Gun Control Anyone?

[Master Shake]

Re: Shooting caused by prescription drugs?

So ban assault weapons and magazines, then the monsters will use shotguns or handguns. If you ban them too then they could bring gasoline and bombs (which happened at a school in 1927). Or they could use axes.

What's wrong with an armed guard to protect our children. We have them everywhere else. There are bad people out there; they have to be stopped.

What about the proposals to address violent video games, TV shows, Movies, and music. Shouldn't we ban those too? Of course the free speech crowd would jump all over that. These are complex problems.

We arm police and others to protect us. If we have to have police in schools, then our children have a far better chance of being protected.

By the way I'm not a member of the NRA, and haven't fired a gun since ROTC training 50 years ago. I have no agenda. Communities with concealed carry and open carry have far less gun crime than those that have gun control.

Armed guards in schools makes no sense. It's just another emotional reaction to this horrific incident.

This is an emergency preparedness issue where you have an event which is extremely rare, but which has a high cost should it occur. Like everything, it
becomes a cost benefit/risk analysis. IMO, stationing armed police officers (or private security) in every school seems overkill, as does repealing the 2nd
Amendment. Actions aimed at gun control would have no effect.

The most logical steps to take, imo, revolve around limiting and securing entrances to schools, installing panic alarms (like at banks), training on emergency
procedures, and training and arming administrative staff.

[aaron]

Re: Shooting caused by prescription drugs?

How about we forget all this nonsense and treat this as the isolated incident that it was?

Because a large percentage of our country does not treat it as an isolated incident. This isolated incident is threatening the 2nd amendment. The rest of the Constitutional protections depend on it. Perhaps we may all forget about it if we see some stock market decline after the fiscal cliff.

[aaron]

Re: Shooting caused by prescription drugs?

Badjuju is right. We should treat this as an isolated instance and move on. In a country of 320 million people, bad stuff will happen. If we must do something, then arming teacher/admin volunteers is a good idea. Hopefully, the stock market will crash in the next few weeks and we will not have to see more of this in the news.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Shooting caused by prescription drugs?

You would not hire a mentally unstable military vet, as you would not hire a mentally unstable teacher to work as a school employee. Anyone hired as an armed employee would have to pass extremely rigorous mental and psychological tests. These people are not only protectors, they are teachers. Most are parents and /or grandparents too.

All folks serving in the military are NOT the same.....for every soldier with a high level of CQB shooting skills(which is a skill that fades quickly) or persistent skills training relevant to protecting a school, there are probably 20 that don't.

Police are also trained for combat, but we tell our children to place their trust in them.

Police are NOT trained for combat.

SOME police have been receiving training in dealing with "active shooter" scenarios...which is a scenario where the offender is assumed to be conducting the most dangerous course of action.......attempting to inflict maximum casualties and moving.

The first responders( if trained to deal with an active shooter) will move to contact.....Find the offender(ignoring all casualties and calls for assistance along the way), Fix him to the ground(until further assistance and specialist support arrives), and if possible Finish the incident.

Thinking police are involved in combat operations is like thinking a public health nurse is involved in surgical oncology.

Passing an assault weapons ban does not stop monsters from using other methods to kill and maim.

I've read that 400-1000 people get struck by lightning each year...maybe every school kid should have be grounded to avoid the threat of electrocution.

I've read armored back packs are the latest useless item to purchase by parents who cannot understand the difference between artificial fear and the reality of danger.

I would LOVE nothing more than seeing heaps of veterans teaching in our schools....particularly males(assuming they are equally qualified)...but it would be for the benefit of their life experience rather than their perishable CQB shooting skills.

Arming teachers/schools is insane(in my opinion).......and I'm a BIG supporter of the 2nd Amendment.

Physical layout/security and access control for future schools should be a big design consideration....and affordable retrofit maybe......but this is all quite silly isn't it?

[vt]

Re: Gun Control Anyone?

[bpr]

Re: Gun Control Anyone?

...a classic and pathetic, totally hypocritical free rider, and one who, knowingly or not, wills a stalinist's agenda on the rest of us by default by the vote he should not be entitled to. maybe we get the full orwell today, maybe tomorrow.

I'm going to ignore the rest of your post, because it's irrelevant, and extremely mean-spirited, beyond the pale: let's focus on the bold part.

Why exactly do you feel I should not be entitled to a vote? What are, in your opinion the requirements for a voting public?

Are you a voting American? If so, what do you think the requirements should be for voting?

[bpr]

Re: Gun Control Anyone?

No, maybe you should NOT. You should get some training first or you're a prime candidate for a Darwin award.
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/01/ob...bruce-lee.html
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,304026,00.html

Shotguns are as lethal as any other firearm and more so than most handguns or assault rifles.

I'm willing to give this a rest, but spreading potentially fatal misinformation is dangerous. Do you get the point? You are abusing the first amendment to near the breaking point.

Easy, LorenS. Me and my family will take bullets to the head before I get a shotgun. The First Amendment hasn't been shaken by anything said here. It's the Second Amendment that's been abused to the breaking point.

I know you know this. And I can see your cohorts shaking in their boots.

[bpr]

Re: Gun Control Anyone?

Tell that to the Oklahoma City victims. And the perps parked their truck and walked away. Most shooters are either dead or in handcuffs at the end of the day.

The Vancouver police department is even now apologizing for not capturing a serial killer before he killed 49 young women. It appears the victims didn't rate enough for a full investigation unitl the full nature of the calamitiy was revealed.

Single day events are news, but they're not indicdative of violence in general.


You gun haters would get a bit more sympathy from me if you devoted even an ounce of concern for car violence victims.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...d-into-cyclist

That part hurts. Because I have known and loved victims of car violence and, specifically, drunk drivers.

That's what led to my misreading of another's post earlier.

But those incidents are totally unrelated to guns, which can be concealed, and aimed, and... well, if you need me to explain the difference between a gun and a car then you probably need a better counselor than I.

[bpr]

Re: Gun Control Anyone?

Actually, the statistics show the most effective weapon in war is the land mine.

The most effective machine for killing in the United States today is the automobile:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

Thanks for the link, it's very informative.

Consider this link, which shows that over two-thirds of homicides are due to firearms:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

Mortality

All homicides

• Number of deaths: 16,799
• Deaths per 100,000 population: 5.5
• Cause of death rank: 15

Firearm homicides

• Number of deaths: 11,493
• Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.7

Okay, so two-thirds (2/3) of ALL HOMICIDES are done with firearms, according to the CDC.

Hm.

There are 254,212,610 registered passenger vehicles in the US, and 310 million non-military firearms. As each vehicle is 11% deadlier than a gun, clearly we should be banning cars. Ooh! and poisons - definitely we should ban those. No more Drano in stores. /sarc

LOL. You are going to compare the number of vehicles owned vs the number of firearms owned and... wait... what are you trying to do here?

With all due respect to those who have lost a loved one to a motor vehicle accident, are you going to equate a motor vehicle death to someone being gunned down?

The most likely way to kill is to throw someone/throw yourself off a tall bridge.

Not sure where you got this, but please share.

A gun is by far the easiest to use - badly - but ultimately it is a tool just like a baseball bat, a bow and arrow, a sword, or CLUE game murder weapon.

That's just the thing -- a gun is the easiest to use... badly. Even suicides can wind up damaging loved ones. Guns are a mess in the hands of the uninitiated.

Guns are efficient at what they do. People, on the other hand... not so much.

[bpr]

Re: Gun Control Anyone?

No, maybe you should NOT. You should get some training first or you're a prime candidate for a Darwin award.
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/01/ob...bruce-lee.html
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,304026,00.html

Shotguns are as lethal as any other firearm and more so than most handguns or assault rifles.

I'm willing to give this a rest, but spreading potentially fatal misinformation is dangerous. Do you get the point? You are abusing the first amendment to near the breaking point.

Rest assured to all of our babies, I will never own a firearm.

A prayer that everyone would make that statement would make us safe.

A decree by our federal government would not make it so, but it would make it extremely hard.

It's high time to do away with the wild west.

[raja]

Re: Shooting caused by prescription drugs?

How about we forget all this nonsense and treat this as the isolated incident that it was?

Right.

I'm outta here . . . .

[GRG55]

Re: Gun Control Anyone?

Maybe in your world. I've been threatened and assaulted by drivers of automobiles several times in the last few years. I've never been within 1/4 mile of a gun crime. Keep in mind that violence includes the threat of bodily harm, it doesn't have to result in injuries.


EDIT:

Just because people don't currently choose cars now doesn't mean they won't (especially if guns get harder to get).

I also wanted to add:
Auto control: Horse power limits, speed governors, auto transmission ban, gas tank limits - all could be proposed to reduce auto fatalities. _ you get the same why nots - you don't need 100 mph, you don't need 200 HP cars, you don't need automatic transmission...... bla bla bla.

If so many people are killed by cars why doesn't this stuff come up?

Why so much focus on guns? The Conn killer used a car. Do you think he could have gotten to the school armed as he was on a public bus? Did the Columbine killers ride a school bus that day?

In the military mobility and firepower are inextricably linked. Why not in our public debates on violence?

I suppose one could make the same arguments about "commercial airliner violence" in the wake of 9/11. Do we really need them? Do they need to be so big? Do they need to fly so fast? Do they need such precise navigation capabilities that they can be programmed to target a specific office building? Maybe we should ban flight simulators so potential terrorists cannot be trained to fly them? And on it goes.

As for your admonition...

...Just because people don't currently choose cars now doesn't mean they won't (especially if guns get harder to get)...

...it would seem that the US Department of Homeland Security came to the same conclusion about airplanes. And now we have the ridiculous spectacle of Grandma from Des Moine having to half-disrobe herself in public every time she wants to fly to visit the grandkids in Toledo.

The difference between guns and automobiles (and commercial airliners) is that guns are manufactured to be a weapon. Automobiles and aeroplanes are not. That is why "so much focus on guns"...

[Ghent12]

Re: Shooting caused by prescription drugs?

Armed guards at schools is a ridiculous idea.

For one thing, if someone really wants to do something, they'll shoot the guard first.

Secondly, who watches the watchers?

Why is it everyone thinks security guards are incorruptible, perfectly sane, conscientious, and reliable? They are people too, and generally poorly paid ones to boot.

It's not a ridiculous idea, although you bring up valid criticisms of it. Protection comes in many different forms, and the prime/first level is Presence. In schools things are far trickier, because the threat comes more often from the inside than the outside, so any security personnel at a school would have to be very good at their job which is just a bit too much to ask for anyone working in public education. That doesn't mean that a security detail for schools is a bad idea, just that it must be carefully considered.

The idea of arming teachers is far worse. If anyone needs an explanation, they should consult their critical thinking abilities--having education "professionals" armed is a recipe for disaster because few teachers are professional enough to handle such a burden.

Of course, the idea of gun control also offers no resolution to the problem of school shootings, and any person in a moment of clarity will realize that. Any efforts to reduce both the chances and the severity of these types of incidents must put everything on the table and then appropriately apply only the efforts that have any hope of success.

[c1ue]

Re: Gun Control Anyone?

Thanks for the link, it's very informative. Consider this link, which shows that over two-thirds of homicides are due to firearms: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm ... Okay, so two-thirds (2/3) of ALL HOMICIDES are done with firearms, according to the CDC. Hm.

And all homicides are performed by murderers. So what exactly is your point? The reality is: people kill people. You remove one tool, they use another. The reasons they kill are also varied, but there is a very clear relationship between mass media coverage of such rampages and future occurrences. You desire to remove the tool - thinking somehow it will remove the problem. It won't

LOL. You are going to compare the number of vehicles owned vs the number of firearms owned and... wait... what are you trying to do here? With all due respect to those who have lost a loved one to a motor vehicle accident, are you going to equate a motor vehicle death to someone being gunned down?

A death is a death no? And the reality is - the vast, vast, vast majority of guns don't figure in anything except closets and the occasional weekend shooting range visit. Every car is statistically more deadly than every gun, but somehow you don't seem to want to ban cars.

Not sure where you got this, but please share. ... That's just the thing -- a gun is the easiest to use... badly. Even suicides can wind up damaging loved ones. Guns are a mess in the hands of the uninitiated. Guns are efficient at what they do. People, on the other hand... not so much.

That you can't stop people from doing what they want to do, but you can try to change what they want to do.

The difference between guns and automobiles (and commercial airliners) is that guns are manufactured to be a weapon. Automobiles and aeroplanes are not. That is why the focus on guns is appropriate...

Frankly this is a poor argument. Merely because guns are manufactured to be a weapon - does this mean all weapons are to be banned? And does banning all weapons accomplish the purpose? In my view, a weapon is made into one by the person wielding it. It can be a car, a gun, a knife, an airliner. While I am no NRA gun nut, it is still true that the vast majority of guns used in crime are illegally purchased, and thus also true that the only effect of banning guns is to restrict the use of them to criminals. Banning guns is against the Constitution, it won't stop rampages, it won't stop crime, it won't stop suicides. If, on the other hand, those who hate guns can muster up the votes to repeal the 2nd amendment, by all means do it.

[Ghent12]

Re: Gun Control Anyone?

In my view, a weapon is made into one by the person wielding it.

That is absolutely true. All firearms, for instance, are not designed to hurt anyone. They are only designed to give the operator the capability to do so in such a way that is safe for the operator when properly used.