Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

At least 18 children and 9 others dead in Connecticut school shooting. Does this change your mind ab Options · View
lafayettemister
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 10:05:14 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,343
Location: Alabama, United States
For those of you that promote "gun control", what kind of control are you advocating. What plan of action would you like to see take place? What restrictions do you want in place? If you want to ban all guns completely, how do you propose to get the ones already out there? How do you propose to gather the millions of unlicensed/unregistered guns possessed by criminals? After guns are banned, what will happen to someone who commits a crime with an illegal gun?

Tell us what you mean by "gun control". Right now I'm reading nothing but ban guns and hope for the best. That's a scary idea in my mind.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
foxjack
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:16:47 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/25/2010
Posts: 712
Location: Pierre, United States
ByronLord wrote:


I have heard the same rant from Timothy McVeigh.

Then he went out and murdered almost 200 people.

When someone says that the gun they are waving in my face protects my freedom I see a pair of stinking jackboots and a NAZI salute. I see the carbines that the guards carried on the watchtowers on the Berlin wall.

I don't see freedom, I see a threat.


And what do you when you see a threat and have nothing to combat it? Get in line for the gas chambers I suppose...

Drunk driving kills about 27 people a day, guns do about 24-30 (some articles state less and others state more); I see a threat, worst yet that threat is everywhere on the road. I'll also point out that some gun violence is directly linked with drinking. Getting rid of the 21st seems like just as good of an idea as the second, if not better. After all, all drinking does is cost you money and allow you to temporally run away from your problems, sometimes having the side effect of making them much worse. At least when gun violence comes up it isn’t' the gun that caused the mental instability, it was already present.
CleverFox
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:49:36 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 465
Location: United States
foxjack wrote:


And what do you when you see a threat and have nothing to combat it? Get in line for the gas chambers I suppose...

Drunk driving kills about 27 people a day, guns do about 24-30 (some articles state less and others state more); I see a threat, worst yet that threat is everywhere on the road. I'll also point out that some gun violence is directly linked with drinking. Getting rid of the 21st seems like just as good of an idea as the second, if not better. After all, all drinking does is cost you money and allow you to temporally run away from your problems, sometimes having the side effect of making them much worse. At least when gun violence comes up it isn’t' the gun that caused the mental instability, it was already present.


Take all of you semi-automatic weapons you want. If the military decided to take over this country they would use M-1 tanks, preditor drones with hell fire missiles and other equipment that your guns couldn't do squat to stop. You won't have to line up for the gas chamber, it will be brought to you.
WellMadeMale
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:50:59 AM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,216
Location: Cakeland, United States
lafayettemister wrote:
For those of you that promote "gun control", what kind of control are you advocating. What plan of action would you like to see take place? What restrictions do you want in place? If you want to ban all guns completely, how do you propose to get the ones already out there? How do you propose to gather the millions of unlicensed/unregistered guns possessed by criminals? After guns are banned, what will happen to someone who commits a crime with an illegal gun?

Tell us what you mean by "gun control". Right now I'm reading nothing but ban guns and hope for the best. That's a scary idea in my mind.


We could start by making the sale of assault-styled replica combat rifles as illegal as selling an ounce of cocaine. Same goes for having one or some in your possession. There's nothing sporting about shooting one of those things, to claim otherwise is disingenuous.

Outlaw the ownership of clips which contain over a certain amount of cartridges. Make the punishments for having those in your possession similar to possessing drug paraphernalia.

We as a society have allowed the arms race to migrate from our military to our civilian population. Outlaw all weapons which hold more than 9 cartridges, 8, 7, 6... pick a number.

Handguns? When is the last time anyone here can claim they went hunting with a semi-automatic machine/handgun and for what species? I own a revolver and have never aimed it nor triggered it at a living organism.

Hold many amnesty periods for the first several years. Request voluntary weapon surrender. Just like the old days in Dodge City, except you don't get your murder machine back when you leave town.

How many cartridges do you require when you're target shooting? I need five shells chambered when I trap shoot clays. Just like at any other target range I've ever visited, you better damned well know what you're doing or you will not be allowed to participate. Everyone's eyes are on you - and yours on them. Gun safety is priority number one.

There are many gun clubs already established around the country. To my knowledge you bring your own gun to them. Establish a library of guns to be checked out and utilized while on premises. You break it, you buy it. It stays on the premises.

Don't choose to surrender your weapons? That's okay too. If your house catches fire and your cache is discovered - there will be hell to pay.

Get caught firing your .357 into the sky on fourth of july or new year's eve - hell to pay.

You have several tens of thousand of dollars invested in your toys/hobby now, tough titty little kitty. Develop another hobby, get different toys or...Maybe you can apply for a special permit to continue to hold them. Firing mechanisms removed. If you have 'special' rifles and handguns, you can't also have/hold/own ammunition.

Ammunition is only available at the firing/target ranges/clubs.

I depend on the conscience of those already enlisted and those in the future who enlist in our Armed Forces to disregard any and every order to turn on and march or fire upon the civilian population of the United States of America.

If a law is passed, I'll relinquish my revolver, half a box of cartridges and my Ithaca .12 gauge pump. I haven't carried either one into the field to hunt since I was 17 years old.

Killing critters like that, started to my stomach about the time I started growing pubic hair and my brain started developing.

I can join a trap or target shooting club and abide by those kinds of rules.

If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
LadyX
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:57:14 AM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,678
Location: United States
I'd start with a ban on sale and transport of assault firearms. What should qualify as an "assault firearm"? I think that's up for discussion; I'm not a gun expert, and I have respect for the gray area. But that's not to say that it doesn't need to be sussed out. The whole point is to work our way through the analysis paralysis and take some responsible action (and it goes without saying that many will vehemently disagree on the definition of 'responsible' here). If a handful of non-government occupations seem to need the type of firearm that is classified as banned assault firearms, then perhaps a restricted permit system can be implemented.

I'd ban the high round clips that allow people to squeeze off 10, 20, 30 shots at a time. What's the need for that, unless you want to mow down a herd of something?

I'd introduce mandatory licensing and registration at the federal level, for all firearms as well as firearm owners and users. In order to own a legal firearm, you would need to pass an extensive test as well as the background check. The licenses for both guns and for owners would be revoked for any number of reasons (documented mental health issues, convictions, etc.)


lafayettemister
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 12:09:24 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,343
Location: Alabama, United States
WellMadeMale wrote:


We could start by making the sale of assault-styled replica combat rifles as illegal as selling an ounce of cocaine. Same goes for having one or some in your possession. There's nothing sporting about shooting one of those things, to claim otherwise is disingenuous.

Outlaw the ownership of clips which contain over a certain amount of cartridges. Make the punishments for having those in your possession similar to possessing drug paraphernalia.

We as a society have allowed the arms race to migrate from our military to our civilian population. Outlaw all weapons which hold more than 9 cartridges, 8, 7, 6... pick a number.

Handguns? When is the last time anyone here can claim they went hunting with a semi-automatic machine/handgun and for what species? I own a revolver and have never aimed it nor triggered it at a living organism.

Hold many amnesty periods for the first several years. Request voluntary weapon surrender. Just like the old days in Dodge City, except you don't get your murder machine back when you leave town.

How many cartridges do you require when you're target shooting? I need five shells chambered when I trap shoot clays. Just like at any other target range I've ever visited, you better damned well know what you're doing or you will not be allowed to participate. Everyone's eyes are on you - and yours on them. Gun safety is priority number one.

There are many gun clubs already established around the country. To my knowledge you bring your own gun to them. Establish a library of guns to be checked out and utilized while on premises. You break it, you buy it. It stays on the premises.

Don't choose to surrender your weapons? That's okay too. If your house catches fire and your cache is discovered - there will be hell to pay.

Get caught firing your .357 into the sky on fourth of july or new year's eve - hell to pay.

You have several tens of thousand of dollars invested in your toys/hobby now, tough titty little kitty. Develop another hobby, get different toys or...Maybe you can apply for a special permit to continue to hold them. Firing mechanisms removed. If you have 'special' rifles and handguns, you can't also have/hold/own ammunition.

Ammunition is only available at the firing/target ranges/clubs.

I depend on the conscience of those already enlisted and those in the future who enlist in our Armed Forces to disregard any and every order to turn on and march or fire upon the civilian population of the United States of America.

If a law is passed, I'll relinquish my revolver, half a box of cartridges and my Ithaca .12 gauge pump. I haven't carried either one into the field to hunt since I was 17 years old.

Killing critters like that, started to my stomach about the time I started growing pubic hair and my brain started developing.

I can join a trap or target shooting club and abide by those kinds of rules.


Nice list. All of those are viable ideas and options. But for the sake of argument...

Assault styled replica rifles, I can see the need for banning them. My 30 year old 30-06 with a 5 round clip used for deer hunting could be just as effective in defending my home. As well as my grandfather's side-by-side double barrel 12 gauge.

Multi-round clips. I've thought of this as well. But in my mind, I'm not sure that a gun holding 8 rounds is much of an improvement. A psycho with a hunting rifle could still invade a school and take out eight innocent lives. Eight is better than twenty, but I'd feel just as awful about the loss of eight lives. I don't know the answer, just don't think eliminating rounds solves the problem.

I don't own a handgun and have limited experience with one, but I'm not opposed to them. Maybe require anyone who purchases one, must take some sort of safety class before they can take possession of the gun? In Louisiana (maybe other states too) you cannot get a hunting license until you've taken the Hunter Safety class and passed the test. All handguns purchases must include a trigger lock? And must be stored in a gun safe when not in use? Not sure how to regulate or monitor that though.

Total agreement about firing any weapon into the sky at anytime. Firing any weapon anytime in any direction for no reason - Hell To Pay







When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
sprite
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 12:11:52 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 13,725
Location: My Tower, United States
This is how you do it;

Arturo Hurtado of Richmond was still stricken with grief over the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., that left 20 schoolchildren dead when he awoke Saturday morning.

So he decided to get rid of his gun - "that darn thing," he called it - and purged it from his home.

"I've got kids, man," said Hurtado, who works at Waste Management in Oakland and has children ages 14, 10, 6 and 1. "Kids are curious. Kids don't know any better. I had it locked in a toolbox, so I don't know. ... I just know it had to go."

Hurtado was among hundreds of Bay Area residents who dropped off their firearms at buyback locations in Oakland and San Francisco on Saturday, collecting $200 cash for their weapon, no questions asked.

Organizers said both locations saw crowds twice as large as expected. In East Oakland, a mile-long line of cars waited on 82nd Avenue to enter a parking lot at St. Benedict's Church, with some running out of gas while idling. In San Francisco, people stood in pouring rain outside the Omega Boys Club in the Dogpatch neighborhood to exchange their guns for cash.

By the end of the day, organizers expected more than 600 guns to be turned in.

Hurtado was a rare customer. Not only was Friday's school shooting his primary motivation, but also he walked away without taking the cash.
"I'm just glad it's out of my house," he said.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/S-F-Oakland-gun-buyback-nets-hundreds-4121621.php#ixzz2FQrbVViJ
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 12:20:43 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,808

New York Times
EDITORIAL | THE GUN CHALLENGE
In Other Countries, Laws Are Strict and Work
Published: December 17, 2012


Like other shootings before it, the Newtown, Conn., tragedy has reawakened America to its national fixation with firearms. No country in the world has more guns per capita, with some 300 million civilian firearms now in circulation, or nearly one for every adult.



Experts from the Harvard School of Public Health, using data from 26 developed countries, have shown that wherever there are more firearms, there are more homicides. In the case of the United States, exponentially more: the American murder rate is roughly 15 times that of other wealthy countries, which have much tougher laws controlling private ownership of guns.

There’s another important difference between this country and the rest of the world. Other nations have suffered similar rampages, but they have reacted quickly to impose new and stricter gun laws.

Australia is an excellent example. In 1996, a “pathetic social misfit,” as a judge described the lone gunman, killed 35 people with a spray of bullets from semiautomatic weapons. Within weeks, the Australian government was working on gun reform laws that banned assault weapons and shotguns, tightened licensing and financed gun amnesty and buyback programs.

At the time, the prime minister, John Howard, said, “We do not want the American disease imported into Australia.” The laws have worked. The American Journal of Law and Economics reported in 2010 that firearm homicides in Australia dropped 59 percent between 1995 and 2006. In the 18 years before the 1996 laws, there were 13 gun massacres resulting in 102 deaths, according to Harvard researchers, with none in that category since.

Similarly, after 16 children and their teacher were killed by a gunman in Dunblane, Scotland, in 1996, the British government banned all private ownership of automatic weapons and virtually all handguns. Those changes gave Britain some of the toughest gun control laws in the developed world on top of already strict rules. Hours of exhaustive paperwork are required if anyone wants to own even a shotgun or rifle for hunting. The result has been a decline in murders involving firearms.

In Japan, which has very strict laws, only 11 people killed with guns in 2008, compared with 12,000 deaths by firearms that year in the United States — a huge disparity even accounting for the difference in population. As Mayor Michael Bloomberg stressed on Monday while ratcheting up his national antigun campaign, “We are the only industrialized country that has this problem. In the whole world, the only one.”

Americans do not have to settle for that.
tender_cowboy
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 12:29:14 PM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 10/7/2007
Posts: 52
Location: South Dakota
It is against the law to take a gun in to a "Gun Free School Zone"... so we make a law, to make breaking the law, against the law.
LadyX
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 12:35:35 PM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,678
Location: United States
tender_cowboy wrote:
It is against the law to take a gun in to a "Gun Free School Zone"... so we make a law, to make breaking the law, against the law.


What law is that not true of? Anytime you make a law, then those that break the law are subject to conviction.
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 1:45:14 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,808
Recently heard this man on the news speak about this incident. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Welner
Dr. Michael Welner a forensic psychiatrist.
Stole this from his wiki page:
Quote:
Michael Mark Welner, M.D., (born September 24, 1964, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) is an American forensic psychiatrist. He is founder and Chairman of The Forensic Panel, a forensic science practice, is an Associate Professor of Psychiatry at New York University School of Medicine and an Adjunct Professor of Law Duquesne University School of Law. He has acted as lead forensic psychiatric examiner or as a key consultant in numerous criminal or civil court proceedings around the United States, many of which gained national and international prominence. Welner is known for developing protocols for forensic peer review through The Forensic Panel, as well as his research to standardize the distinction of the worst of crimes, the Depravity Scale. He is also recognizable as a commentator on network television news programs, and has written a number of publications for professional and public audiences.




Quote:
Forensic psychiatrist Michael Welner was asked shed some light on who Adam Lanza really was.
He said people who commit these types of crimes start as a very resentful and alienated person who blames everyone else. The person is also someone who identifies with destruction as a matter of stature. And lastly, these people are usually socially and/or sexually frustrated and have no confindence. Dr. Welner said they will continually “blame everyone around them.”
Dr. Welner said the 24 hour news cycle continually builds up murderers and glorifies them. He said they would be nothing, but the media makes them into something.
He also pointed out not every person who commits sadistic murders such as the one at Sandy Hook is someone with a mental illness. It could be anyone at all that “taps into the idea that people deserve” what is coming to them. Dr. Welner called it a life choice. People plan extensively to carry out these crimes and if they become determined enough, they will carry out their plans.

Why Adam Lanza focused on children,Dr. Welner simply said it was because they were small and easy to get too. He said these types of people want a bigger body count because they think it will give them some sort of legacy, which it may within the media. The worse the crime, the more shocked people are and the more attention the killer is going to get.

Mental Illness Could Have Cloaked Signs of Resentment

Many people have been saying Lanza could have been autistic, which Dr. Welner said could be true. But he pointed out the autism was not what caused him to commit this heinous crime. The austism may have been a cloak though. It may have hid some of the symptoms every mass murderer has in common:
Suspicious and harbor resentment
Hopelessness
Identification with destruction
Dr. Welner said none of these point to autism but they could easily be cloacked by the illness.

How to Stop the Violence in America:

Dr. Welner said this does not need to continue to happen. He said school shootings such as this one have exploded over the past 20 years for two reasons:
24 hour news cycles
Violent video games
Twenty Four hour news cycle promote the violence because they can take an anonymous person and can make them larger than life.Video game violence is Dr. Welner’s second reason there is prolific violence in America. He said for someone who is developmentally disabled, the worst thing to do is isolate them and let them play violent video games where they can get points for killing people. He said as a forensic psychiatrist he never sees people with five to 11 bullet holes in them. That just shows a type of malice that is learned from violent video games.

How to Fix America
Dr. Welner said he can “unreservedly say mass homicide will get worse” but we can be better. He said everyone needs to take part:
Parents need to teach children to take responsibility
Parents need to teach children how to be resilient and get back up after life trips you up
Neighbors need to set a good example of empathy for children
Everyone needs to keep video games out of the house
Stop paying for violence in movies, news, TV and everywhere else
Teach children to be creative and volunteer their time

WellMadeMale
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 1:58:13 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,216
Location: Cakeland, United States
chefkathleen wrote:
Recently heard this man


I can get behind this thoughtful analysis.

If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:06:49 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,808
WellMadeMale wrote:


I can get behind this thoughtful analysis.


Gee thanks Jeff. evil4
lafayettemister
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:21:56 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,343
Location: Alabama, United States
chefkathleen wrote:

Dr. Welner said the 24 hour news cycle continually builds up murderers and glorifies them. He said they would be nothing, but the media makes them into something.

Twenty Four hour news cycle promote the violence because they can take an anonymous person and can make them larger than life.


I think this is a huge contributing factor. Guns may be how they carry out their destruction, but media notoriety fuels their mindset of finally being seen, recognized, and known.

People my age and older may recall that at one time, people running onto football and baseball fields during Nationally televised games was fairly common. At first it was funny and the announcers would joke and laugh. But then it became a problem, it happened at most games and it became a major distraction. Everyone wanted their 15 minutes of fame. Tv stations picked up on it and instructed camera crews to cut away and NOT film field invaders, announcers began ridiculing people who ran onto the field of play. It became UNpopular and there was no payoff. Now you get locked up and/or fined and you don't get shown on tv. So guess what, people don't do it anywhere near as often.

I know it's a whole different world, running onto the field and killing people. But without the media giving them glory, maybe the next guy wouldn't seek notoriety doing the same thing.

edit... .i think the news media should refrain from showing his fucking picture or saying his name. refer to him only as "the shooter" or soemthing like that. no name or picture recognition





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
LadyX
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:31:45 PM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,678
Location: United States
TEACHERS WITH GUNS OK, SAYS GOV. -CNN.com

How did I know, out of 50 possibilities, that this idiot was responsible for the comments, simply upon seeing the headline?
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:41:03 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,808
If by 'the media' you include ads by gun manufacturers, then yeah.


http://www.motherjones.com/media/2012/12/gun-ads-bushmaster-mattel
echopomp
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:42:58 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 190

I agree, how can anyone believe more guns = more safety
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:55:28 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,808

Well, if you keep drinking you never get a hangover...

echopomp wrote:

I agree, how can anyone believe more guns = more safety
CurlyGirly
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:59:03 PM

Rank: CurlyFries

Joined: 10/5/2012
Posts: 1,743
Location: United States
Sadly, this sums up the 8 pages of this thread, and I'm sure the next 8 as well. dontknow








sprite
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 5:19:09 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 13,725
Location: My Tower, United States
Just wanted to take a deep breath and remind everyone what is important here...
For some of you, it might be this:



for me, it is this:

Olivia Rose Engel, dead at the age of 6.



maybe you should take a second and think about what's really important here.

Guest
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 6:34:15 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,808

An eloquent summation of a tragic event.
Well said, Sprite.





sprite wrote:
Just wanted to take a deep breath and remind everyone what is important here...
For some of you, it might be this:



for me, it is this:

Olivia Rose Engel, dead at the age of 6.



maybe you should take a second and think about what's really important here.

Dudealicious
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:05:02 PM

Rank: Wise Ass

Joined: 11/12/2010
Posts: 5,340
Location: The center of the universe, Canada
foxjack wrote:


And what do you when you see a threat and have nothing to combat it? Get in line for the gas chambers I suppose...

Drunk driving kills about 27 people a day, guns do about 24-30 (some articles state less and others state more); I see a threat, worst yet that threat is everywhere on the road. I'll also point out that some gun violence is directly linked with drinking. Getting rid of the 21st seems like just as good of an idea as the second, if not better. After all, all drinking does is cost you money and allow you to temporally run away from your problems, sometimes having the side effect of making them much worse. At least when gun violence comes up it isn’t' the gun that caused the mental instability, it was already present.


This will most likely be my last post in here.

Foxjack. When you are finally in a position in your life to have kids of your own, I sure hope that your views change and you look your little ones in the eyes and cherish the time you have with them knowing that they (under unforeseen circumstances) may be taken from you at any minute. I hope love fills your heart and you do not arm your house. Afterall your young ones may "happen" upon your firearms one day and god forbid a tragic event occurs.

Also based on your facts and figures you continue to post in here I strongly urge you and your family members stop driving immediately and take public transit for the rest of your lives. You seem very concerned about drunk driving and the statistics that surround it. I'm pleading with you DO NOT DRIVE!!!

My thoughts and prayers go out to the families that have lost their innocent children. May strength and courage get you through this holiday season.

The night that changed my life, a four part series of a married man lusting after his co-worker

angieseroticpen
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 6:09:25 AM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 599
Location: United Kingdom
lafayettemister wrote:
For those of you that promote "gun control", what kind of control are you advocating. What plan of action would you like to see take place? What restrictions do you want in place? If you want to ban all guns completely, how do you propose to get the ones already out there? How do you propose to gather the millions of unlicensed/unregistered guns possessed by criminals? After guns are banned, what will happen to someone who commits a crime with an illegal gun?

Tell us what you mean by "gun control". Right now I'm reading nothing but ban guns and hope for the best. That's a scary idea in my mind.



Up until 1996 Australia had very much the same problem that America has today. In the 18 years before the banning of semi automatic weapons and the buyback of weapons in circulation there were 103 massacres (4 or more people killed), since 1996 there have been none. Suicides and homicides in the decade following the ban were also reduced by 59%. Gun control can and does work if the will is there. If Australia can rid itself of the 'Cowboy' mentality so can the USA.

“When one door closes, another opens; but we often look so long and so regretfully upon the closed door that we do not see the one which has opened for us.”
foxjack
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 6:22:34 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/25/2010
Posts: 712
Location: Pierre, United States
CleverFox wrote:


Take all of you semi-automatic weapons you want. If the military decided to take over this country they would use M-1 tanks, predictor drones with hell fire missiles and other equipment that your guns couldn't do squat to stop.

"Predator Drone Strikes: 50 Civilians Are Killed For Every 1 Terrorist, and the CIA Only Wants to Up Drone Warfare "

Tanks are very maneuverable, it’s not going to be driving around on the 5th floor of a skyscraper trying to get people, eventually people will have to get out of their tanks and come in on foot, then you take hostages.

Best case scenario people realize how dumb it is to be killing their own people, worst case people become martyrs.
ByronLord
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 7:31:20 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 721
Location: Massachusetts, United States
foxjack wrote:

"Predator Drone Strikes: 50 Civilians Are Killed For Every 1 Terrorist, and the CIA Only Wants to Up Drone Warfare "

Tanks are very maneuverable, it’s not going to be driving around on the 5th floor of a skyscraper trying to get people, eventually people will have to get out of their tanks and come in on foot, then you take hostages.

Best case scenario people realize how dumb it is to be killing their own people, worst case people become martyrs.


Well that is just the point, since WWI most wars have ended because the populations refused to keep fighting. Germany was not defeated militarily, its soldiers just stopped fighting and deserted in larger number than the allies. Same happened on the Russian front with the Russian troops.

Right now the Syrian army is collapsing due to desertions on a massive scale. The US withdrew from Vietnam because support for the war was broken at home.

The idea that a US president could order the use of the US army against the population of the US without starting a civil war is really rather weird. The Libyan rebels were mostly armed with guns taken from government depots. Same is true in Syria.

The weapons from Libya are currently washing across North Africa. Hence the fighting going on in Mali and parts of Nigeria. That is mostly driven by armed gangs that were formerly Ghadaffi's mercenaries who have made their way out of the country with little more than their rifle and some clips of ammunition.

The US government is not an automata. It is made up of people and those people have rather different internal agendas. Any of the fanciful gun-nut 'gubermint takover' scenarios would require a huge force of Stormtroopers to carry it out. They would have to be fed a bunch of lies about some group going to take away their rights and their guns and make them slaves so you would need a propaganda outfit, lets call that Box News. And there would have to be a club for them all to join and wave flags for, call it the MeParty.

Come on, we know which side the gun nuts would be on in the scenarios they propose it would be the one with the guns and the highly polished jackboots.

delsmith
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 9:31:18 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/30/2012
Posts: 168
Location: Erie, United States
This tragedy only makes me more thankful that I am a licensed gun owner with a ''carry permit''. Responsible owners keep their guns in a gun safe and, additionally have trigger locks on handguns. Even if my home is broken in to no one will be finding or using my weapons.

Had the kids mother stored her weapons properly he would not have had the access that permitted this disaster. Too bad he killed her first.

Hopefully there is somewhere just a bit worse than ''''hell'''' for this mother and son. She allowed the tragedy and is the poster person for bad gun owner of the year.

Guns have never hurt or killed a person without the hand of an evil person on them.

echopomp
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 10:51:27 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 190

i am loosing the will to fight on.

the US gun lobby is full of nuts.

it is all well and good talking about responsible gun owners, but there are thousands who are not.

that aside, more guns is not a good think.

the US needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

we have had gun control for years, gun crime is wa down, and at no point has our governement tried to round up people and execute them.

gun control is not evil, it is simple sense.

but lets face it you guys are against free healt care, so madness runs deep through your culture!
foxjack
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 11:17:29 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/25/2010
Posts: 712
Location: Pierre, United States
echopomp wrote:

i am loosing the will to fight on.

the US gun lobby is full of nuts.

it is all well and good talking about responsible gun owners, but there are thousands who are not.

that aside, more guns is not a good think.

the US needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

we have had gun control for years, gun crime is wa down, and at no point has our governement tried to round up people and execute them.

gun control is not evil, it is simple sense.

but lets face it you guys are against free healt care, so madness runs deep through your culture!


Even more amusing is that these discussions scare people into buying more guns because they're afraid they won't be able to later on.
echopomp
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 12:30:35 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 190

you find it amusement in the death of 20, 6 & 7 year olds.

you truely are a repellent person
principessa
Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 1:35:32 PM

Rank: Sophisticate

Joined: 8/23/2011
Posts: 3,940
Location: Canada
foxjack wrote:


Even more amusing is that these discussions scare people into buying more guns because they're afraid they won't be able to later on.


Amusing? I can't imagine the mind that could perceive anything in these events as amusing. It does give me some insight into the mind of someone who may have guns but shouldn't, given how little you value human life.

Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.