ok, that kind of stuff I can agree with, Seth. I think it'd be difficult to monitor the individual once they become a gun owner, unless they get arrested and ****, but yeah I agree we could definitely do a better job prescreening gun owners. If we put as much emphasis on that as we do the worthiness of a home loan, there'd probably be less homicide and less nut jobs with the patience to see the process through. lol. ........although today would've likely still happened b/c I don't think anyone's taking away 2 handguns from a teacher.
Too bad guns can't tell when you've gone crazy and initiate a self kill switch...... on the gun, too.
There was a shooting tonight at the Las Vegas strip. At the Excalibur Hotel, I don't get the hate people have in this world, its such a shame
no guns needed here... third-deadliest non-military massacre in U.S. history, behind 9/11 and the Oklahoma City bombing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
You know what....... **** you and your Self-rightous condescending bull****. 1. There are people in this thread advocating a total gun ban 2. We already have laws that restrict who can own a gun 3. it is not a privilege to own a gun its a right guaranteed to us under the Constitution, if you don't like that amend it or move 4. Its not the guns fault, its not the parents fault this happened, and society/culture was not responsible for this, stop putting everything other then the shooter on trial. It was the shooters fault. Unless he is completely insane he knew what he was doing was wrong and evil. You are way to emotional about this and completely irrational. Next you will be demanding that we set up TSA screening booths at all faculties so that everyone can be x-rayed, screened, and waved with a metal detector before entering a building. Get off your soapbox, stop ranting, and start thinking with some common sense. Its disgusting listening to you and others trying to take advantage of this tragedy by hijacking peoples emmotions and using that as justification to advance your own personal agenda against guns. People are the problem not guns.
In response to the first bold point, outside of gun shows, people ARE screened based off of their background, not everyone living with them. Whether it is by law enforcement, or NCIC, people are screened. The problem is you don't think that is enough. Do you know that even being subject to a restraining order discounts one from owning a gun? Second bold: You do realize you just contradicted yourself right? Black market weapons aren't the ones mowing people down indiscriminately(amazingly false, but we will leave it alone for now), legally obtained(meaning the owner went through background checks and registrations) are, but we need more control! Third bold: wow.....stereotype much? Only rednecks own automatic weapons? I guess all those gang bangers with MAC 11s are all closet rednecks.
are you yelling at him on his soapbox from your own soapbox? sounds like it. I'm not advocating for total gun control, but the "People are the problem not guns" is a total cop out by idiots who live in an ideal world, when the world is anything but ideal. yes, at the lowest level of logic, that's true. but it completely disregards how F#$@!n stupid and unpredictable people are. having easy access to guns just makes it easier for these rampages to happen. bottom line: a good portion of our population is so screwed up, there should be, IMO, a higher bar for obtaining guns. and I've still yet to hear a valid excuse for owning anything more than a small handgun or rifle, except that it's really cool to own one. I grew up in a household This guys parents owned guns. having guns in a house with a person with a history of mental instability is beyond stupid, it's almost asking for trouble. and it doesn't even include the argument of how many kids get hurt playing with their parents guns. I used to play with my dad's 44 magnums. I know one girl who accidently shot her father with her mother's small handgun (darringer) in her purse and paralyzed her dad. I knew another kid that shot himself when he was drunk with his dad's handgun. these latter cases are harder to prevent, because again, advocating a ban isn't realistic, but neither is the dumbass notion that guns are not the problem..
Yes I was doing a little pontificating of my own in response to the thrash he was spewing. I loved his little crack about gun owners living in trailers, it was a real gem. If you have read my prior posts throughout this thread you would see that I have not advocated for unrestricted gun ownership. I asked the question how much restrictions are fair. Again I will ask what restrictions on gun ownership is being advocated for here that does not already exist. I will offer 1 in response to a very valid point that you brought up in your post. I think it would be reasonable to create a law that says when you accept ownership of a firearm you are also accepting a responsibility of how somebody else uses it. If someone in your house uses a weapon that belongs to you in a commission of a crime then you can be charged with a crime as well. I think if that law does not exist it would be fair to look at creating one. What I find unreasonable is the knee jerk reaction for greater gun control whenever some tragedy occurs involving a firearm. Whats fair IMO: 1. Restrict people who have been clinicaly diagnosised as being incapable of knowing the difference between right and wrong 2. Restrict people who have been convicted of violent crimes 3. As I said above hold people criminally responsible for someone else's use of your gun in the commission of a crime. Beyond those 3 things what more would you do and explain how your additional measures would reduce homosides.
Do we have a problem .... yes we do. Is the problem only in the US ..... NO it is not! Will more gun control solve this problem? It has not solved the problem in anyother country in the world so why would any rational human being think we would be any different. People kill people and they do so in alot of very horrific ways. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/12/man-kills-eight-china-nursery http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/04/AR2010080402314.html http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2012-03/20/content_14869559.htm http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-15010198 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ng-man-goes-on-rampage-in-Chinese-school.html http://murdersmostfoul.com/ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-13006440 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...errick-Bird-kills-12-then-shoots-himself.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14259356 Of course this list leaves out the Cumbria killings (June 2010) in England of man who kills 12 and then himself .... using a silencer on his legally owned gun, no less. The links only took about 10/15 minutes of research to find so much of what is stated in these post are false. The Gun Law in Connecticut: http://www.ibtimes.com/connecticut-gun-laws-no-permit-needed-buy-shotguns-rifles-938576 It appears this woman did not know or care about Conn. law regarding Semi-Auto's As for hunter safety all states have the requirement of a hunter safety course. http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/outdoor-learning/hunter-education/requirements-in-the-us-and-canada And as for taxing them; the two following Federal laws pretty much cover that. It should be noted that all guns/ammo are taxed twice. First a 10% manufacturing tax and then a 10% tax by the person buying the weapon and/or ammo to shoot in it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act http://www.fws.gov/southeast/federalaid/pittmanrobertson.html In my view until we as humans can start to treat eachother with kindness and teach our kids those same lessons the killings will only continue. Be it by gun, knife, club, car, meat cleaver, or anyother handy item regulated or not.
The problem is that you're small, and your archaic thoughts on what you think is your right is no longer relevant. I sited plenty of examples, on how to keep checking a person/family. More? Firearm ID cards should have freuqent expiration dates, where owning a firearm is a felony after. Households then should be investigated and info and soc#s provided to seek and find and prevent mental cases from getting access to their moms guns. It's not the Guns fault ? Moronic. Society can't handle guns, not the way it is now. Know the ultimate kicker? I have them. And im not eager to part with them. But I'm not a selfish idiot. The system needs changing. The law is dated. The restrictions are not enough. Auto weapons should be banned everywhere, as they are in the more civilized states. You don't need an AK, a shotgun or sig should be just fine.
I said black mArket guns are not what armed this disaster, and columbine. I was very clear about what I said on black market guns, did you not read? People are screened in NJ and NY and a few other states, but in a majority of others, the process is a joke. The process needs more depth. Gang bangers don't slaughter kindergarteners and small school children. They don't buy at the local gun show or acquire auto weapons legally. Everybody here stereotypes. At least I'm not a hypocrit about it.
It's the Internet. Outside of hurting his own argument, his words are nothing. A waste of his own energy.
Dude.... 2 of your 3 restrictions already exist. See the Laughtenberg amendment, albeit only for domestic violence and those that are subject to a restraining order.
It surprises me how many people want to sweep this under the wrong and just continue on like nothing is wrong. It's sad.
Misread...my bad. I did some digging, and the states purchase permit paperwork I could find covered mental illness as a disqualifier. You realize that banning all automatic weapons would include about 50% or more of the handguns on the market, right?
big·ot - noun a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion. If you were talking about Ireland, then yes, Seth is a bigot, but he hasn't been bigoted in this thread. Actually you've been closer to the definition than he has in this thread.
Not semi automatic. Fully automatic. And I'm looking for deeper background checks. Mental illness checks for all dependents/persons in the household, not just the permit applicant. Like car insurance.
I have no problem with those restrictions. People in this thread are using this tragedy as a platform to advocate for more restrictions as if that is going to make these type of things never happen again or at least greatly reduce their occurences. There is 0 stastical data to back that up. It is a purely emmotional response on their part that offers nothing. Why should people be expected to sacrafice thier rights to make these people feel better when it is not even going to have the desired effect they claim they want it done for.
Never met you so I have no idea how small or not you are. But your beliefs about gun control are fairly archaic.
And I will ask the same question again, better yet let me rephrase it. If you could go back in time and write a law that predates this massacre What would it be and how would it of prevented this from happening?
I have no idea. But instead of just sticking our heads in the sand and pretending nothing is wrong, lets figure it out. I think Seth has had some good ideas. Instead of leaving gun laws up to each state, make it nationally regulated and make it hard a hell to buy guns and ammo and register for permit. I don't pretend to know the guns laws of your fine country, but I do know they are way more laxed then there are here in Canada. Yeah, it's a bigger pain in the *** to own a gun here, but we don't have nearly as many mass shootings. Is there a correlation between the two? Maybe, maybe not. Could be that there are just way more people in the U.S. Or it could be that there are way less yahoos walking around with guns up here because they aren't as readily available or easily accessible. But why not change the laws and find out?
I gave a method several times, you choose not to read I guess. Again, permits should be based on households, not just individuals. Like auto insurance, and when I was a teen and lousy driver, so my moms policy became high risk. Firearm IDs and permits should involve those dependents and dwellers of the same household. It's not that hard. So when this kids mental illness history drew a red flag, his mom would have been denied the guns that slaughtered these kids. And every 2-3 years, the ID should be renewed so any new red flags may be caught or monitored. Maybe some tragedies will fall through the cracks, but a lot more would be prevented. I tell you what that little anti social weirdo bastard wasn't going to do. He wAsnt going to go to Newark and find a black market weapon. He wouldn't make it out alive.
I love giving my answer to this question. All guns are banned, EXCEPT the types of guns avaliable in 1778. Muzzle loaders, muskets etc... Bayonettes are optional. As well, a limit of 3 guns per person, and 5 for a house. There is no way that this school shooting takes as many lives as it did if my plan is in place, and as soon as I come to power, I will make it happen.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster You can't pass enough laws to stop crazy people. What works best is to arm enough people to act as a deterrent. Have any staff and faculty that wish to go through an abbreviated law enforcement program and carry.
And at that point they will gleefully crazily ignore any law you put in front of them. They are doing this with premeditation. Planning. Thus they will get the weapons even if it takes more time.
Except that isn't how car insurance works in a household. Each driver is assigned their own rate based off their risk, and the vehicle they drive. My wife's DUI that she got has zero bearing on my rate. It only affects her rate. Much like the accident I got in has zero bearing on her rate. What you are suggesting is akin to my wife getting a DUI and the court revoking both of our licenses. In that situation, I could understand both of our vehicles having breathalyzer interlocks as we could both drive them, but to revoke both of our licenses??? No way that happens.
You my friend, live in a fantasy world. You think banning all guns is going to equal to people having no guns? Such naivete. The banning of guns correlates to the government just raising a white flag and admitting "hey, we cannot police guns, so we just give up." Criminals get more powerful, get more guns. Citizens are more at the mercy of criminals. You will still see senseless crimes like the school shooting. But now, you also see more police massacres, and innocent bystanders caught in crossfire. Congratulations, you just made the problem much worse.
I will consider gun control once someone can convince me that someone about to commit criminal acts would actually follow such a law.