http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Armed_classroomsBig supporter.Armed classroomsFor years, some areas in the US have allowed "armed classrooms" to deter (or truncate) future attacks, presumably by changing helpless victims into armed defenders. In 2008, Harrold Independent School District in Texas became the first public school district in the U.S. to allow teachers with state-issued firearm-carry permits to carry their arms in the classroom; special additional training and ricochet-resistant ammunition were required for participating teachers.[106] Students at the University of Utah have been allowed to carry concealed pistols (so long as they possess the appropriate state license) since a State Supreme Court decision in 2006.[107][108] In addition to Utah, Wisconsin and Mississippi each have legislation that allow students, faculty and employees with the proper permit, to carry concealed weapons on their public university's campuses.[109][110] Colorado and Oregon state courts have ruled in favor of Campus Carry laws by denying University's proposals to ban guns on campus. Ruling that the UC Board of Regents and the Oregon University System did not have the authority to ban weapons on campus.[111][112] A selective ban was then re-instated, wherein Oregon state universities enacted a ban on guns in school building and sporting events or by anyone contracted with the university in question.[113]Michigan State University as of June 2009, allows students to carry firearms on campus,the university still prohibits knives and other non-firearm weapons however.A commentary in the conservative National Review Online argues that the armed school approach for preventing school attacks, while new in the US, has been used successfully for many years in Israel and Thailand.[114] Teachers and school officials in Israel are allowed and encouraged to carry firearms if they have former military experience in the IDF, which almost all do. However, statistics on what percentage of teachers are actually armed are unavailable.
Understand, but there will be people that bring it up. Trying to get it out the other threads.We'll get to it. I...just can't right now. Too emotional. This is ####ed up.
I could probably be convinced, but I'd honestly be just as concerned about most teachers losing it and using that gun improperly as I would about someone breaking in and starting a shooting. I hear about a lot more "workplace" shootings than school shootings.'ATC1 said:
will?Understand, but there will be people that bring it up. Trying to get it out the other threads.We'll get to it. I...just can't right now. Too emotional. This is ####ed up.
Really? I guess mass shootings are more school related. They get more victims because there is no other threat. Movie theaters, some malls, government buildings and schools are gun free zones. Now, I will agree with being concerned about teachers being able to use the gun. I am all having regular training mandatory for those who want to conceal carry.I could probably be convinced, but I'd honestly be just as concerned about most teachers losing it and using that gun improperly as I would about someone breaking in and starting a shooting. I hear about a lot more "workplace" shootings than school shootings.'ATC1 said:
Oh, I don't mean the teacher being unable to use it. I mean I'd be concerned that a disgruntled teacher would carry out a workplace shooting and not set off any alarms beforehand because he/she was allowed to carry weapons into the school.Really? I guess mass shootings are more school related. They get more victims because there is no other threat. Movie theaters, some malls, government buildings and schools are gun free zones. Now, I will agree with being concerned about teachers being able to use the gun. I am all having regular training mandatory for those who want to conceal carry.I could probably be convinced, but I'd honestly be just as concerned about most teachers losing it and using that gun improperly as I would about someone breaking in and starting a shooting. I hear about a lot more "workplace" shootings than school shootings.'ATC1 said:
hmm not sure on tasers. It would be difficult to conceal from the children.Serious question, why are non lethal weapons not available to people in schools? Are they simply not effective? I mean a taser or rubber bullet gun is going to slow somebody down a bit at least. I just don't think through rules and lockdown this type of event is preventable.
Maybe, but so would a firearm. At least with a taser if a kid gets a hold of it you aren't looking at a body count in the teens you are looking at a bunch of soiled pants.hmm not sure on tasers. It would be difficult to conceal from the children.Serious question, why are non lethal weapons not available to people in schools? Are they simply not effective? I mean a taser or rubber bullet gun is going to slow somebody down a bit at least. I just don't think through rules and lockdown this type of event is preventable.
In order to have a concealed carry permit, you can not have a record of any type of violent or drug related crime or even a DWI in LA. Don't know the numbers, but I don't think the people with the permits to carry are the ones who are the shooters in the workplace.Oh, I don't mean the teacher being unable to use it. I mean I'd be concerned that a disgruntled teacher would carry out a workplace shooting and not set off any alarms beforehand because he/she was allowed to carry weapons into the school.Really? I guess mass shootings are more school related. They get more victims because there is no other threat. Movie theaters, some malls, government buildings and schools are gun free zones. Now, I will agree with being concerned about teachers being able to use the gun. I am all having regular training mandatory for those who want to conceal carry.I could probably be convinced, but I'd honestly be just as concerned about most teachers losing it and using that gun improperly as I would about someone breaking in and starting a shooting. I hear about a lot more "workplace" shootings than school shootings.'ATC1 said:
Where do you teach?'ATC1 said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Armed_classroomsBig supporter.Armed classroomsFor years, some areas in the US have allowed "armed classrooms" to deter (or truncate) future attacks, presumably by changing helpless victims into armed defenders. In 2008, Harrold Independent School District in Texas became the first public school district in the U.S. to allow teachers with state-issued firearm-carry permits to carry their arms in the classroom; special additional training and ricochet-resistant ammunition were required for participating teachers.[106] Students at the University of Utah have been allowed to carry concealed pistols (so long as they possess the appropriate state license) since a State Supreme Court decision in 2006.[107][108] In addition to Utah, Wisconsin and Mississippi each have legislation that allow students, faculty and employees with the proper permit, to carry concealed weapons on their public university's campuses.[109][110] Colorado and Oregon state courts have ruled in favor of Campus Carry laws by denying University's proposals to ban guns on campus. Ruling that the UC Board of Regents and the Oregon University System did not have the authority to ban weapons on campus.[111][112] A selective ban was then re-instated, wherein Oregon state universities enacted a ban on guns in school building and sporting events or by anyone contracted with the university in question.[113]Michigan State University as of June 2009, allows students to carry firearms on campus,the university still prohibits knives and other non-firearm weapons however.A commentary in the conservative National Review Online argues that the armed school approach for preventing school attacks, while new in the US, has been used successfully for many years in Israel and Thailand.[114] Teachers and school officials in Israel are allowed and encouraged to carry firearms if they have former military experience in the IDF, which almost all do. However, statistics on what percentage of teachers are actually armed are unavailable.
If you see me anywhere out of a gun zone, I'm probably carrying, but you would never know.Maybe, but so would a firearm. At least with a taser if a kid gets a hold of it you aren't looking at a body count in the teens you are looking at a bunch of soiled pants.hmm not sure on tasers. It would be difficult to conceal from the children.Serious question, why are non lethal weapons not available to people in schools? Are they simply not effective? I mean a taser or rubber bullet gun is going to slow somebody down a bit at least. I just don't think through rules and lockdown this type of event is preventable.
I don't. My job has me off and on university campus.Where do you teach?'ATC1 said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Armed_classroomsBig supporter.Armed classroomsFor years, some areas in the US have allowed "armed classrooms" to deter (or truncate) future attacks, presumably by changing helpless victims into armed defenders. In 2008, Harrold Independent School District in Texas became the first public school district in the U.S. to allow teachers with state-issued firearm-carry permits to carry their arms in the classroom; special additional training and ricochet-resistant ammunition were required for participating teachers.[106] Students at the University of Utah have been allowed to carry concealed pistols (so long as they possess the appropriate state license) since a State Supreme Court decision in 2006.[107][108] In addition to Utah, Wisconsin and Mississippi each have legislation that allow students, faculty and employees with the proper permit, to carry concealed weapons on their public university's campuses.[109][110] Colorado and Oregon state courts have ruled in favor of Campus Carry laws by denying University's proposals to ban guns on campus. Ruling that the UC Board of Regents and the Oregon University System did not have the authority to ban weapons on campus.[111][112] A selective ban was then re-instated, wherein Oregon state universities enacted a ban on guns in school building and sporting events or by anyone contracted with the university in question.[113]Michigan State University as of June 2009, allows students to carry firearms on campus,the university still prohibits knives and other non-firearm weapons however.A commentary in the conservative National Review Online argues that the armed school approach for preventing school attacks, while new in the US, has been used successfully for many years in Israel and Thailand.[114] Teachers and school officials in Israel are allowed and encouraged to carry firearms if they have former military experience in the IDF, which almost all do. However, statistics on what percentage of teachers are actually armed are unavailable.
Can you be more specific? I'd like to be able to determine whether or not you should be armed.I don't. My job has me off and on university campus.Where do you teach?'ATC1 said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Armed_classroomsBig supporter.Armed classroomsFor years, some areas in the US have allowed "armed classrooms" to deter (or truncate) future attacks, presumably by changing helpless victims into armed defenders. In 2008, Harrold Independent School District in Texas became the first public school district in the U.S. to allow teachers with state-issued firearm-carry permits to carry their arms in the classroom; special additional training and ricochet-resistant ammunition were required for participating teachers.[106] Students at the University of Utah have been allowed to carry concealed pistols (so long as they possess the appropriate state license) since a State Supreme Court decision in 2006.[107][108] In addition to Utah, Wisconsin and Mississippi each have legislation that allow students, faculty and employees with the proper permit, to carry concealed weapons on their public university's campuses.[109][110] Colorado and Oregon state courts have ruled in favor of Campus Carry laws by denying University's proposals to ban guns on campus. Ruling that the UC Board of Regents and the Oregon University System did not have the authority to ban weapons on campus.[111][112] A selective ban was then re-instated, wherein Oregon state universities enacted a ban on guns in school building and sporting events or by anyone contracted with the university in question.[113]Michigan State University as of June 2009, allows students to carry firearms on campus,the university still prohibits knives and other non-firearm weapons however.A commentary in the conservative National Review Online argues that the armed school approach for preventing school attacks, while new in the US, has been used successfully for many years in Israel and Thailand.[114] Teachers and school officials in Israel are allowed and encouraged to carry firearms if they have former military experience in the IDF, which almost all do. However, statistics on what percentage of teachers are actually armed are unavailable.
Sad thing is IMO.. nothing. If someone wants a gun they're not hard to get legally or illegally. People want to think gun control will stop a killer or persons that want to do harm. I'm not one of those people.It appears the school shooting was planned with two shooters involved. I am not sure stricter gun control laws would have prevented this from happening.
And then??In most of the mass shooting cases, the shooter gave off signs that he was unhinged and possibly going to do something bad. Hell, Loughner was making threats against Giffords well before he actually shot her. The best way to stop this stuff from happening isn't to ban all guns, or a certain type of gun, it's to be observant of those around you, recognize when someone is mentally unstable.
That is part of my point. Why does it matter? If I have gone through training much like a police officer to learn how to use a weapon and have no prior record. What should it matter?Can you be more specific? I'd like to be able to determine whether or not you should be armed.I don't. My job has me off and on university campus.Where do you teach?'ATC1 said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Armed_classroomsBig supporter.Armed classroomsFor years, some areas in the US have allowed "armed classrooms" to deter (or truncate) future attacks, presumably by changing helpless victims into armed defenders. In 2008, Harrold Independent School District in Texas became the first public school district in the U.S. to allow teachers with state-issued firearm-carry permits to carry their arms in the classroom; special additional training and ricochet-resistant ammunition were required for participating teachers.[106] Students at the University of Utah have been allowed to carry concealed pistols (so long as they possess the appropriate state license) since a State Supreme Court decision in 2006.[107][108] In addition to Utah, Wisconsin and Mississippi each have legislation that allow students, faculty and employees with the proper permit, to carry concealed weapons on their public university's campuses.[109][110] Colorado and Oregon state courts have ruled in favor of Campus Carry laws by denying University's proposals to ban guns on campus. Ruling that the UC Board of Regents and the Oregon University System did not have the authority to ban weapons on campus.[111][112] A selective ban was then re-instated, wherein Oregon state universities enacted a ban on guns in school building and sporting events or by anyone contracted with the university in question.[113]Michigan State University as of June 2009, allows students to carry firearms on campus,the university still prohibits knives and other non-firearm weapons however.A commentary in the conservative National Review Online argues that the armed school approach for preventing school attacks, while new in the US, has been used successfully for many years in Israel and Thailand.[114] Teachers and school officials in Israel are allowed and encouraged to carry firearms if they have former military experience in the IDF, which almost all do. However, statistics on what percentage of teachers are actually armed are unavailable.
This is part of the problem with these discussions. You have people that are very comfortable with firearms and don't want them out of their hands, but they represent such a small subset of the population such as to make such an approach untenable. In a school setting you would want 1-2 people out of 40-50 or on up to 200 staff to have such a predilection for gun use I would argue that this rate is perhaps as high as 1000x the national average. (I looked this up later in Texas CCL is 0.16% of population) So then you look at highly trained PD members and the cost is too high for such a thing based on the cost of life risk equation.So training people to have less lethal options available seems like a reasonable compromise however it is not discussed as an option openly.If you see me anywhere out of a gun zone, I'm probably carrying, but you would never know.Maybe, but so would a firearm. At least with a taser if a kid gets a hold of it you aren't looking at a body count in the teens you are looking at a bunch of soiled pants.hmm not sure on tasers. It would be difficult to conceal from the children.Serious question, why are non lethal weapons not available to people in schools? Are they simply not effective? I mean a taser or rubber bullet gun is going to slow somebody down a bit at least. I just don't think through rules and lockdown this type of event is preventable.
Notify authorities. Of course, that would require the authorities to do something (as in Giffords, the police thought Loughner was harmless. Whoops.) Now it won't stop everything. Nothing will.And then??In most of the mass shooting cases, the shooter gave off signs that he was unhinged and possibly going to do something bad. Hell, Loughner was making threats against Giffords well before he actually shot her. The best way to stop this stuff from happening isn't to ban all guns, or a certain type of gun, it's to be observant of those around you, recognize when someone is mentally unstable.
Sad but true. And you bring up a good point on the ability to carry a taser. I have not gone through the proper training for a taser, so I can not comment of the possible effectiveness it may have.ETA: If more people familiarize themselves with proper use and saftey, those numbers should improve.This is part of the problem with these discussions. You have people that are very comfortable with firearms and don't want them out of their hands, but they represent such a small subset of the population such as to make such an approach untenable. In a school setting you would want 1-2 people out of 40-50 or on up to 200 staff to have such a predilection for gun use I would argue that this rate is perhaps as high as 1000x the national average. (I looked this up later in Texas CCL is 0.16% of population) So then you look at highly trained PD members and the cost is too high for such a thing based on the cost of life risk equation.So training people to have less lethal options available seems like a reasonable compromise however it is not discussed as an option openly.If you see me anywhere out of a gun zone, I'm probably carrying, but you would never know.Maybe, but so would a firearm. At least with a taser if a kid gets a hold of it you aren't looking at a body count in the teens you are looking at a bunch of soiled pants.hmm not sure on tasers. It would be difficult to conceal from the children.Serious question, why are non lethal weapons not available to people in schools? Are they simply not effective? I mean a taser or rubber bullet gun is going to slow somebody down a bit at least. I just don't think through rules and lockdown this type of event is preventable.
This is the Oregon shooting. Correct?Just throwing this in here. Picture of the type of gun used .223 caliber rifle
Just throwing this in here. Picture of the type of gun used .223 caliber rifle
both of those are handguns.Police have recovered two weapons from the suspect, a Glock and a Sig Sauer, the source said. It's unclear if police killed the suspect.
Might want to look at WHY people do these things and not HOW. Hint: It isn't a gun problem.
Then why don't we see more mass stabbings?It's actually pretty simple, the old saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is spot on.The hand wringers think that once all guns are banned the criminals will hand over their guns because it's illegal. Ridiculous.
It's what the AP is reporting now.Just throwing this in here. Picture of the type of gun used .223 caliber rifleboth of those are handguns.Police have recovered two weapons from the suspect, a Glock and a Sig Sauer, the source said. It's unclear if police killed the suspect.
I think the "Injures" part of the headline is kind of relevant to this debate. It's a very different headline than "Kills."My linkThen why don't we see more mass stabbings?It's actually pretty simple, the old saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is spot on.
The hand wringers think that once all guns are banned the criminals will hand over their guns because it's illegal. Ridiculous.
Yes - at least those 22 kids had the chance to grow up.I think the "Injures" part of the headline is kind of relevant to this debate. It's a very different headline than "Kills."My linkThen why don't we see more mass stabbings?It's actually pretty simple, the old saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is spot on.
The hand wringers think that once all guns are banned the criminals will hand over their guns because it's illegal. Ridiculous.
So then, you're part of the crowd that believes if all guns are banned, these problems will go away?Again, I wish my world was as simple as yours.I think the "Injures" part of the headline is kind of relevant to this debate. It's a very different headline than "Kills."My linkThen why don't we see more mass stabbings?It's actually pretty simple, the old saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is spot on.
The hand wringers think that once all guns are banned the criminals will hand over their guns because it's illegal. Ridiculous.
What percent of criminal acts are stopped or somehow prevented by armed citizens? I know you don't have a percentage and can't because it would be something around .0001%So the argument of loose gun control laws stopping crime is bull####. After Aurora I proposed that anyone who wants to acquire a gun have to go through a psychological check as well as a background check. The first should be a call to the person's medical insurance to see if they covered any psychological drugs or counselling. If either is found the person would have to wait while the seller talked to the counselor or dr. who prescribed the drugs. If either felt that the person posed any sort of risks to other or himself, he/she would not be able to purchase a gun and be put on a police watch-list for attempting to purchase a gun.I was laughed off this board because of concerns around what it would take to build the infrastructure to execute and the invasion of privacy.I wonder how people feel about those concerns now.It's actually pretty simple, the old saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is spot on.The hand wringers think that once all guns are banned the criminals will hand over their guns because it's illegal. Ridiculous.
Exactly.I have never seen a gun kill someone without a person pulling the trigger.I think we all can agree no citizens should be able to have pipe bombs, grenades, bazookas, rocket launchers, or Claymore Mines. Why is that? I mean what's more effective than Claymore mines to protect your house. Post a sign out front that says this house is protected by Claymore Mines...proceed at your own risk. Or using a few grenades to do some sport fishing. Dead fish float up and you scoop them up and eat for weeks.
I state crazy talk like this, because some guns have no place in society. Assault Rifles, Rapid shooting guns, etc. What's the point of allowing citizens to own these except to be used for killing lots of people. Make the penalty for owning this type of gun severe and they will go away. Just like normal people don't own pipe bombs.
Let's at least start down a path that says we are trying to fix this problem. Just ignoring it with stupid phrases like guns don't kill people, people kill people make no sense. Because if that was true, we should all be able to go buy our grenades. I have never seen a grenade injure someone that was not tossed by a person.
JFC If I hear this nonsensical tripe trotted out one more time I am going to ####### explode.NO PREVENTATIVE MEASURE HAS A 100% SUCCESS RATE. Not our laws, not prisons, not seatbelts, not bike helmets, not parachutes.So then, you're part of the crowd that believes if all guns are banned, these problems will go away?Again, I wish my world was as simple as yours.I think the "Injures" part of the headline is kind of relevant to this debate. It's a very different headline than "Kills."My linkThen why don't we see more mass stabbings?It's actually pretty simple, the old saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is spot on.
The hand wringers think that once all guns are banned the criminals will hand over their guns because it's illegal. Ridiculous.
No, I'm not part of that crowd. But if you're putting up a stabbing of 22 elementary school kids as a correlary to what happened today, I'd say it's also relevant that those kids aren't dead.So then, you're part of the crowd that believes if all guns are banned, these problems will go away?Again, I wish my world was as simple as yours.I think the "Injures" part of the headline is kind of relevant to this debate. It's a very different headline than "Kills."My linkThen why don't we see more mass stabbings?It's actually pretty simple, the old saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is spot on.
The hand wringers think that once all guns are banned the criminals will hand over their guns because it's illegal. Ridiculous.
Hello, Mr. Criminal, you need to go through a background check before you buy the gun I'm selling on the street.What percent of criminal acts are stopped or somehow prevented by armed citizens? I know you don't have a percentage and can't because it would be something around .0001%So the argument of loose gun control laws stopping crime is bull####.It's actually pretty simple, the old saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is spot on.
The hand wringers think that once all guns are banned the criminals will hand over their guns because it's illegal. Ridiculous.
After Aurora I proposed that anyone who wants to acquire a gun have to go through a psychological check as well as a background check. The first should be a call to the person's medical insurance to see if they covered any psychological drugs or counselling. If either is found the person would have to wait while the seller talked to the counselor or dr. who prescribed the drugs. If either felt that the person posed any sort of risks to other or himself, he/she would not be able to purchase a gun and be put on a police watch-list for attempting to purchase a gun.
I was laughed off this board because of concerns around what it would take to build the infrastructure to execute and the invasion of privacy.
I wonder how people feel about those concerns now.
Except citizens can't own grenades. See the irony. You don't have the right to own a grenade. It's the law. That's the same logic a lot of guns should be banned. They have no place in society.Exactly.I have never seen a gun kill someone without a person pulling the trigger.I think we all can agree no citizens should be able to have pipe bombs, grenades, bazookas, rocket launchers, or Claymore Mines. Why is that? I mean what's more effective than Claymore mines to protect your house. Post a sign out front that says this house is protected by Claymore Mines...proceed at your own risk. Or using a few grenades to do some sport fishing. Dead fish float up and you scoop them up and eat for weeks.
I state crazy talk like this, because some guns have no place in society. Assault Rifles, Rapid shooting guns, etc. What's the point of allowing citizens to own these except to be used for killing lots of people. Make the penalty for owning this type of gun severe and they will go away. Just like normal people don't own pipe bombs.
Let's at least start down a path that says we are trying to fix this problem. Just ignoring it with stupid phrases like guns don't kill people, people kill people make no sense. Because if that was true, we should all be able to go buy our grenades. I have never seen a grenade injure someone that was not tossed by a person.
You kind of made the point of "......people kill people"
That said, I agree with your post that we need to fix this problem. Rapid unemployment and lack of direction growing up all contribute to people going bat#### crazy with no morals or regard for human life.
I'm not comparing the two at all. I just read about it and it was fresh in my mind. Both are sad though and signs this world is coming a part.Maybe the world should end next Friday. This #### makes me sick.No, I'm not part of that crowd. But if you're putting up a stabbing of 22 elementary school kids as a correlary to what happened today, I'd say it's also relevant that those kids aren't dead.So then, you're part of the crowd that believes if all guns are banned, these problems will go away?Again, I wish my world was as simple as yours.I think the "Injures" part of the headline is kind of relevant to this debate. It's a very different headline than "Kills."My linkThen why don't we see more mass stabbings?It's actually pretty simple, the old saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" is spot on.
The hand wringers think that once all guns are banned the criminals will hand over their guns because it's illegal. Ridiculous.
The Why is a longer term societal fix.Doesn't mean you shouldn't make it harder for people to get the means to execute schoolchildren even if you can't fix everyone's thoughts.Might want to look at WHY people do these things and not HOW. Hint: It isn't a gun problem.
And once you recognize, what are you supposed to do? How do you stop someone? Institutionalize someone for life for making threatening comments? How do you seperate a threat from a serious threat?In most of the mass shooting cases, the shooter gave off signs that he was unhinged and possibly going to do something bad. Hell, Loughner was making threats against Giffords well before he actually shot her. The best way to stop this stuff from happening isn't to ban all guns, or a certain type of gun, it's to be observant of those around you, recognize when someone is mentally unstable.
What BS. You can't shoot up a school classroom in seconds without a semi-automatic weapon. These weapons directly let these events happen.Exactly.I have never seen a gun kill someone without a person pulling the trigger.I think we all can agree no citizens should be able to have pipe bombs, grenades, bazookas, rocket launchers, or Claymore Mines. Why is that? I mean what's more effective than Claymore mines to protect your house. Post a sign out front that says this house is protected by Claymore Mines...proceed at your own risk. Or using a few grenades to do some sport fishing. Dead fish float up and you scoop them up and eat for weeks.
I state crazy talk like this, because some guns have no place in society. Assault Rifles, Rapid shooting guns, etc. What's the point of allowing citizens to own these except to be used for killing lots of people. Make the penalty for owning this type of gun severe and they will go away. Just like normal people don't own pipe bombs.
Let's at least start down a path that says we are trying to fix this problem. Just ignoring it with stupid phrases like guns don't kill people, people kill people make no sense. Because if that was true, we should all be able to go buy our grenades. I have never seen a grenade injure someone that was not tossed by a person.
You kind of made the point of "......people kill people"
That said, I agree with your post that we need to fix this problem. Rapid unemployment and lack of direction growing up all contribute to people going bat#### crazy with no morals or regard for human life.
like I wrote before.. just because something is illegal doesnt mean you cant obtain it. A person who wants to kill unsuspecting people will most likely succeed by any means.Except citizens can't own grenades. See the irony. You don't have the right to own a grenade. It's the law. That's the same logic a lot of guns should be banned. They have no place in society.