time this happens we give them a little more and a little more. None of us did anything wrong. Yet they have our rights in their crosshairs. The ******* politicians are just trying to make it look like they're doing something. Its like the mob coming around and "talking" to us about paying them more money to "protect us". Protect us from who!? Protect us from them. There isn't one thing in this country that laws have stopped. Remember prohibition? Imagine that with guns.

Writer
12-14-2012, 5:20 PM
According to the most recent news reports the firearms used in this crime were purchased by the shooter's mother, legally. He killed her with her own gun and then went to the school to kill more innocent people. Some reports say he was mentally ill or "somewhat autistic."

The guns used were two pistols and a .223 caliber rifle. Apparently he left the rifle in the back seat of his mother's car and only took the semiautomatic pistols into the school.

The school had procedures in place to ensure strangers did not come onto the campus. Guests had to sign in at the school office. Apparently the shooter went there first and that is why screaming was heard over the school intercoms.

My point (assuming the latest reports are true) is that no law or policy could have prevented what happened today in CT. Not the assault weapons ban (he left the rifle in the back of the car), not a mental health screening (he didn't buy the guns), and not tighter security at the school (it didn't work).

The only practical intervention that could have saved those precious lives is an armed and trained citizen on the scene.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 5:21 PM
Exactly my point. CA restrictions, applied nationwide, like the anti-smog laws were, may help MINIMIZE these tragedies around the country. No need to change things in CA.

...and the countdown to being flamed by those non-CA folks starts in 4.... 3..... 2..... 1.....

I've never seen the CA restrictions make a measurable impact, ever. Per capita, we're one of the most violent states in the country.

Laws need to be belt on reality, not on rhetoric.

The only way to help prevent this is proactive defense, whether that comes from individuals already there or some kind of third party security.

You can take your own rhetoric and shove it.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 5:21 PM
This is a dialogue thread, correct? I'm not trying to be callussed, but I am pointing out that possibly 10 round mags and mag locks ACTUALLY HELPED in these tragedies that happened in CA.

That makes a whole lot of sense. Who the hell goes on a shooting spree and says "oh I better leave my bullet button on incase I get checked by a LEO".

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 5:24 PM
...My point (assuming the latest reports are true) is that no law or policy could have prevented what happened today in CT. Not the assault weapons ban (he left the rifle in the back of the car), not a mental health screening (he didn't buy the guns), and not tighter security at the school (it didn't work).

The only practical intervention that could have saved those precious lives is an armed and trained citizen on the scene.

How about the Handgun Safety Certification? Was the mother's handgun locked up properly in an approved device/safe? This is what we do here in CA. Maybe it helps.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 5:25 PM
Exactly my point. CA restrictions, applied nationwide, like the anti-smog laws were, may help MINIMIZE these tragedies around the country. No need to change things in CA.

...and the countdown to being flamed by those non-CA folks starts in 4.... 3..... 2..... 1.....

You are by definition anti, because you are promoting the further restrictions of firearms rights on a national scale. I hear BHO is looking for a Secretary of State who will sell us out to UN. You sound like your up to the job.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 5:25 PM
How about the Handgun Safety Certification? Was the mother's handgun locked up properly in an approved device/safe? This is what we do here in CA. Maybe it helps.

There is no requirement in the state of California to keep a gun locked up, though you can be held liable for what a minor does with them.

That has nothing to do with the HSC, which is just a multi choice test that says you know how not to gut shot yourself when you load your gun.

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 5:26 PM
That makes a whole lot of sense. Who the hell goes on a shooting spree and says "oh I better leave my bullet button on incase I get checked by a LEO".

Very good point, but wouldn't it take an enthusiast, someone like YOU, to know about disabling a bullet button, not the average wacko? It's not hte enthusiasts comminting these tragedies.

hornswaggled
12-14-2012, 5:27 PM
How about the Handgun Safety Certification? Was the mother's handgun locked up properly in an approved device/safe? This is what we do here in CA. Maybe it helps.

That's not a law.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 5:28 PM
Very good point, but wouldn't it take and enthusiast, someone like YOU, to know about disabling a bullet button, not the average wacko?

Are you serious? You look in the side and you can see the slot for the scredriver.

None of this is super top secret obscure info. You're making tremendous stretches, here.

WnP
12-14-2012, 5:30 PM
IBTD but: "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

That did not end with my enlistment.

Calling people who may disagree with you as "enemies" is what, I believe, is not needed and may flame up disagreements. This is not a battlefield and you are now a civilian.

cyberpuppy42
12-14-2012, 5:31 PM
I, for one, didn't have anything to do with this tragedy. I am a law-abiding and responsible gun owner. The Constitution tells me I have the right to bear arms, and it also tells me I cannot be considered guilty of a future gun crime before I have committed such crime. Why should I lose my right to own weapons as a result of any of these horrible incidents? My heart goes out to the victims and their families.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 5:32 PM
Are you serious? You look in the side and you can see the slot for the scredriver.

None of this is super top secret obscure info. You're making tremendous stretches, here.

Starting too sound like a troll too, with this baiting. Sound like anti questions.

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 5:33 PM
There is no requirement in the state of California to keep a gun locked up, though you can be held liable for what a minor does with them.

That has nothing to do with the HSC, which is just a multi choice test that says you know how not to gut shot yourself when you load your gun.

The HSC is about safety and awareness. I'm asking if the shooter's mom implemented best safety practices.


Gotta go out to dinner now; wife's birthday today.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 5:35 PM
Starting too sound like a troll too, with this baiting. Sound like anti questions.

Care to read it again?

He said bullet buttons might be why we're safe, I pointed out how easy they are to remove.

You should take care to read something carefully before you cry foul.

MotoriousRacing
12-14-2012, 5:38 PM
Starting too sound like a troll too, with this baiting. Sound like anti questions.

I came to this site to learn how to better arm myself for SHTF scenarios. A couple weeks ago I picked up my first pistol (Buckmark), I bought two 80% lowers today, last week bought 3 stripped lowers, yesterday I picked up my newest 10/22 after 12 days in jail, and next week I'm jailing a G19 that's already paid for. I am not a troll, just open-minded, participating in a "dialogue" that is not to be won or lost.

kilrain
12-14-2012, 5:40 PM
I disagree with whoever said these events are rare.

You can disagree, but you'd be factually incorrect.

Caribouriver
12-14-2012, 5:44 PM
Schools are soft targets for mentally deranged malcontents nurtured by violent video games and encouraged to copy cat to no small degree by the aggrandizement of heinous acts by the media. Allegedly, there was a new security system at the school in Newtown that required people entering to be identified and buzzed in. If so, the first question is how did this guy get in? These defenseless children are our responsibility. The schools must be secure. I'm not sure, but I don't think there has been a death by fire in a school for over 50 years. Why? The use of non-flammable materials, fire exits clearly marked and sprinkler systems to name a few reasons. The same measures can be taken to protect our children from violent sociopaths starting with locking the doors. Mayor Bloomberg shamelessly wasted no time in damning President Obama for not doing enough for gun control. It is almost guaranteed that there will be negative fallout from this horrific incident that will impinge on our RKBA. Just as Richard Reid's failed attempt to blow up his shoes in 2001 now means we all have to take off our shoes at TSA before flying. But that is beside the point. Going through TSA in our stocking feet is only an inconvenience. The real tragedy here is the anguish hundreds of people in Connecticut are experiencing right now. And the 20 children and 7 adults whose lives were cut short by the wanton acts of a psychopath. I don't mean to sound self righteous but I'm thinking more at this moment about them and their families than than the tools the killer used and how that may effect me.

Sunday
12-14-2012, 5:52 PM
Has anyone ever noticed an army of police dressed and armed like they are going to war arrive after the fact???? Is it a police union thing to keep the cops on the clock?

Calplinker
12-14-2012, 5:52 PM
Wow, this thread went downhill fast. :rolleyes:

You know what? IMHO, we don't need a "dialogue" about gun control. Guns are not the problem.

We have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Simple as that.

Honest people can disagree over what kind of arms and where and when they can be.

Getting rid of guns here in America will never happen.

Let's never lose sight of the fact that gun control is FAR, FAR more about control and has little to do with guns.

NYC Mayor Bloomberg honestly believes that citizens should be completely disarmed. He's an idiot, who fortunately will not get his wish.

I have little doubt Obama, post election will now try and push the boundaries of legality and issue executive order(s) that suppress our rights, but the chances of ugly gun legislation getting through both houses of congress is very, very slim.

I am curious to hear what the legal experts here have to say about what our recourse is to challenge executive orders.

It's probably too soon for those discussions, so if it's best to table them for awhile, that's fine too.

Sunday
12-14-2012, 5:55 PM
Constitution ,, just an impediment to the new world order . The subjects need not be armed.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 5:55 PM
Care to read it again?

He said bullet buttons might be why we're safe, I pointed out how easy they are to remove.

You should take care to read something carefully before you cry foul.

As should you. I was referring to his his posts which seem to favor implementing stricter gun laws.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 5:57 PM
As should you. I was referring to his his posts which seem to favor implementing stricter gun laws.

My bad then. Sorry, man.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 5:58 PM
No problem

kilrain
12-14-2012, 6:05 PM
Has anyone ever noticed an army of police dressed and armed like they are going to war arrive after the fact???? Is it a police union thing to keep the cops on the clock?

Perhaps they were concerned about additional suspects in the area and did not assume that since the shooting had stopped, the only suspect was dead?

Additionally, a large show of force by law enforcement would add a layer of physical and psychological security to the community.........

Just a guess but...........;)

Guntech
12-14-2012, 6:16 PM
Perhaps they were concerned about additional suspects in the area and did not assume that since the shooting had stopped, the only suspect was dead?

Additionally, a large show of force by law enforcement would add a layer of physical and psychological security to the community.........

Just a guess but...........;)

It would also add a layer of sensationalism to the media reports. Notice how they kept re-airing the footage of the officer carrying the Rifle length AR. "Look at these officers going car to car with assault weapons, searching every crack, every crevice."

kilrain
12-14-2012, 6:20 PM
It would also add a layer of sensationalism to the media reports. Notice how they kept re-airing the footage of the officer carrying the Rifle length AR. "Look at these officers going car to car with assault weapons, searching every crack, every crevice."

While that may be true, I assure you that the cops on scene could give a frak about the media or their interpretation of the events. They were simply doing their job and, so far, it appears they've done it pretty well all things considered.

Guntech
12-14-2012, 6:42 PM
No doubt, I have nothing but respect for the LEO's especially the ones who don't have the god complex. My beef is with the media.

kilrain
12-14-2012, 6:52 PM
No doubt, I have nothing but respect for the LEO's especially the ones who don't have the god complex. My beef is with the media.

:thumbsup:

ckiwaha
12-14-2012, 7:03 PM
Schools are soft targets for mentally deranged malcontents nurtured by violent video games and encouraged to copy cat to no small degree by the aggrandizement of heinous acts by the media. Allegedly, there was a new security system at the school in Newtown that required people entering to be identified and buzzed in. If so, the first question is how did this guy get in? These defenseless children are our responsibility. The schools must be secure.

I agree with this. This school has no gates. I would never send my child to a school without gates and a buzzer and an armed trained school police officer.

Instead of attacking 2A, there needs to be a school security petition. If we can put air marshal's on planes, we sure as heck can put police officers in schools. And then get back to dealing with the fiscal cliff.

Anyone know how to start a petition?

dieselpower
12-14-2012, 7:12 PM
there is nothing to talk about. some wacko killed people. there is nothing to be done other than keep fighting for gun rights. if they would stop making "gun free zones" people might stop getting shot in "gun free zones"

dieselpower
12-14-2012, 7:12 PM
there is nothing to talk about. some wacko killed people. there is nothing to be done other than keep fighting for gun rights. if they would stop making "gun free zones" people might stop getting shot in "gun free zones"

dieselpower
12-14-2012, 7:16 PM
I agree with this. This school has no gates. I would never send my child to a school without gates and a buzzer and an armed trained school police officer.

Instead of attacking 2A, there needs to be a school security petition. If we can put air marshal's on planes, we sure as heck can put police officers in schools. And then get back to dealing with the fiscal cliff.

Anyone know how to start a petition?

I just watched a parent say they had to go into and through an office in order to access the classrooms. so the shooter knew a way around security.

sounds like a security that starts and ends with...please follow all these rules..:rolleyes:

Your idea that your kids schools are locked up tight is a fantasy. I can bet you any amount of money I can walk onto and into any class room your kids are in by simply NOT following the rules.

romadant
12-14-2012, 7:21 PM
I don't want to talk to anti's about a damn thing. They can go to hell. They make my children less safe. Eff them.

I blame liberals and their whiny political correctness for this awful crap. Again, they can go to hell where their asses belong.

jeffrice6
12-14-2012, 7:28 PM
How about the Handgun Safety Certification? Was the mother's handgun locked up properly in an approved device/safe? This is what we do here in CA. Maybe it helps.

Go away!

Mateba
12-14-2012, 7:32 PM
I'm willing to bet there will be some sort of Federal legislation, good bad or indifferent, the time is ripe to start requiring NICS at gunshows, a possible Federal waiting period and a hi-cap mag ban.

I still don't understand why there aren't NICS checks required at gunshows in states that only go by federal law, it makes perfect sense to me. Everybody should be required to go through a background check to get a firearm.

Mateba
12-14-2012, 7:32 PM
whoops double post.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 7:46 PM
I'm willing to bet there will be some sort of Federal legislation, good bad or indifferent, the time is ripe to start requiring NICS at gunshows, a possible Federal waiting period and a hi-cap mag ban.

I still don't understand why there aren't NICS checks required at gunshows in states that only go by federal law, it makes perfect sense to me. Everybody should be required to go through a background check to get a firearm.

What makes you think that being denied because of a background check is going to stop someone intent on murdering others? The two crimes do not remotely balance out, your lack of logic is painfully obvious.

aklover_91
12-14-2012, 7:49 PM
I'm willing to bet there will be some sort of Federal legislation, good bad or indifferent, the time is ripe to start requiring NICS at gunshows, a possible Federal waiting period and a hi-cap mag ban.

I still don't understand why there aren't NICS checks required at gunshows in states that only go by federal law, it makes perfect sense to me. Everybody should be required to go through a background check to get a firearm.

Gun shows require background checks in all the same situations the state they're in requires background checks outside of them.

The 'gun show loophole' is just a private party sale that happens at a gunshow, not gun dealers not performing background checks.

Most states recognize that requiring a background check on a gun sold between two individuals is inherently unenforceable, and don't require it.

Mateba
12-14-2012, 7:50 PM
Its not, you quoted my post so obviously you read it. I never said anything of the sort, that doesn't mean people shouldn't be stopped from buying guns at gun shows if they shouldn't be allowed to have them, regardless. Everybody should have to do a background check to get a gun, period, that's all I said.

Jason P
12-14-2012, 7:58 PM
Well thank God you're not in charge of my rights as a human on this planet... Which turncoat RINO do you work for?

Jason P
12-14-2012, 7:58 PM
Well thank God you're not in charge of my rights as a human on this planet... Which turncoat RINO do you work for?

Mateba
12-14-2012, 8:07 PM
What is a RINO?

Turncoat? You don't know me, you know nothing about me, give me a break.

GrizzlyGuy
12-14-2012, 8:16 PM
Its not, you quoted my post so obviously you read it. I never said anything of the sort, that doesn't mean people shouldn't be stopped from buying guns at gun shows if they shouldn't be allowed to have them, regardless. Everybody should have to do a background check to get a gun, period, that's all I said.

And how would that have prevented what happened today? He used his mother's guns that he stole from her, right after he murdered her.

mrdd
12-14-2012, 8:22 PM
Guns are not the problem here. This family sounds like it had serious problems. The mother may have been in denial about how serious her son's problems really were. Hopefully the ex-husband and father can shed some light into what may have gone wrong.

Though, the two people who know for sure what triggered this incident are now dead, so the full explanation may never be known.

Ford8N
12-14-2012, 8:24 PM
And how would that have prevented what happened today? He used his mother's guns that he stole from her, right after he murdered her.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You just proved the fallacy of background checks. It wouldn't have made a difference in this case.

CitaDeL
12-14-2012, 8:26 PM
Is it too soon for me to impugn 'sensitive areas' or the school employee or official who let this animal into the school?

Perhaps I am not understanding the circumstances with 100% clarity, but in listening to the breaking reports today, I believe that in order to attain access to the school building, someone has to buzz you in.

So is it completely insensitive or irrational for me to want someone or some group to sieze the dialogue to assert that the failure wasnt in the presence of firearms or the mass murderer but in the fact that someone looked at this guy dressed in camoflage and and 'tactical' gear and thought it was a good idea to let him into a school?

This isnt even a discussion about guns, gun proliferation, or murder. This is about 'sensitive places' and the failure of those who work in the 'sensitive place' to treat it as such. You cannot claim that there is any greater sensitivity in one place over another if there isnt an effort to take precautions to ensure safety and security of those with in.

They let that monster in. Whoever did, is responsible for dooming those children to death.


http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/12/14/newtown-conn-school-district-had-recently-installed-new-safety-protocols/

Dear Members of our Sandy Hook Family,

Our district will be implementing a security system in all elementary schools as part of our ongoing efforts to ensure student safety. As usual, exterior doors will be locked during the day. Every visitor will be required to ring the doorbell at the front entrance and the office staff will use a visual monitoring system to allow entry. Visitors will still be required to report directly to the office and sign in. If our office staff does not recognize you, you will be required to show identification with a picture id. Please understand that with nearly 700 students and over 1000 parents representing 500 SHS families, most parents will be asked to show identification.

Meplat
12-14-2012, 8:33 PM
Calling other Americans "enemies" is one of the problems,we are not at war. Things do need to change now. Mental evaluations need to be done.

The hell we aren’t. If there had been someone in that school office, or a teacher or a janitor, or preferably all of the above no kids may have died at all. Evil exists; you don’t fight it by disarming the good people.

If you back up an inch on that or on “mental illness” they will have it to where if a mental health professional even thinks you might be having a bad day you will be banned for life. And if he doesn’t report it he will lose his license.

And they will wrap it up in such a reasonable sounding package. How’s that 1000 foot gun free school zone workin’ out for ya?

Meplat
12-14-2012, 8:40 PM
Am I the only one who has noticed that every time the statists decide the time is right to push more gun control, these whackjobs start coming out of the woodwork? It’s like they have them already identified and waiting in the wings; and they know just how to push them over the edge.

Meplat
12-14-2012, 8:47 PM
Starting too sound like a troll too, with this baiting. Sound like anti questions.

This is sure to bring out the moles and trolls to show their true stripes. Take notes.:43:

Meplat
12-14-2012, 8:49 PM
The HSC is about safety and awareness. I'm asking if the shooter's mom implemented best safety practices.


Gotta go out to dinner now; wife's birthday today.

Well, if she knew her nut job son had access; daaaaaa..........NO!

But every case is different.

Meplat
12-14-2012, 8:56 PM
I came to this site to learn how to better arm myself for SHTF scenarios. A couple weeks ago I picked up my first pistol (Buckmark), I bought two 80% lowers today, last week bought 3 stripped lowers, yesterday I picked up my newest 10/22 after 12 days in jail, and next week I'm jailing a G19 that's already paid for. I am not a troll, just open-minded, participating in a "dialogue" that is not to be won or lost.


A few years of trying to have dialogues with demagogues should break you of that notion!:facepalm:

1911 .45
12-14-2012, 8:56 PM
Am I the only one who has noticed that every time the statists decide the time is right to push more gun control, these whackjobs start coming out of the woodwork? It’s like they have them already identified and waiting in the wings; and they know just how to push them over the edge.


Thought this same exact thing after this past week.

Kempfer
12-14-2012, 8:56 PM
Serious changes.

The media could start by watching this. Won't happen though, easier to blame guns.

PezlFNTGWv4

The last part is chillingly accurate considering the recent mall shooting...

Meplat
12-14-2012, 9:03 PM
I agree with this. This school has no gates. I would never send my child to a school without gates and a buzzer and an armed trained school police officer.

Instead of attacking 2A, there needs to be a school security petition. If we can put air marshal's on planes, we sure as heck can put police officers in schools. And then get back to dealing with the fiscal cliff.

Anyone know how to start a petition?

This school had locked gates and a buzzer. THEY KNEW THE GUY!

Meplat
12-14-2012, 9:09 PM
I'm willing to bet there will be some sort of Federal legislation, good bad or indifferent, the time is ripe to start requiring NICS at gunshows, a possible Federal waiting period and a hi-cap mag ban.

I still don't understand why there aren't NICS checks required at gunshows in states that only go by federal law, it makes perfect sense to me. Everybody should be required to go through a background check to get a firearm.

The guns in question were registered! Is NICS at gun shows just one of your christmas wishes that you decided to exploit this outrage to get?

Meplat
12-14-2012, 9:13 PM
What is a RINO?

Turncoat? You don't know me, you know nothing about me, give me a break.

From your posts we can tell you are either an anti or hoplessly :facepalm: .

Pred@tor
12-14-2012, 10:20 PM
Exactly my point. CA restrictions, applied nationwide, like the anti-smog laws were, may help MINIMIZE these tragedies around the country. No need to change things in CA.

...and the countdown to being flamed by those non-CA folks starts in 4.... 3..... 2..... 1.....

No thanks bro! Like being left alone out here and I am a Californian who got away from it all! Like not having to smog my vehicles too.

Damn True
12-14-2012, 11:33 PM
I had high hopes for this thread.......I was misguided in my expectation.

Damn True
12-14-2012, 11:33 PM
I had high hopes for this thread.......I was misguided in my expectation.

tcrpe
12-14-2012, 11:41 PM
CBS news Update at 1325 hrs:

"Carney (white house spokesman) stated that The president may be making some hard decisions in the coming days about our 2nd Amendment right, and that some Americans may not support his decision."


obama usurping the Supreme Court?

Sure, sounds like a good idea to me.

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc23/tcrpe/2CA88D22-6B00-418C-A3EA-656DD0ECAD9A-3563-000004B5960DAD01.jpg

kcbrown
12-15-2012, 12:12 AM
The former is a bit hyperbolic don't you think in that it'd be bloody impossible to implement? I think getting those actually diagnosed mentally ill and those on prescribed psychotropics uniformly entered into the background check database is an attainable goal.

Due process or bust.

This is a fundamental (the most fundamental) right we're talking about here -- the right to be able to effectively defend your own life. Unilaterally putting people on some list just because they're taking some prescribed drugs is completely unacceptable.

Also, way to give people with problems incentives to take the medicines they need to take to function normally! Take the drugs, get your rights revoked, is that it? Nice going.

kcbrown
12-15-2012, 12:34 AM
Anyone who thinks that the proposal to arm teachers--in grade schools, no less--is going to be treated with anything other than scorn, ridicule, and dismissal is politically tone deaf.

I think we'd be better off proposing that the local police place an officer (or other qualified security personnel) on the grounds while school is in session.

If there's only one officer there, then there's only one person the bad guy needs to take out before he has free reign over the entire school. Do you really think that's going to be enough? It's better than nothing, but it seems insufficient.

The problem is that the real world only allows you two options:


Armed bad guy(s) against armed law-abiding citizens
Armed bad guy(s) against unarmed law-abiding citizens


You don't get any other options. So which one is it going to be?


It's not our fault the anti-self-defense people are interminably blind to the real world. If they weren't, they'd realize the above, but they continue to hang on to the fantasy that they can somehow choose "unarmed bad guy(s)". The real world doesn't give them that option. Never has, never will. Never in the history of the entire world have the bad guys been unarmed except when they arrange to win by sheer numbers. The bad guys are always looking for a way to gain an advantage in arms. Disarming the law-abiding citizens guarantees only one thing: that the bad guys will always be able to be better armed, and therefore that the law-abiding citizens will always lose.

So: do you want the law-abiding citizens to lose, or to win? The anti-self-defense people have implicitly decided that they want the law-abiding citizens to lose, because they continue to insist on believing in the fantasy that they can somehow arrange for the bad guys to be unarmed.


This horrific tragedy should make it crystal clear that the anti-self-defense people are clinging to a fantasy, because very nearly every anti-gun law they uphold as being necessary was broken here. Connecticut has an "assault weapons" ban. That was broken here (though the rifle in question apparently wasn't used at the school). It has an age limit on lawful possession of handguns. That was broken here. It has a carry permit requirement. That was broken here. The federal gun free school zone law is in place there. That was obviously broken.

No law will deter a sufficiently determined person intent on criminal activity. But what will deter such a person is an armed law-abiding citizenry. It is much riskier to shoot at people who can shoot back. The bad guy might not care about that, but at the very least there is almost certainly going to be much less loss of life at his hands if he's shooting at people who can shoot back.

We can't eliminate the danger. There's no such thing. To live is to risk. The only way to eliminate all risk is to put everyone (and I mean everyone) in a straitjacket and lock each of them in their own padded cell. Anything short of that introduces some risk. To chase after a risk-free society is lunacy, because it's an impossibility. And, in any case, liberty automatically carries risk with it by its very nature. Those who pine for safety at all costs should move to China, which has a government that I'm very sure would be happy to restrict them as much as they desire. I, for one, prefer liberty, and I will happily accept the attendant risks.

There is no other nation on the earth that has liberty as its founding principle. Why in the world would you or anyone else even think of compromising that? Haven't we lost enough liberty already?

CessnaDriver
12-15-2012, 12:57 AM
You cannot stop bad people from getting guns, but you can stop bad people with a gun.

kcbrown
12-15-2012, 1:04 AM
The dialog we need to have with the other side is, simply, this:

The other side's methods have failed. The states of Connecticut and New Jersey are number 5 and number 2, respectively, in Brady's "states with the best gun laws" list, and those laws didn't work. Even worse, those very laws prevented the people who could have saved those kids from being able to respond effectively to the murderer. So not only are those "best gun laws" ineffective, they're counterproductive. They made things worse, not better.

It's time to try something completely new. If greater restrictions doesn't work (and this tragedy proves it doesn't), then the only thing left to try is fewer restrictions.

Give liberty a chance. It's what the country was founded for.

elSquid
12-15-2012, 2:30 AM
You cannot stop bad people from getting guns, but you can stop bad people with a gun.

One of my favorite Jeff Cooper quotes:

“The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.”

-- Michael

wizdumb
12-15-2012, 2:45 AM
It's times like this when SAF, NRA, and other firearm-related organizations have an opportunity to show great leadership by pro-actively working with various state/federal entities. Organizations representing responsible gun owners certainly understand the limitations of gun legislation better than an anti-gun lobbyist or politician.

Many of the individuals who committed these crimes were identified as being at risk of harming themselves or others, but are rarely reported as such. There is a failure of responsibility (and sometimes lack of accountability) here of parents, teachers, and mental health professionals that should be addressed.

If they were to contact NICS, these individuals would be denied from purchasing firearms from an FFL. However, this does not restrict: firearms they already own, local C&R purchases, private-party transfers (where permitted), theft, or black market purchases.

These individuals need help, but they do need to be identified before they can be cared for.

Another way to help our cause would be to provide private sellers with the option (yes, optional) to quickly, easily, and freely do a NICS check on private buyers. That option needs to be made available for folks who want to be sure of who they are selling to. It should not require the time of an FFL, nor require further burden to responsible gun owners.

These steps may not seem like much, but I believe they would go a long way towards preventing future tragedies while showing leadership by responsible gun owners, rather than being portrayed as the enemy.

Ford8N
12-15-2012, 5:12 AM
Another way to help our cause would be to provide private sellers with the option (yes, optional) to quickly, easily, and freely do a NICS check on private buyers. That option needs to be made available for folks who want to be sure of who they are selling to. It should not require the time of an FFL, nor require further burden to responsible gun owners.



First time I have every seen your idea. Excellent! I just hope you can get it past the elitism that exists by those that horde and hold that information. They do not want to share, they might be out of a job.

loose_electron
12-15-2012, 5:13 AM
It would be nice if you actually presented some meaningful data, 'cause it seems to appear that you are just making things up in order to support your conclusions.

-- Michael

There a certain amount of truth to it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/gun-control-laws-and-gun-deaths-florida.jpg

From:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/

The rest of the article makes for an interesting read as well.

frankiejoe577
12-15-2012, 5:17 AM
This just in from fox news "He had hollowed out bullets!, Yeah brian the hollow point bullets are the most feared with law enforcement because they go thru bullet proof armor!" . . . . . . .

The things the media thinks up while waiting for the news conference.

Ford8N
12-15-2012, 5:47 AM
Some of the information in that article is wrong. FWIW

jswr450
12-15-2012, 6:14 AM
First and most important, my heart goes out to the family's that had their loved ones murdered by another monster.

There should be a trained administrator with a gun on every campus. We will NEVER get rid of violence and crime. Unfortunately I have already heard people, including some of my family members, mention that "something needs to be done". It saddens me greatly to see normal people similar to me so willing to give up the most important and greatest right we have living in the U.S.A.
In all of the recent shootings the person was able to go to an area and assault people with little or no resistance. We need more law abiding citizens with CCWs. We don't need ANYMORE gun laws, period. Of course all this is just my opinion.

bob7122
12-15-2012, 7:24 AM
Calling other Americans "enemies" is one of the problems,we are not at war. Things do need to change now. Mental evaluations need to be done.

1st off, we are in a constant struggle against those who wish to extract our god given rights written and expressed in the constitution. if group tries to take something from you through the law and by force what would you call that?


second, if the laws were enforced and i mean the laws that we have in place; there wouldn't be so many shootings. in many instances you find out later that the police, school, counselors, psychologists, family, etc knew about them. they also knew they were a danger to society and did nothing. the police won't get in trouble and even though some other groups are court mandated reporters and other stuff, they still don't do squat.

we need people to stand up and do what is right and not have to worry about "not wanting to get involved".

451040
12-15-2012, 7:35 AM
Dialogue, Serious Dialogue.


Dialogue with the gun grabbers?


NOT INTERESTED IN THE LEAST

taperxz
12-15-2012, 7:43 AM
Dialogue? REALLY? Why don't you try having a dialogue with the Brady Camp. on their FB page?

Lets see where that dialogue will get you. It will get you banned from their site!

It is now time to become even firmer on our stance on gun rights!!!!!!!!

You do not retreat 3/4's of the way into a battle when you are slaughtering the opponent.

TempleKnight
12-15-2012, 8:04 AM
Dialogue? REALLY? Why don't you try having a dialogue with the Brady Camp. on their FB page?

Lets see where that dialogue will get you. It will get you banned from their site!

.[/B]

That's the real question. Who are we supposed to have this dialog with? The Brady's, Carolyn McCarthy, Shumer, Feinstein, etc don't want a dialog. They called for a new AW ban the afternoon of the shooting, despite the fact that no AW was used.

The shooter did not buy the guns himself. No background would have changed the outcome. ABC just reported the he had four handguns with him. That's 44 rounds with no mag change assuming a "high cap" mag ban.

Do we need a US Dept of Nutballs that goes door to door to determine whether someone is dangerous and just throw them in the looney bin? Do you really want to go there?

saint7
12-15-2012, 8:24 AM
I do not know what to say... I have spent most of yesterday and this morning trying to open the eyes of the blind. This guy was nothing more than a criminal with mental problems. He had to steel these weapon and the one they sceam to be banned is the one he never used. This is getting way out of hand. I am so sick and tired of all this. The media I believe is the biggest culprit. We have people dying from heart disease to the tune of 600k+ a year with only 60 at most this year from wacko's in gun free zones. Not to down play what happend in any way... also all I could do was hug my kids ages 8, 5, and 2. and than GOD we they are home with us and not in traditional public school. I hope we as Americans can stand up and make sure we have the right to deffend ourselves and our homes without fear of them taking away the tools we use to do so.

Semper FI!

SanPedroShooter
12-15-2012, 8:28 AM
Here is some 'dialogue' for you

Mr. Nadler was asked whether the Newtown tragedy could be the turning point in many Democrats’ longstanding struggle to enact stronger gun laws.

“I think we will be there if the president exploits it, and otherwise we’ll go on to the next” incident, Mr. Nadler said.
Mr. Nadler joins New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten and others who quickly turned their attention to gun control laws in the hours following Friday’s shooting, one of the worst campus massacres in U.S. history

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/14/dem-lawmaker-get-gun-control-obama-must-exploit-sh/

GaryV
12-15-2012, 8:42 AM
I've said this in at least two other threads already. The way to win the debate that this incident will generate is to control the focus of the discussion. We should not even be addressing the question of the role of guns or gun control. Anytime anyone even brings it up we should call it what it is - opportunistic exploitation of tragedy to push a political agenda - and then immediately point out that what we should be discussing is how, after the prior school shootings and our experiences with terrorism, it is still possible for an armed intruder to enter an elementary school anywhere in the US.

We can point out that billions have been wasted militarizing the police, who only respond after the fact, but virtually nothing has been spent on the simpler more common-sense job of simply making high-priority targets like schools safe in order to actually prevent attacks before they happen. The idea that anyone without legitimate business there can access the student-occupied areas of an elementary school is insane. If we make that our mantra, and simply refuse to discuss anything else, the antis have no way to control this debate or to make it about guns.

American Samurai
12-15-2012, 9:03 AM
Mr. Presidente gets an F for his Hollywood acting, wiping away fake tears.

MotoriousRacing
12-15-2012, 9:28 AM
I came to this site to learn how to better arm myself for SHTF scenarios. A couple weeks ago I picked up my first pistol (Buckmark), I bought two 80% lowers today, last week bought 3 stripped lowers, yesterday I picked up my newest 10/22 after 12 days in jail, and next week I'm jailing a G19 that's already paid for. I am not a troll, just open-minded, participating in a "dialogue" that is not to be won or lost.


A few years of trying to have dialogues with demagogues should break you of that notion!:facepalm:

Apparently true, however I can't tell if you speak of the pro or anti demagogues. Much close-mindedness on both sides.

Guntech
12-15-2012, 9:29 AM
a ban on guns will definitely be on the table after this tragedy. as always, no middle ground will be met in the "guns in America" discourse.

i believe that a federal mandate should be enacted, that any US citizen seeking to purchase a firearm should be required to pass a psychological examination and an interview by local police officials (both in-person), before he or she is allowed to legally purchase a firearm. the cost should be covered by the purchaser and follow-up examinations/interviews should occur every year or two. it would boost state revenue and deter any person with undocumented mental illness or personality disorders from legally purchasing firearms.

i'm sure many here will disagree with me, but i don't care anymore. ~20 dead elementary school children really is the last straw.


Brady is hiring, better send in your resume.

"... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag ... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

-Theodore Roosevelt 1907

The same applies to the constitution. If you are not a Patriot defending freedom then you are a Tyrant, a threat to liberty and democracy.

MotoriousRacing
12-15-2012, 9:35 AM
Exactly my point. CA restrictions, applied nationwide, like the anti-smog laws were, may help MINIMIZE these tragedies around the country. No need to change things in CA.

...and the countdown to being flamed by those non-CA folks starts in 4.... 3..... 2..... 1.....

No thanks bro! Like being left alone out here and I am a Californian who got away from it all! Like not having to smog my vehicles too.

IN NO WAY am I wishing this on you. My point has been that I would rather have a BB and 10-round mag than NOTHING.

Also, as loose_electron has found in the graphic below, regulations appear to have some protective affect.

There a certain amount of truth to it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/gun-control-laws-and-gun-deaths-florida.jpg

From:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/

The rest of the article makes for an interesting read as well.


This has been my contribution to the dialogue that seems to be lost, in favor of flaming.

MotoriousRacing
12-15-2012, 9:38 AM
I've said this in at least two other threads already. The way to win the debate that this incident will generate is to control the focus of the discussion. We should not even be addressing the question of the role of guns or gun control. Anytime anyone even brings it up we should call it what it is - opportunistic exploitation of tragedy to push a political agenda - and then immediately point out that what we should be discussing is how, after the prior school shootings and our experiences with terrorism, it is still possible for an armed intruder to enter an elementary school anywhere in the US.

We can point out that billions have been wasted militarizing the police, who only respond after the fact, but virtually nothing has been spent on the simpler more common-sense job of simply making high-priority targets like schools safe in order to actually prevent attacks before they happen. The idea that anyone without legitimate business there can access the student-occupied areas of an elementary school is insane. If we make that our mantra, and simply refuse to discuss anything else, the antis have no way to control this debate or to make it about guns.

This is real good.

jrwhitt
12-15-2012, 9:38 AM
The dialog we need to have with the other side is, simply, this:

The other side's methods have failed. The states of Connecticut and New Jersey are number 2 and number 5 in Brady's "states with the best gun laws" list, and those laws didn't work. Even worse, those very laws prevented the people who could have saved those kids from being able to respond effectively to the murderer. So not only are those "best gun laws" ineffective, they're counterproductive. They made things worse, not better.

It's time to try something completely new. If greater restrictions doesn't work (and this tragedy proves it doesn't), then the only thing left to try is fewer restrictions.
.


Echo this every where we can

taperxz
12-15-2012, 9:39 AM
IN NO WAY am I wishing this on you. My point has been that I would rather have a BB and 10-round mag than NOTHING.

Also, as loose_electron has found in the graphic below, regulations appear to have some protective affect.




This has been my contribution to the dialogue that seems to be lost, in favor of flaming.

YOUR contribution is an absolute falacy! The number one law in this country to protect children from firearms is the "gun free school zone federal law"

And this law has done what for children?

Guntech
12-15-2012, 9:47 AM
IN NO WAY am I wishing this on you. My point has been that I would rather have a BB and 10-round mag than NOTHING.

Also, as loose_electron has found in the graphic below, regulations appear to have some protective affect.




This has been my contribution to the dialogue that seems to be lost, in favor of flaming.


Show me the map of statistics for how many rapes, murders and other horrific crimes are stopped by law abiding citizens defending themselves with their constitutionally guaranteed arms. I'll bet The PRK has a lot more people who have become victims because they have been unconstitutionally denied the right to defend themselves. You can claim that as one of your pro gun control statistics too, or does that not help the anti gun lobby?

MotoriousRacing
12-15-2012, 9:52 AM
Exactly my point. CA restrictions, applied nationwide, like the anti-smog laws were, may help MINIMIZE these tragedies around the country. No need to change things in CA.

...and the countdown to being flamed by those non-CA folks starts in 4.... 3..... 2..... 1.....

I've never seen the CA restrictions make a measurable impact, ever. Per capita, we're one of the most violent states in the country.

Laws need to be belt on reality, not on rhetoric.

The only way to help prevent this is proactive defense, whether that comes from individuals already there or some kind of third party security.

You can take your own rhetoric and shove it.

So where is your basis, or is it rhetoric, that CA is one of the most violent states per capita? Even if true, I'm willing to assume CA has a higher number of gang members per capita than most states that raises the violence index you don't provide facts for either. I'm also willing to assume having an international border with Mexico adds the violence in CA, something only 4 states need to deal with.

CessnaDriver
12-15-2012, 9:54 AM
CBS news Update at 1325 hrs:




obama usurping the Supreme Court?

Sure, sounds like a good idea to me.

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc23/tcrpe/2CA88D22-6B00-418C-A3EA-656DD0ECAD9A-3563-000004B5960DAD01.jpg


Those far outside corner eye wipes do like kind of phony to me.
Tear ducts are in the inner corners of the eyes of course.

GaryV
12-15-2012, 9:55 AM
IN NO WAY am I wishing this on you. My point has been that I would rather have a BB and 10-round mag than NOTHING.

Also, as loose_electron has found in the graphic below, regulations appear to have some protective affect.




This has been my contribution to the dialogue that seems to be lost, in favor of flaming.

Not flaming, but what do they mean by "firearm law designed to protect children in place"? I'm very familiar with Florida law, for example, which is one of the states they list, and the laws in that state regarding guns and children are no more stringent than in any other state. The laws they're talking about are "assault weapons’ bans, trigger locks, or safe storage requirements".

The only one of these that Florida has is the "safe storage requirement". But that doesn't mean they require that a gun be locked up, disassembled, or unloaded when stored. You can legally leave your loaded and unlocked gun lying on your bedside table 24 hours a day, even when you're not home, if you choose. The only thing Florida law says is that if you live in a situation where you should know that your gun is readily accessible to children, and if a child gets your loaded gun, and if that child then causes injury or damage, then and only then are you guilty of a crime. In other words, it only punishes you if your actions are reckless and lead to harm. It in no way places any prior restraint on your actions. That is a very weak "safe storage law" indeed, and is not liked at all by the antis such as LCAV and Brady. The CDC, however, found that this type of law was just as effective at keeping guns away from children as laws requiring trigger locks or storage in a safe. So laws apparently work just as well if they only punish bad actors after the fact as they do if they restrict the rights all law-abiding persons.

But more importantly, if you buy into this image, you've bought into the subtle lie on which its based. The implication they're trying to make is that gun laws make a place safer. However, the only crime they're looking at is "deaths due to injury by firearm". If you instead rate these states by overall murder rate, what you find is a very different picture. By limiting their statistics to only those related to guns, they artificially make guns the only possible culprit. However, what actually matters is the rate of murder, not the rate of murder by one means over another. When posed as "do strict gun laws reduce murder rates?" what you get is a very different picture, with a resounding answer of "NO!"

therealnickb
12-15-2012, 10:04 AM
Those far outside corner eye wipes do like kind of phony to me.
Tear ducts are in the inner corners of the eyes of course.

I hate to be cynical at a time like this, but o's track record makes it difficult to believe anything he says. I think the slimy politician just got his first real Clinton moment. ("I feel your pain")

It's effective. The fight is coming.

GrizzlyGuy
12-15-2012, 10:21 AM
It would be nice if you actually presented some meaningful data, 'cause it seems to appear that you are just making things up in order to support your conclusions.

-- Michael

There a certain amount of truth to it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/gun-control-laws-and-gun-deaths-florida.jpg

From:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/

The rest of the article makes for an interesting read as well.


Also, as loose_electron has found in the graphic below, regulations appear to have some protective affect.

This has been my contribution to the dialogue that seems to be lost, in favor of flaming.

No, you (MotoriousRacing) and Loose_Electron are misinterpreting the data. If you follow the source links in the article that Loose linked to, you arrive here (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/) where it says (with my bolding):

The map above charts firearm deaths for the 50 states plus the District of Columbia. Note that these figures include accidental shootings, suicides, even acts of self-defense, as well as crimes.

It also says:

Taking the voting patterns from the 2008 presidential election, we found a striking pattern: Firearm-related deaths were positively associated with states that voted for McCain (.66) and negatively associated with states that voted for Obama (-.66). Though this association is likely to infuriate many people, the statistics are unmistakable.

I don't know why the author would think this is infuriating, as it is common sense: on average, the people in red states are more pro-gun than the people in blue states. This means that red states will have more guns per capita, and thus guns are more likely to be used in self-defense. There will be more accidents per capita simply because there are more guns, and yes there will even be more suicides-by-gun for the same reason. None of that has anything to do with gun control laws.

Correlation is not causation, so when the author goes on to make this conclusion based on even lower correlations than what I quoted from his same article... take his conclusion with a grain of salt:

Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).

MotoriousRacing
12-15-2012, 10:26 AM
YOUR contribution is an absolute falacy! The number one law in this country to protect children from firearms is the "gun free school zone federal law"

And this law has done what for children?

Provide a plausible solution then. How about LE checkpoints within 1000 yards of EVERY school? Are you willing to pay more taxes for this protection?

How about we start with BB and 10-round mags? According to this graphic
Mass Shootings Map (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map), CA has not had a shooting with more than 9 fatalities since 22 were killed in San Ysidro in 1984. Unless guns are removed from everyone, unfortunately there will likely always be shootings (a nation of 310M will always have a few loonies), but perhaps BB and 10-round mags are working in CA. Maybe they can work elsewhere.

And as you are about to flame me, PLEASE READ THIS;

I have prepared my family for bugging in. I have a large supply of food, water/filtration, batteries/solar/DC devices, first aid/medicine, CBNR filters, non-firearm weapons, etc., and now I am building my firearms collection. To protect my family, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE automatic weapons, 100 round mags, no mag locks, and other scary schite, etc.

I would also like to STOP SEEING 20+ lives being lost in events like what has just happened. As a parent of a 6 and 4 y/o boys, I cannot even imagine what it would be like to have to bury a healthy child that has been caught up in such a tragedy.

MotoriousRacing
12-15-2012, 10:36 AM
Grizzly, you bring up a good point, but without breaking out the number of self-defense shootings (google was a bust), either of us can be mis-interpreting.

AM9000
12-15-2012, 10:38 AM
I would like to see measures taken in two directions.
One direction would be to limit gun ownership among the mentally ill. Just reading some of the comments around here is proof that some people just should not own guns. Sadly they are out there, and if we can't disarm them, we can stop selling guns to them or at least make it harder for them to get them. I know this presents privacy and 2a implications, but its necessary.

The other direction would be to arm our Teachers, Principals and other group leaders. Give them training and arm them so they can shoot back and save lives. Israel has had some success with this.

CessnaDriver
12-15-2012, 10:39 AM
In my view more often then not these mass killer scenerios there is a chain of events, where people could have made a difference as there were serious signs and concerns or complete failures on security, in the end some people want to blame and demonize an inanimate object to serve as scapegoat or as we al know a launch pad against our rights.

taperxz
12-15-2012, 10:39 AM
Provide a plausible solution then. How about LE checkpoints within 1000 yards of EVERY school? Are you willing to pay more taxes for this protection?

How about we start with BB and 10-round mags? According to this graphic
Mass Shootings Map (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map), CA has not had a shooting with more than 9 fatalities since 22 were killed in San Ysidro in 1984. Unless guns are removed from everyone, unfortunately there will likely always be shootings (a nation of 310M will always have a few loonies), but perhaps BB and 10-round mags are working in CA. Maybe they can work elsewhere.



First of all if i am willing to buy all the firearms i have to protect my family, i would have no problem taxing myself to ensure that an armed guard or faculty members were armed and trained to protect children in a place they spend most of their lives for 12 years.

BB's and ten round magazines helping CA??? LMAO get your facts straight! A featureless rifle in AR/ AK are not required to have a BB or legally owned 10+ round mags in them. Of course criminals will always follow this rule:facepalm:

Not to mention rifles like the socom 16/scout/M1A which is not limited to 10 round mags if previously owned and are much more powerful and as accurate as any AR.

Do you have any idea how easy it is to take a BB off an AR for those that wish to commit a crime? Your logic equals 100% fail.

GaryV
12-15-2012, 10:41 AM
According to this graphic
Mass Shootings Map (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map), CA has not had a shooting with more than 9 fatalities since 22 were killed in San Ysidro in 1984.

And many states with no such laws have never had such an incident. Drawing any conclusion about the effectiveness of these laws based on such a limited amount of information is no different than pulling a factoid out of one's posterior. So why cut it off at 9? Because California has had shootings with up to that number of fatalities since then. Is 9 somehow a magic number below which such incidents don't count, or is this simply an attempt to arbitrarily pick a number that allows one to make a false argument in support of California's anti-gun laws? Why not make the number 5, which would still leave many gun friendly states with no such incidents, but put California back into the "bad" category?

The fact is, as both the CDC and the National Academy of Sciences, after extensive reviews of the published research, concluded, not even one legitimately conducted study has shown any decrease in any kind of violent crime due to any gun control law, anywhere, ever. I'll take their words over those of LCAV, VPC, and the Brady Bunch any day.

AM9000
12-15-2012, 10:45 AM
http://imageshack.us/a/img855/1939/sign01a.jpg

GrizzlyGuy
12-15-2012, 11:08 AM
Grizzly, you bring up a good point, but without breaking out the number of self-defense shootings (google was a bust), either of us can be mis-interpreting.

I agree, and that's why it is irresponsible for people like the author of Loose's article to conclude that gun control is the answer. However, there actually is data available regarding the use of guns in self-defense vs. criminal use, suicide and accidents. Go here (http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf) and you'll find plenty. such as:

Fact: For every accidental death (802), suicide (16,869) or homicide (11,348) with a firearm (29,019), 13 lives (390,000) are preserved through defensive use.

You might also want to read through all of the various 'guns are bad/gun control is good' myths that are debunked in that document, including ones regarding children and school shootings.

MotoriousRacing
12-15-2012, 11:15 AM
And many states with no such laws have never had such an incident. Drawing any conclusion about the effectiveness of these laws based on such a limited amount of information is no different than pulling a factoid out of one's posterior. So why cut it off at 9? Because California has had shootings with up to that number of fatalities since then. Is 9 somehow a magic number below which such incidents don't count, or is this simply an attempt to arbitrarily pick a number that allows one to make a false argument in support of California's anti-gun laws? Why not make the number 5, which would still leave many gun friendly states with no such incidents, but put California back into the "bad" category?

The fact is, as both the CDC and the National Academy of Sciences, after extensive reviews of the published research, concluded, not even one legitimately conducted study has shown any decrease in any kind of violent crime due to any gun control law, anywhere, ever. I'll take their words over those of LCAV, VPC, and the Brady Bunch any day.

The population of California is more than 20 states COMBINED. California has more gangs and borders Mexico. OF COURSE more happens here.

Apparently I need to be more clear. According to my research, the largest number of fatalities in a single shooting in California, since 1984 is 9. I claim that 10-round mags and BB have played a factor in this reduction in fatalities.

And for all of you talking about how easy it is to illegally modify a firearm, disabling the BB and such, illegal weapons will almost always be available; drive down to Mexico and get one. A BB and 10-round mag will likely help prevent some deaths in a circumstance when an individual finally snaps; this person may have just stolen or even purchased a firearm, and may not likely know how to disable these safety features, especially while they have "snapped". Typically we are talking about someone who is mentally ill or has snapped.

So for you enthusiasts telling me how easy it is to disable a BB, and therefore we might as well not have them, are you suggesting that YOU are one who is likely to snap or are mentally ill? If so, you are not helping the cause that 2A should not be waivered.

Tarn_Helm
12-15-2012, 11:18 AM
Engaging in dialogue is not needed. We already know what the antis will say.

Why do you want input from "all sides"? Never give your enemy an opportunity.

^ +1

We need to discuss laws about patient/student confidentiality (HIPAA (http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/understanding/summary/index.html) and FERPA (http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html)) not when we are all emotional but during a calm cool hour when we are not overwrought with grief.

Sadly, too many pro-gun people will make ill-conceived comments during moments like this, the kind of comments that can be quoted against us at a later time.

For now, somber silence is more advisable than defensive chest pounding or emotionless dissection of fine-grained policy/legal issues.

Let the anti-gun folks dance in the blood of the victims.

That is how they operate.

Let's not join them.
:(

therealnickb
12-15-2012, 11:19 AM
MR, you realize that all the standard cap mags and non-bullet button rifles didn't just disappear in 1984 right?