Mass shooting

[Moonlight Graham]

After a plane crashes or a bridge collapses do people call for bans on bridges and planes?

That's a horrible argument, it makes no sense.

[Canuckistani]

In Britain deaths by stabbings rose manyfold after handguns were banned in the aftermath of the Dunblane school-massacre.

The murder rate in England and Wales fell by 14% to 550 homicides in 2011-12 – the lowest level since 1983.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/19/murder-rate-falls-crime-figures

[Moonlight Graham]

People seem to blame everything and everyone... except the one guy that actually shot up those kids.

It's the guns! It's the mom! It's the cruel heartless society that doesn't make social outcasts feel welcome! It's the lack of money spent on treatment of mental illness! I'll stick with my theory... it's Adam Lanza.

Yes, but there's an entire context around Adam Lanza. Why did he do it? Why was he able to do it? How could have it been prevented? Simply blaming the man (which obviously need to be done) and nothing else does nothing to prevent future disasters. Normal mentally/emotionally healthy people armed with wooden spoons don't go into schools and kill 20 kids.

[GreatJob!]

That's a horrible argument, it makes no sense.

actually it does make sense... don,t blame inanimate objects for pilot error or human misuse.

[cybercoma]

If I wasn’t a member, I’d bet you there will be calls for further mental health screening and safe storage.

Oh. You have evidence that the mother had mental health issues? Didn't she have her guns properly stored too?

It's tough to tell with all the conflicting reports, but I believe she was screened and legally obtained and stored her guns.

[Wilber]

I don't know why you're blaming me....if it makes you feel better go right ahead. He could have gotten guns elsewhere as well. You think you have it all figured out based on media that has already been proven wrong. Simple minded reductionist thinking like yours would mean no guns for anybody. You don't get to make that call...not even in Canada.

I do not worship guns, as I graduated to far more powerful toys years ago.

When I see you and Derek posting your picturs and going on about these things like they were the latest offerings from Apple instead of objects specificaly designed to kill other human beings, it isn't a big stretch.

Perhaps he could have got them elsewhere, you certainly make it easy enough but that would have taken at least some time, effort and some money. During that time something else might have happened to break the chain of events that day. As it was, they were sitting there waiting for him, so does locking these things up really make any difference? Make up your mind.

Well, at least your more powerful toys aren't available in sporting goods stores with a 15 minute background check. Yet. But if your constitution maintains that citizens should have the same access to weapons as your military, as I heard one gun shop owner claim last night, why not a Trident sub or B2? There are a few people around who could afford at least one.

Just out of curiosity, what would it take for you to give up your guns?

Edited December 19, 2012 by Wilber

[Wilber]

No, like airlines, you wouldn’t have one in every school, more often then not, only in a very small percentage of schools, moving around on a roving basis……….Deterrence would be key…………Like I was saying earlier, these shooters target gun free zones…….take away the certainty that said school would be gun free.

Sky marshals have been around for decades and were quite effective at deterring hijackers who just wanted to divert an aircraft or hold it for ransom and had no real intention of killing themselves or anyone else. They did nothing to deter the 9/11 hijackers and will be a minimal deterrence to anyone else who doesn't plan on being alive at the end of the day. They will just be number one on the target list.

On edit. In the short term, putting these people in schools will will probably deter wannabee copycats but they will do little to deter someone who is truly committed.

Edited December 19, 2012 by Wilber

[eyeball]

The two choices aren't that stark. Not everyone who has a "mental illness" would need full time care. But this kid, of whom his mother warned not to ever leave alone, would be a case for sure. And taking away 260 million guns would not be realistic. Can you imagine the police tracking down every single person to ask if they have a piece that's not registered?

I can imagine the government offering cash for guns while eliminating the sales of new one's and very strictly controlling the production and sales of ammunition and I bet we'd have much of that 260 million either accounted for or rendered harmless soon enough - a few years at most. I can see a progressive increase in the amount of fines for people who refuse to get with the program.

That said though, I wouldn't outright ban or prohibit gun ownership. Guns could be stored at armouries or gun-clubs and shooting ranges that are also licenced as armouries. Hunting rifles could be checked out of armouries and outfitted with GPS tracking devices to ensure they go to where they are to be used following predetermined routes that are filed along with other hunting/licencing paperwork.

[bush_cheney2004]

When I see you and Derek posting your picturs and going on about these things like they were the latest offerings from Apple instead of objects specificaly designed to kill other human beings, it isn't a big stretch.

And when I see you lashing out in a different directions trying to lay blame, I wonder why you don't include the Chinese for inventing gunpowder.

Perhaps he could have got them elsewhere, you certainly make it easy enough but that would have taken at least some time, effort and some money. During that time something else might have happened to break the chain of events that day. As it was, they were sitting there waiting for him, so does locking these things up really make any difference? Make up your mind.

Again, I have no idea how the arms were or were not securely stored. A gun safe is one of the first things that a responsible owner buys, for several reasons. We just don't know how much control she had over the situation as her son't mental health deteriorated. The actual blame still goes to the perp no mater how many other enabling events you wish to add to the mix.

Well, at least your more powerful toys aren't available in sporting goods stores with a 15 minute background check. Yet. But if your constitution maintains that citizens should have the same access to weapons as your military, as I heard one gun shop owner claim last night, why not a Trident sub or B2? There are a few people around who could afford at least one.

Thats just sarcastic nonsense....the point was that I am not in love with guns so much as the concept of liberty that provides for citizen ownership. I am not the least bit concerned by bans on magazine capacities (easily underminded anyway), or existing laws concerning military weapons. I don't need to make excuses for why guns are needed/wanted. I also don't live in Canada.

Just out of curiosity, what would it take for you to give up your guns?

Do you mean hardware or the right to bear arms ? The hardware always has a price, and many cities have sponsored "no questions asked" buyback programs, which usually collect a lot of rusted junk. But in the case of gun rights, no price is high enough.

[Wilber]

Do you mean hardware or the right to bear arms ? The hardware always has a price, and many cities have sponsored "no questions asked" buyback programs, which usually collect a lot of rusted junk. But in the case of gun rights, no price is high enough.

I meant your hardware, all of it. You've made it clear that no price is high enough, including 20 grade ones and their teachers.

[bush_cheney2004]

I can imagine the government offering cash for guns while eliminating the sales of new one's and very strictly controlling the production and sales of ammunition and I bet we'd have much of that 260 million either accounted for or rendered harmless soon enough - a few years at most.

Nope...wouldn't work, because the sale of components would not be banned, and that includes ammunition. My uncle hasn't purchased commercially manufactured ammo in decades, preferring to load his own, you know, kinda like the way that pot heads roll their own blunts. The latest home tools include a rotating production jig that pops out new bullets with each pull of the handle. Maybe he couldn't sell them anymore, but he could still make them.

I can see a progressive increase in the amount of fines for people who refuse to get with the program.

The program is the U.S. Constitution...good luck with that.

That said though, I wouldn't outright ban or prohibit gun ownership. Guns could be stored at armouries or gun-clubs and shooting ranges that are also licenced as armouries. Hunting rifles could be checked out of armouries and outfitted with GPS tracking devices to ensure they go to where they are to be used following predetermined routes that are filed along with other hunting/licencing paperwork.

Sounds like Gun Registry 2.....The Sequel to a collossal failure.

[bush_cheney2004]

I meant your hardware, all of it. You've made it clear that no price is high enough, including 20 grade ones and their teachers.

That's right...I am not going to get teary eyed after the Newtown shooting while thousands of kids (and others) have been killed in violent shootings and accidents. You just dismiss them as "inner city" people who can only blame themselves, but you would be wrong, because a 2-year old sitting at a dining room table doesn't "deserve it" any more than kids in Newtown.

Why you choose to get upset this time is your business, but it means the same to me given the history of gun homicides in the US and Canada.

[Wilber]

That's right...I am not going to get teary eyed after the Newtown shooting while thousands of kids (and others) have been killed in violent shootings and accidents. You just dismiss them as "inner city" people who can only blame themselves, but you would be wrong, because a 2-year old sitting at a dining room table doesn't "deserve it" any more than kids in Newtown.

Why you choose to get upset this time is your business, but it means the same to me given the history of gun homicides in the US and Canada.

There is no object I own that has a price so high that I couldn't get rid of it. You don't seem able to answer that question, you just hide behind your constitution. Your guns obviously have more value to you than just stuff.

[bush_cheney2004]

There is no object I own that has a price so high that I couldn't get rid of it. You don't seem able to answer that question, you just hide behind your constitution. Your guns obviously have more value to you than just stuff.

I have already answered your question. How much? Whatever the market price is. I do not own any valuable or collectible firearms, as they are just tools. Hell, my Craftsman tools are actually more valauble to me.

[Wilber]

And when I see you lashing out in a different directions trying to lay blame, I wonder why you don't include the Chinese for inventing gunpowder.

Again, I have no idea how the arms were or were not securely stored. A gun safe is one of the first things that a responsible owner buys, for several reasons. We just don't know how much control she had over the situation as her son't mental health deteriorated. The actual blame still goes to the perp no mater how many other enabling events you wish to add to the mix.

Thats just sarcastic nonsense....the point was that I am not in love with guns so much as the concept of liberty that provides for citizen ownership. I am not the least bit concerned by bans on magazine capacities (easily underminded anyway), or existing laws concerning military weapons. I don't need to make excuses for why guns are needed/wanted. I also don't live in Canada.

The invention is not the point, it's the application'

You say he could have got the guns elsewhere so I guess whether they were locked or not is irrelevant.

No sane society voluntarily creates a situation that requires it to have people armed with assault rifles to protect its elementary schools and then claims that to be freedom and liberty. You act as though the answer to AIDS is more people with HIV. You can manage it and it's harmless to others, Unless.

[Wilber]

I have already answered your question. How much? Whatever the market price is. I do not own any valuable or collectible firearms, as they are just tools. Hell, my Craftsman tools are actually more valauble to me.

I'm not asking you whether you would sell your existing guns, I'm asking what it would take for you to give up guns period.

[Guest American Woman]

I'm not asking you whether you would sell your existing guns, I'm asking what it would take for you to give up guns period.

What would his giving up his guns accomplish?

[Wilber]

What would his giving up his guns accomplish?

That's not what I'm getting at. I want to know what they really mean to him as a person, without hiding behind the constitution.

[Guest American Woman]

That's not what I'm getting at. I want to know what they really mean to him as a person, without hiding behind the constitution.

Why? What difference does it make if guns mean something to him as a person or if he simply supports people's rights? And how does supporting Americans' rights become "hiding behind the Constitution?"

[Wilber]

Why? What difference does it make if guns mean something to him as a person or if he simply supports people's rights? And how does supporting Americans' rights become "hiding behind the Constitution?"

It means a lot. I maintain they mean more to him than just possessions. He denies it. I'm sure there are many people who support the right to own a firearm but don't feel they have to own one.

[DogOnPorch]

There is some irony in having BC-2004 waiting to turn millions into ashes in order to protect our way-of-life but then asking him the price at which he'd give-up his rights to own guns by special pleading via dead children. Just sayin...

[Guest American Woman]

It means a lot. I maintain they mean more to him than just possessions. He denies it. I'm sure there are many people who support the right to own a firearm but don't feel they have to own one.

That's right. So what difference does it make how he personally feels? What does that have to do with anything? In other words, why are you making it personal with him?

[Wilber]

That's right. So what difference does it make how he personally feels? What does that have to do with anything? In other words, why are you making it personal with him?

I'm not trying to make it personal between us, I'm trying to get at the mindset which is at the root of what is going on in your country. Unless you start coming to grip with that, things will not improve. BC happens to be the only one at hand.

[DogOnPorch]

That's right. So what difference does it make how he personally feels? What does that have to do with anything? In other words, why are you making it personal with him?

In Camus's The Outsider, they executed Meursault because he didn't cry at his mother's funeral.

[DogOnPorch]

Perhaps it is the height of absurdity to ask why...