Forum Index » Chaff » Newtown


Display Avatars Sort By:
Doug I.
(idester) - MLife

Locale: MidAtlantic
Re: Re: "Newtown" on 12/16/2012 07:16:38 MST Print View

Craig, I did not say, did not even imply, that guns have no place in the discussion. Of course the issue of gun control/gun availability has an important place in the discussion. Jason Alexander (yes, the actor) wrote a wonderful piece about the insanity of allowing pretty much anyone access to assault style weapons. It's a great, reasoned piece, I agree with it wholeheartedly.

But it's problematic, IMO, when the discussion never gets much beyond gun control/gun availability, which is most often the case, as this thread shows. There are deeper issues at play that need to be part of the discussion - just as much as guns, if not moreso.

An interesting tidbit from an article I read this morning: "There are countries with gun ownership rates nearly as high as our own and much less gun violence. ... There are also countries with many fewer guns than the United States, but with even higher homicide by firearm rates. They are all countries poorer and less equal than the United States. Social democracy might actually be a better deterrent to gun violence than gun control."

So, yes, the gun control/gun availability debate needs to happen (of course, it would be more beneficial if it happened without the usual vitriol and hyperbole from both sides), but, again IMO, it shouldn't dominate the discussion about these tragedies. There is so much more at play.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Re: Re: "Newtown" on 12/16/2012 08:52:06 MST Print View

There was a teacher that was shot, she locked the door with the kids inside with her, the gunman tried to get in but the door was locked - that's a nice story that brings a tear to me.


"There are also countries with many fewer guns than the United States, but with even higher homicide by firearm rates. They are all countries poorer and less equal than the United States. Social democracy might actually be a better deterrent to gun violence than gun control."

That should also bring a reaction from Michael L : )

So, we need to raise taxes on the super-rich, increase programs to help people pull themselves up by their bootstraps like almost free college education,...

That maybe makes more sense than gun regulation, because if you make assault weapons illegal people can use handguns, limit number of rounds per magazine people will bring more magazines and practice changing,...


Maybe this super polarized political strategy to make everyone hate the other side works up people that are mentally unstable to begin with?

bruce thibeault
(brucetbo) - M

Locale: New England
Uninformed on Gun Laws on 12/16/2012 12:51:10 MST Print View

Im no longer surprised when I a tragedy strikes and within hours people come out of the woodwork making ridiculous claims about gun ownership/availability.

First, for those unfamiliar with Federal Firearms Licensing... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Firearms_License

Note the cost. Also understand that obtaining said license becomes more difficult as the scope and capabilities of the firearms in question increase. Your local gun dealer is also legally obligated to call the FBI NICS center and complete a background check everytime a sale being made. Records must be maintained forever, of all incoming and outgoing firearms. When you consider the red tape that "over the counter" gun sale becomes a bit more complex than one might assume.

Second, "Military assault weapons" are the business of the military... period. "Military assault weapons" cannot be possessed or sold by civilians. Firearms designed to look like military weapons do not have the same capabilities as military weapons. Fact is there are numerous hunting rifles that possess as much or more stopping power than many military knock offs and high capacity mags are available for some.

If the anti gunners are right about anything its the gun show loophole. Im not going to defend gun dealers who sell to people without going through the proper legal channels.

Its frustrating to hear people call for tighter gun laws when most of what they think should be made illegal already is. Before feeding the flames of the anti govt types maybe we should look at current laws and try to figure out why they havent worked.

Stephen Barber
(grampa) - MLife

Locale: SoCal
re: Uninformed on Gun Laws on 12/16/2012 13:09:32 MST Print View

Note also that murder is already illegal.

Why would someone intent on murder care about another lesser law?

Bob Bankhead
(wandering_bob) - MLife

Locale: Oregon, USA
Uninformed on Gun Laws on 12/16/2012 14:48:01 MST Print View

query 2

or to put it another way....

query 1


Be it for bear or human, it's your choice.

query 3

Edited by wandering_bob on 12/16/2012 14:51:03 MST.

Michael Mathisen
(mathix)

Locale: Oregon
Bullet Control on 12/16/2012 15:32:03 MST Print View

Since guns have been made the issue in this thread maybe we should take a page from Chris Rocks Bigger and Blacker, and call for more bullet control. A gun is useless without ammo, raise the price of bullets and people will think twice about using them.
However I think we are missing a major issue here, lack of respect. As a society I think we need to put more emphasis on respecting humans and human life and what a gift life is. We need to place more value in people and social interaction and less in material items.

Victoria Soto is one of the hero's of the Sandy Hook tragedy. She saved the lives of her students at the cost of her own.

@ Ike, my daughter got a lot of extra hugs and kisses on Friday as well!

Dave U
(FamilyGuy) - F

Locale: Rockies
Re: Uninformed on Gun Laws on 12/16/2012 17:48:14 MST Print View

Good post, Bob. Too bad those 20 under 10 years of age children weren't packing heat. What were their parents thinking?

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Can any of you pro gun types tell me on 12/16/2012 18:15:40 MST Print View

what is the justification for the legality of 30 plus round clips, armour piercing hand gun rounds(cop killer ammunition), semi automatic assault rifles that can easily be converted to full automatic, Barrett Rifles, to mention a few that puzzle me. I am not talking here about banning guns in general, but I really would like to hear the rational for these things being legal.

David Adair
(DavidAdair) - M

Locale: West Dakota
Uninformed on Gun Laws on 12/16/2012 18:26:20 MST Print View

>Too bad those 20 under 10 years of age children weren't packing heat. What were their parents thinking?<

From the another viewpoint, the school was responsible for providing protection for 100's of kids, while possessing absolutely no means to do so. Well, none if you discount the deterrent of harsh language and the stern sign on the gate declaring a policy of "zero tolerance for weapons".

Dave U
(FamilyGuy) - F

Locale: Rockies
Re: Uninformed on Gun Laws on 12/16/2012 18:34:05 MST Print View

"From the another viewpoint, the school was responsible for providing protection for 100's of kids, while possessing absolutely no means to do so"

Protection from what? People with guns?

Gun owners use circular arguments to support a means of defending themselves against other gun owners. Only one solution to that.

M B
(livingontheroad) - M
guns on 12/16/2012 18:54:43 MST Print View

"what is the justification for the legality of 30 plus round clips, armour piercing hand gun rounds(cop killer ammunition), semi automatic assault rifles that can easily be converted to full automatic, Barrett Rifles, to mention a few that puzzle me. I am not talking here about banning guns in general, but I really would like to hear the rational for these things being legal."

They are so you can protect yourself. From your own government, if the need arises.

And the day will come. Guaranteed. Its a matter of time. History shows us this is so.

Our founding fathers were much smarter than the average person today. Thank God.

Mike M
(mtwarden) - MLife

Locale: Montana
Re: Can any of you pro gun types tell me on 12/16/2012 19:01:30 MST Print View

there really is no good justification; the problem I see is that even w/o the above, a determined person can wreak havoc w/ a "typical" firearm

reducing magazine size to 10, just means carrying a few extra magazines (a typical magazine change rifle or pistol takes all of a second to two)

the real problem as I see it, is keeping firearms out of the hands that shouldn't have them- a tall order I know

one easy start is to get rid of the loophole on private sales w/ no background check- just go to any gun swap/show and you'll see dozens of individuals selling large numbers of firearms and because they aren't licensed dealers- no background check

there are several experts (read some of Colonel Grossman's stuff) that point to the desensitization of violence through media and video games, he also contends that it also offers viable "training" for would be offenders- it rewards proper sight picture and trigger control, a person can become a pretty good shot w/o even getting to a range

as far as the school goes, it certainly had more security in place than any of our local schools- locked doors and you have to be identified and then buzzed in- of course w/ a AR you can get through most glass doors handily

bruce thibeault
(brucetbo) - M

Locale: New England
Re: re: Uninformed on Gun Laws on 12/16/2012 19:02:47 MST Print View

Couldnt have said it better myself Stephen.

David Adair
(DavidAdair) - M

Locale: West Dakota
Re: Re: Uninformed on Gun Laws on 12/16/2012 19:10:39 MST Print View

>Gun owners use circular arguments to support a means of defending themselves against other gun owners. Only one solution to that.<

If every gun in the country was confiscated today, gun smuggling would start tomorrow. Consider how successful banning alcohol, drugs or illegal immigrants have been. So when all the newly armed bad guys know you and your house are unarmed just how safe will you be?

M B
(livingontheroad) - M
guns on 12/16/2012 19:18:45 MST Print View

We cannot stop the flow of drugs across our borders.
We cannot stop 10,000 illegal mexicans PER NIGHT coming across our borders.

What in the world would make anyone think you can stop guns, knives, or anything else that could be used as a weapon against others?

You cannot. Period.


If someone had driven a car over a chain-link fence, onto the playground, and run over dozens of kids and a few teachers, would someone be wanting to ban all cars? Or just big ones that could run down the fence easiest?

Of course not. No one would want to give up their car. Hypocrites.

But because some dont want a gun, they dont think anyone else should have one.
Thats whats at the core. The warped thinking of some people.

Edited by livingontheroad on 12/16/2012 19:20:08 MST.

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Re: guns on 12/16/2012 19:58:38 MST Print View

"They are so you can protect yourself. From your own government, if the need arises."

You really believe that a disorganized rabble with a few light arms could protect us from the firepower and surveillance methods of the US military?

"And the day will come. Guaranteed. Its a matter of time. History shows us this is so."

Probably true if we don't start paying more attention to our choices at the ballot box, but the kind of things I mentioned in my original post are not going to make a difference if it comes to revolution.

"Our founding fathers were much smarter than the average person today. Thank God."

Which is probably why the 2nd Amendment BEGINS with the words "A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free state", whereas the average person today, a group in which I include the current majority of the Supreme Court, focuses on the second part, "the right of the citizens to bear arms shall not be infringed". I wonder why the Founding Fathers didn't put that first? Any insights?

Dave U
(FamilyGuy) - F

Locale: Rockies
Re: guns on 12/16/2012 20:01:02 MST Print View

The issue is the weapon of choice. A gun can be concealed, easily carried anywhere, and used from a distance. It can easily kill many at once with precision. . The only thing a gun does is kill. It doesn't serve any other purpose.


A knife would not have worked in this case. You simply would not have had the overall devastating effect that the guns produced.

Chris Lacey
(Staplebox) - M
Newtown on 12/16/2012 20:02:59 MST Print View

I think that making this about guns or school security is the easy way out. Guns are not why this guy did this - they are how he did this. How doesn't matter to me. Could have been a bomb or poison or a fire. The school security seems to have done fairly well in these circumstances. What matters to me is why he did this - and how we all let him get to that state without intervention. In my opinion this needs to be about modern mental health assessment/treatment/containment.

I found this earlier and I can understand the mother's sentiment. These are the kids that I work with.

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

Edited by Staplebox on 12/16/2012 20:03:29 MST.

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Re: Re: Can any of you pro gun types tell me on 12/16/2012 20:08:39 MST Print View

"one easy start is to get rid of the loophole on private sales w/ no background check- just go to any gun swap/show and you'll see dozens of individuals selling large numbers of firearms and because they aren't licensed dealers- no background check

there are several experts (read some of Colonel Grossman's stuff) that point to the desensitization of violence through media and video games, he also contends that it also offers viable "training" for would be offenders- it rewards proper sight picture and trigger control, a person can become a pretty good shot w/o even getting to a range"

I'm with you all the way on this part, Mike.

How to keep firearms out of the hands of those who should not have them is well nigh an impossible task, which is why I tend to look for answers in the control area in the short term. I have no problem with hunting rifles, shotguns, or handguns in the home, subject to a very thorough vetting procedure. But access to guns/accessories in all their permutations is out of control in this country. Combined with the points you make above, it is an increasingly lethal and socially destructive phenomenon that poses a threat to us as a cohesive, civilized society, IMO. No easy answers, but we need to start figuring some out pretty darn quick, again IMO.

Michael L
(mpl_35) - MLife

Locale: The Palouse
Re: Uninformed on Gun Laws on 12/16/2012 20:30:38 MST Print View

re: adair:

-----"From the another viewpoint, the school was responsible for providing protection for 100's of kids, while possessing absolutely no means to do so. Well, none if you discount the deterrent of harsh language and the stern sign on the gate declaring a policy of "zero tolerance for weapons"."-----

Great point. from this article

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335739/facts-about-mass-shootings-john-fund

“With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.”


re: Dave Ure

-----"Protection from what? People with guns?

Gun owners use circular arguments to support a means of defending themselves against other gun owners. Only one solution to that."

"A knife would not have worked in this case. You simply would not have had the overall devastating effect that the guns produced."---

Don't ignore the reality Dave. We have had 6 mass attacks in China with knives, axes, etc. They have not been quite as bad as this, but the attackers have killed 20 and wounded 60.