***OFFICIAL GUN CONTROL DEBATE*** (2 Viewers)

[timschochet]

Let's talk politics for a second: there is a reason why these gun control laws, even the most reasonable ones, rarely ever happen: it's a question of pluralism. There is a loud minority, mostly conservative Republicans, willing to lay it all on the line to oppose these measures. The politicians in favor of it, mostly Democrats, are not willing to use the political capital needed to push this through when they've got what they regard as more important items on the agenda. Would Obama be willing to bring this issue up at the risk of losing on the budget, on immigration reform, on all of the other items he wants to raise? I strongly doubt it.

That's why, though there will as a result of what happened yesterday be plenty of rhetoric over the next few weeks and months, I predict NOTHING regarding gun control is going to happen.

 

[Rayderr]

I don't get why people are taking a position of regulating use of guns. Problem is that as soon as you forbid certain types of guns, manufacturers tweak designs to skirt the law.

I don't see a middle ground here. Ban them completely.

Putting aside the 2nd Amendment issue, and also the even larger issue of whether or not it would benefit society to ban all private guns- it's impossible to do so. It's a logistical impossibility, as ridiculous as the proposals to arrest and deport 12 million illegal immigrants. It's pointless to even discuss it.

How is it impossible to ban private guns? Repeal the Second Amendment...voila...private guns are banned.

Can we make other changes to the bill of rights as long as we're in there messing about?

 

[timschochet]

I don't get why people are taking a position of regulating use of guns. Problem is that as soon as you forbid certain types of guns, manufacturers tweak designs to skirt the law.

I don't see a middle ground here. Ban them completely.

Putting aside the 2nd Amendment issue, and also the even larger issue of whether or not it would benefit society to ban all private guns- it's impossible to do so. It's a logistical impossibility, as ridiculous as the proposals to arrest and deport 12 million illegal immigrants. It's pointless to even discuss it.

How is it impossible to ban private guns? Repeal the Second Amendment...voila...private guns are banned.

Yeah, no. Let's say we could, or should repeal the 2nd Amendment. Say it passed through Congress and all the states. There is still the little problem of all the guns already owned. Are you going to send police into millions of private households to seize their firearms?

 

[sporthenry]

I'm all for a higher age limit and limits on the number and type of guns someone can own. Say 25 years old and you can own one personal protection piece, say a Glock, and two hunting guns. Or something like that. Also the body armor stuff. It didn't matter in this case but there is no reason for a citizen to own that. And spare me the need for something like if someone breaks into your house or because you think Obama is going to start killing citizens. Those are straw man arguments put out by the NRA. So be a certain age, limit the number of guns and no body armor. What are the arguments against those ideas? And "that won't stop everything" is not a legitimate argument.

So I had to sign up for selective service and could have been drafted at age 18. I can vote for president at age 18 and I can drink alcohol at age 21. However in your hypothetical world I wouldn't be able to own a firearm until 25 even if the armed forces entrusted me with weapons 7 years prior?Also what if I am not a hunter? Am I restricted to only the personally protection weapon? What if I am a competetive shooter? Can I own those guns or must I give up the sport? Would you allow me to keep my grandfathers M1 Garand rifle that he used to liberate Europe in WW2? That gun was certainly not devised for hunting.

I can die for my country at age 18 but can't drink til 21. I can't rent a car until 25, well at least not without paying an exorbitant fee. Wouldn't be the only age restriction that goes against this type of thinking.

 

[tom22406]

I don't get why people are taking a position of regulating use of guns. Problem is that as soon as you forbid certain types of guns, manufacturers tweak designs to skirt the law.

I don't see a middle ground here. Ban them completely.

Putting aside the 2nd Amendment issue, and also the even larger issue of whether or not it would benefit society to ban all private guns- it's impossible to do so. It's a logistical impossibility, as ridiculous as the proposals to arrest and deport 12 million illegal immigrants. It's pointless to even discuss it.

How is it impossible to ban private guns? Repeal the Second Amendment...voila...private guns are banned.

Yeah, no. Let's say we could, or should repeal the 2nd Amendment. Say it passed through Congress and all the states. There is still the little problem of all the guns already owned. Are you going to send police into millions of private households to seize their firearms?

I have been patiently waiting for someone to tackle this monster

 

[Rayderr]

I'm all for a higher age limit and limits on the number and type of guns someone can own. Say 25 years old and you can own one personal protection piece, say a Glock, and two hunting guns. Or something like that. Also the body armor stuff. It didn't matter in this case but there is no reason for a citizen to own that. And spare me the need for something like if someone breaks into your house or because you think Obama is going to start killing citizens. Those are straw man arguments put out by the NRA. So be a certain age, limit the number of guns and no body armor. What are the arguments against those ideas? And "that won't stop everything" is not a legitimate argument.

So I had to sign up for selective service and could have been drafted at age 18. I can vote for president at age 18 and I can drink alcohol at age 21. However in your hypothetical world I wouldn't be able to own a firearm until 25 even if the armed forces entrusted me with weapons 7 years prior?Also what if I am not a hunter? Am I restricted to only the personally protection weapon? What if I am a competetive shooter? Can I own those guns or must I give up the sport? Would you allow me to keep my grandfathers M1 Garand rifle that he used to liberate Europe in WW2? That gun was certainly not devised for hunting.

I can die for my country at age 18 but can't drink til 21. I can't rent a car until 25, well at least not without paying an exorbitant fee. Wouldn't be the only age restriction that goes against this type of thinking.

car rental thing is irrelevant. It's not the government that makes you pay the huge fee if you're under 25.

 

[Glass Joe]

Let's talk politics for a second: there is a reason why these gun control laws, even the most reasonable ones, rarely ever happen: it's a question of pluralism. There is a loud minority, mostly conservative Republicans, willing to lay it all on the line to oppose these measures. The politicians in favor of it, mostly Democrats, are not willing to use the political capital needed to push this through when they've got what they regard as more important items on the agenda. Would Obama be willing to bring this issue up at the risk of losing on the budget, on immigration reform, on all of the other items he wants to raise? I strongly doubt it. That's why, though there will as a result of what happened yesterday be plenty of rhetoric over the next few weeks and months, I predict NOTHING regarding gun control is going to happen.

True. This is why I view politics as so manipulative - in reality, the two parties have no real moral backbone. Their reason for being is, in reality, to make money for their party. They dont work for us.What could be more important than the safety of our society? Immigration reform? Budgets? No.I guess I was naive to think that politicians have any goals of improving our country. It's really sad.

 

[Otis]

Or we could just ban any deadly weapon characterized as an "assault" weapon. I suspect they're not designed for assaulting antelope.

Ok, done. Magical spell is cast and all "assault weapons" have vanished. They don't exist anymore. Hey look, another mass shooting. This time without assault weapons. Now what?I'm not trying to be a #### here or use this as an argument that no changes should be made to the gun laws. But everyone on here that's calling for changes to be made to the gun laws seems to acknowledge that it's not going to end these types of events. So if these events are going to continue happening, there's going to be a demand for something to be done. What is the next step after an assault weapon ban? Why will that be more effective? If it is more effective, why are we not looking at that instead?

I think you ban assault weapons, concealed pistols, automatic weapons, machine guns, and any other guns that are purposed for killing human beings. If people want to keep hunting rifles for hunting, fine. Let's draw the line there and see what happens. The great part is we can always try it and see what happens. Yeah, Bubba and Bodene might have to give up some years of shooting assault weapons in Tammy-Sue's side lot, but maybe just maybe in the end it will be worth a try.

Can you show me a case where a concealed weapons permit holder committed a mass shooting? Automatic weapons are basically illegal to own unless you hold a special federal permit. Been illegal since the 1930s. There isn't much difference between a semi-auto "assault rifle" and a semi auto hunting rifle. The main difference is furniture and how they look.

Apparently two pistols were involved in yesterday's slaughter. We can start there and work backwards.

Your answer to the boldest above from my original post is not an answer. I highly doubt that the murderers mother was a concealed weapons permit holder. The fact that she owned two pistols does not indicate that.

I'm not talking about a concealed weapons permit holder. I never said anything about that. I'm talking about pistols and small killing weapons that are easily concealed. Like, say, the two pistols used yesterday. The pistol the Chiefs player used. And the pistols used in countless other murders.

Then why bold what I said about CW permit holders? So you want to ban the sale of all pistols? Revolvers are also easily concealed. Shall we ban.those too?

Yes. Revolvers are a tool for killing people.

 

[Otis]

All of the gun owners that I have known or talked to have all agreed they have no problem filling out paperwork,background checks or whatever else is needed to make it tougher for the bad guys to obtain guns and so far I have yet to read anyone say here they feel that no restrictions should be placed on purchasing a gun.I have no problem at all jumping through hoops to have to buy a gun but I do have a big problem with a total ban of guns in this country.I say let's make it as tough as possible to buy a gun(longer waiting periods,extensive background check,mental health check etc)and also,as a nation,be more aware of clear warning signs of mental health illness and act upon them sooner.Of course this all means more money and time involved but I doubt any responsible gun owner will deny it can't hurt to try.I am one of those willing to do so.

This doesn't solve the problem. You're still putting guns out there. Just like this mom did. She bought guns and registered them. She exercised her "right." And it resulted in not only her own death, but the deaths of 20 small children.So you people can keep exercising your rights and pretend that it only affects you and your rights. But for every one of you who stockpiles guns in a home, there are that many more guns out in circulation, and it's that much more likely that those guns will become a part of something absolutely tragic. No offense to you, but if the risk were limited to you doing something stupid and shooting your own child one night thinking he were a prowler, or your own child shooting a sibling or himself by accident, while I would still think it awful, it would be a risk you ran and you and only you paid the price. But the risk doesn't end there. Because things like this happen.You're taking risks for everyone else too. And that's not fair to us.

So your solution is to ban all guns then,right?

Guns that are designed for killing people, yes.Guns that are designed for hunting deer? I could see leaving those legalized and carefully monitored. Rarely do they lead to the kinds of problems that pistols and assault weapons do.

Could you check your list of these guns designed for killing people and tell me if a Glock G21 and Remington 12 guage pump shotgun are on your list?Both securely stored in a safe(locked away)place that only I have access to.Just to satisfy my curiousity how do you propose to round up these weapons that you want banned?Do we all just turn them in and hope the bad guys do so as well?

Give me one good reason why this woman needed to have an arsenal of 6 guns in her home.**Note: good reasons do not include "it's not our place to inquire; she was exercising her constitutional right."

Actually it is a good reason. She was exercising her rights as granted to her by the constitution and Connecticut law. Just as you are exercising your constitutionally protected right in this forum.

That all you got?

 

[Glass Joe]

I don't get why people are taking a position of regulating use of guns. Problem is that as soon as you forbid certain types of guns, manufacturers tweak designs to skirt the law.

I don't see a middle ground here. Ban them completely.

Putting aside the 2nd Amendment issue, and also the even larger issue of whether or not it would benefit society to ban all private guns- it's impossible to do so. It's a logistical impossibility, as ridiculous as the proposals to arrest and deport 12 million illegal immigrants. It's pointless to even discuss it.

How is it impossible to ban private guns? Repeal the Second Amendment...voila...private guns are banned.

Yeah, no. Let's say we could, or should repeal the 2nd Amendment. Say it passed through Congress and all the states. There is still the little problem of all the guns already owned. Are you going to send police into millions of private households to seize their firearms?

I have been patiently waiting for someone to tackle this monster

I wouldnt advocate any proactive enforcement of a gun restriction. Instead, I'd put into place a law that said anyone found possessing a gun would face mandatory, significant jail time. If the police are called to your house for an unrelated issue, but guns are found, you're going to face the penalties.

 

[Glass Joe]

All of the gun owners that I have known or talked to have all agreed they have no problem filling out paperwork,background checks or whatever else is needed to make it tougher for the bad guys to obtain guns and so far I have yet to read anyone say here they feel that no restrictions should be placed on purchasing a gun.I have no problem at all jumping through hoops to have to buy a gun but I do have a big problem with a total ban of guns in this country.I say let's make it as tough as possible to buy a gun(longer waiting periods,extensive background check,mental health check etc)and also,as a nation,be more aware of clear warning signs of mental health illness and act upon them sooner.Of course this all means more money and time involved but I doubt any responsible gun owner will deny it can't hurt to try.I am one of those willing to do so.

This doesn't solve the problem. You're still putting guns out there. Just like this mom did. She bought guns and registered them. She exercised her "right." And it resulted in not only her own death, but the deaths of 20 small children.So you people can keep exercising your rights and pretend that it only affects you and your rights. But for every one of you who stockpiles guns in a home, there are that many more guns out in circulation, and it's that much more likely that those guns will become a part of something absolutely tragic. No offense to you, but if the risk were limited to you doing something stupid and shooting your own child one night thinking he were a prowler, or your own child shooting a sibling or himself by accident, while I would still think it awful, it would be a risk you ran and you and only you paid the price. But the risk doesn't end there. Because things like this happen.You're taking risks for everyone else too. And that's not fair to us.

So your solution is to ban all guns then,right?

Guns that are designed for killing people, yes.Guns that are designed for hunting deer? I could see leaving those legalized and carefully monitored. Rarely do they lead to the kinds of problems that pistols and assault weapons do.

Could you check your list of these guns designed for killing people and tell me if a Glock G21 and Remington 12 guage pump shotgun are on your list?Both securely stored in a safe(locked away)place that only I have access to.Just to satisfy my curiousity how do you propose to round up these weapons that you want banned?Do we all just turn them in and hope the bad guys do so as well?

Give me one good reason why this woman needed to have an arsenal of 6 guns in her home.**Note: good reasons do not include "it's not our place to inquire; she was exercising her constitutional right."

Actually it is a good reason. She was exercising her rights as granted to her by the constitution and Connecticut law. Just as you are exercising your constitutionally protected right in this forum.

That all you got?

 

[sporthenry]

All of the gun owners that I have known or talked to have all agreed they have no problem filling out paperwork,background checks or whatever else is needed to make it tougher for the bad guys to obtain guns and so far I have yet to read anyone say here they feel that no restrictions should be placed on purchasing a gun.I have no problem at all jumping through hoops to have to buy a gun but I do have a big problem with a total ban of guns in this country.I say let's make it as tough as possible to buy a gun(longer waiting periods,extensive background check,mental health check etc)and also,as a nation,be more aware of clear warning signs of mental health illness and act upon them sooner.Of course this all means more money and time involved but I doubt any responsible gun owner will deny it can't hurt to try.I am one of those willing to do so.

This doesn't solve the problem. You're still putting guns out there. Just like this mom did. She bought guns and registered them. She exercised her "right." And it resulted in not only her own death, but the deaths of 20 small children.So you people can keep exercising your rights and pretend that it only affects you and your rights. But for every one of you who stockpiles guns in a home, there are that many more guns out in circulation, and it's that much more likely that those guns will become a part of something absolutely tragic. No offense to you, but if the risk were limited to you doing something stupid and shooting your own child one night thinking he were a prowler, or your own child shooting a sibling or himself by accident, while I would still think it awful, it would be a risk you ran and you and only you paid the price. But the risk doesn't end there. Because things like this happen.You're taking risks for everyone else too. And that's not fair to us.

So your solution is to ban all guns then,right?

Guns that are designed for killing people, yes.Guns that are designed for hunting deer? I could see leaving those legalized and carefully monitored. Rarely do they lead to the kinds of problems that pistols and assault weapons do.

Could you check your list of these guns designed for killing people and tell me if a Glock G21 and Remington 12 guage pump shotgun are on your list?Both securely stored in a safe(locked away)place that only I have access to.Just to satisfy my curiousity how do you propose to round up these weapons that you want banned?Do we all just turn them in and hope the bad guys do so as well?

Give me one good reason why this woman needed to have an arsenal of 6 guns in her home.**Note: good reasons do not include "it's not our place to inquire; she was exercising her constitutional right."

Actually it is a good reason. She was exercising her rights as granted to her by the constitution and Connecticut law. Just as you are exercising your constitutionally protected right in this forum.

So I pose this to you. If she got the guns legally and you don't want to change how she was able to obtain the guns, how do you ensure this doesn't happen again? We task politicians with this task then take away the means to do this through gun restrictions.

 

[BassNBrew]

Let's talk politics for a second: there is a reason why these gun control laws, even the most reasonable ones, rarely ever happen: it's a question of pluralism. There is a loud minority, mostly conservative Republicans, willing to lay it all on the line to oppose these measures. The politicians in favor of it, mostly Democrats, are not willing to use the political capital needed to push this through when they've got what they regard as more important items on the agenda. Would Obama be willing to bring this issue up at the risk of losing on the budget, on immigration reform, on all of the other items he wants to raise? I strongly doubt it. That's why, though there will as a result of what happened yesterday be plenty of rhetoric over the next few weeks and months, I predict NOTHING regarding gun control is going to happen.

47% of the US adult population owns a gun. Reported gun ownership is up from 41% to 47% in 2011 per Gallup. 40% of Dems own a gun, 55% of Reps. My guess is the bulk of that ownership is in the hands of moderate Dems and non-CC Reps.

 

[Otis]

lol at 'the solution is MORE guns in the schools!'

If the NRA nerds had their way, we'd be having shootouts in the schoolyards during recess. But in a responsible way.

 

[eoMMan]

Or we could just ban any deadly weapon characterized as an "assault" weapon. I suspect they're not designed for assaulting antelope.

Ok, done. Magical spell is cast and all "assault weapons" have vanished. They don't exist anymore. Hey look, another mass shooting. This time without assault weapons. Now what?I'm not trying to be a #### here or use this as an argument that no changes should be made to the gun laws. But everyone on here that's calling for changes to be made to the gun laws seems to acknowledge that it's not going to end these types of events. So if these events are going to continue happening, there's going to be a demand for something to be done. What is the next step after an assault weapon ban? Why will that be more effective? If it is more effective, why are we not looking at that instead?

I think you ban assault weapons, concealed pistols, automatic weapons, machine guns, and any other guns that are purposed for killing human beings. If people want to keep hunting rifles for hunting, fine. Let's draw the line there and see what happens. The great part is we can always try it and see what happens. Yeah, Bubba and Bodene might have to give up some years of shooting assault weapons in Tammy-Sue's side lot, but maybe just maybe in the end it will be worth a try.

Can you show me a case where a concealed weapons permit holder committed a mass shooting? Automatic weapons are basically illegal to own unless you hold a special federal permit. Been illegal since the 1930s. There isn't much difference between a semi-auto "assault rifle" and a semi auto hunting rifle. The main difference is furniture and how they look.

Apparently two pistols were involved in yesterday's slaughter. We can start there and work backwards.

Your answer to the boldest above from my original post is not an answer. I highly doubt that the murderers mother was a concealed weapons permit holder. The fact that she owned two pistols does not indicate that.

I'm not talking about a concealed weapons permit holder. I never said anything about that. I'm talking about pistols and small killing weapons that are easily concealed. Like, say, the two pistols used yesterday. The pistol the Chiefs player used. And the pistols used in countless other murders.

Then why bold what I said about CW permit holders? So you want to ban the sale of all pistols? Revolvers are also easily concealed. Shall we ban.those too?

Yes. Revolvers are a tool for killing people.

Where do you stand on crossbows?My link

My link

 

[The Flying Elvis]

Just curious... Why is it we look to the founders' intent at the time of the Constitution when we want to combat the 1st Amendment or 4th or 5th, 9th, 10th, etc but there is such a push back if we want to actually discuss the founders' intent with regards to the 2nd Amendment? Do we really think the Jefferson, Madison, Adams really envisioned and intended for how we protect gun rights now? We can pretend to be strict constructionists all we want but the Constitution has been made to fit both sides agendas throughout history.

 

[Otis]

Or we could just ban any deadly weapon characterized as an "assault" weapon. I suspect they're not designed for assaulting antelope.

Ok, done. Magical spell is cast and all "assault weapons" have vanished. They don't exist anymore. Hey look, another mass shooting. This time without assault weapons. Now what?I'm not trying to be a #### here or use this as an argument that no changes should be made to the gun laws. But everyone on here that's calling for changes to be made to the gun laws seems to acknowledge that it's not going to end these types of events. So if these events are going to continue happening, there's going to be a demand for something to be done. What is the next step after an assault weapon ban? Why will that be more effective? If it is more effective, why are we not looking at that instead?

I think you ban assault weapons, concealed pistols, automatic weapons, machine guns, and any other guns that are purposed for killing human beings. If people want to keep hunting rifles for hunting, fine. Let's draw the line there and see what happens. The great part is we can always try it and see what happens. Yeah, Bubba and Bodene might have to give up some years of shooting assault weapons in Tammy-Sue's side lot, but maybe just maybe in the end it will be worth a try.

Can you show me a case where a concealed weapons permit holder committed a mass shooting? Automatic weapons are basically illegal to own unless you hold a special federal permit. Been illegal since the 1930s. There isn't much difference between a semi-auto "assault rifle" and a semi auto hunting rifle. The main difference is furniture and how they look.

Apparently two pistols were involved in yesterday's slaughter. We can start there and work backwards.

Your answer to the boldest above from my original post is not an answer. I highly doubt that the murderers mother was a concealed weapons permit holder. The fact that she owned two pistols does not indicate that.

I'm not talking about a concealed weapons permit holder. I never said anything about that. I'm talking about pistols and small killing weapons that are easily concealed. Like, say, the two pistols used yesterday. The pistol the Chiefs player used. And the pistols used in countless other murders.

Then why bold what I said about CW permit holders? So you want to ban the sale of all pistols? Revolvers are also easily concealed. Shall we ban.those too?

Yes. Revolvers are a tool for killing people.

Where do you stand on crossbows?My link

My link

Already addressed.

 

[BassNBrew]

I don't get why people are taking a position of regulating use of guns. Problem is that as soon as you forbid certain types of guns, manufacturers tweak designs to skirt the law.I don't see a middle ground here. Ban them completely.

That's why we close the gun show loophole, raise the age to buy, and limit the number. I'm against banning them completely. But the fact is that you don't need much more than a Glock to defend yourself and your family. The idea that 5 guys are going to break into your house in the middle of the night, guns blazing, is ridiculous and a product of the movies and the NRA. And you certainly don't need assult rifles for hunting. If you do, then get a new hobby because you suck at shooting. So buy a Glock for family protection and a shotgun or .22 or something for hunting. That's all you need.

Take your limits elsewhere please....12 ga outfitted for turkey huntingo/u 12 ga for duck huntingo/u 12 ga for clays28 ga for quail/grouse20 ga sxs for pass shooting doves12 semi for pheasant on days they're flushing wild and a loaner gun to friends who would like to hunt/target shoot and don't have a gun2 x .22 rifles for small game, one bolt for states where that is required, the other semi-auto20 ga single shot which is the only keepsake from my dead grandfather20 ga semi which my dad who is ill pass alone12 ga single shot for my son to learn with

 

[eoMMan]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?

Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).

According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state

Why is that?

I'll hang up and listen.

 

[eoMMan]

#deflection

Where does it stop then?Ban crossbows?Ban kitchen knives?Many things in this world can do harm. It's all about responsibility. Blame the problem, not the tool the problem used.

It stops with the things that are used to commit heinous mass murders. You keep your little bow and arrow for now. And if there are an outbreak of bow and arrow mass murders we can sit down and revisit it. Ok?

You mean like this bow and arrow murder from a couple of weeks ago?http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/02/man-killed-father-in-wyoming-college-bow-and-arrow-murder-suicide-attack/

 

[The Flying Elvis]

lol at 'the solution is MORE guns in the schools!'

If the NRA nerds had their way, we'd be having shootouts in the schoolyards during recess. But in a responsible way.

Yup. I'm sure everyone would feel real safe if we armed classrooms. It's not like teachers are individuals who have their own problems outside of classrooms, deal with divorce, family issues, debt etc and having that individual armed to "protect" a 1st grade class is the solution to the problems. Sure, you can put them through all the rigorous training you want, make them like Air Marshalls, but I would not be allowing my child anywhere near a school or classroom that allowed such measures.

 

[Abraham]

Texas has extremely tight gun laws.

 

[Otis]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_stateWhy is that?I'll hang up and listen.

Couldn't possibly be because there are lots of other variables involved right?

 

[eoMMan]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_stateWhy is that?I'll hang up and listen.

Couldn't possibly be because there are lots of other variables involved right?

Of course. You mean like people not committing murders with guns because they think someone else might be armed? I agree. Good point.

 

[eoMMan]

Texas has extremely tight gun laws.

Really?You consider this tight? http://www.texasgunlaws.org/

 

[sporthenry]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_stateWhy is that?I'll hang up and listen.

http://apt46.net/2011/12/13/correlation-is-not-causation/And babies named Ava caused the housing bubble.

 

[eoMMan]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_stateWhy is that?I'll hang up and listen.

http://apt46.net/2011/12/13/correlation-is-not-causation/And babies named Ava caused the housing bubble.

So you're saying that state gun laws have nothing to do with the gun murder rate?Please stop trying to be cute and say what you mean.

 

[sporthenry]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_stateWhy is that?I'll hang up and listen.

Couldn't possibly be because there are lots of other variables involved right?

Of course. You mean like people not committing murders with guns because they think someone else might be armed? I agree. Good point.

So I'm not going to shoot someone in South Dakota for fear they have a gun. But I'm going to go in the middle of Chicago or New York or Philly and shoot someone b/c nobody in New York or Chicago has a gun? When we've already proven that gun violence is high in these cities, so I should know that odds are people have guns? Now I'm just confused.

 

[tom22406]

I don't get why people are taking a position of regulating use of guns. Problem is that as soon as you forbid certain types of guns, manufacturers tweak designs to skirt the law.

I don't see a middle ground here. Ban them completely.

Putting aside the 2nd Amendment issue, and also the even larger issue of whether or not it would benefit society to ban all private guns- it's impossible to do so. It's a logistical impossibility, as ridiculous as the proposals to arrest and deport 12 million illegal immigrants. It's pointless to even discuss it.

How is it impossible to ban private guns? Repeal the Second Amendment...voila...private guns are banned.

Yeah, no. Let's say we could, or should repeal the 2nd Amendment. Say it passed through Congress and all the states. There is still the little problem of all the guns already owned. Are you going to send police into millions of private households to seize their firearms?

I have been patiently waiting for someone to tackle this monster

I wouldnt advocate any proactive enforcement of a gun restriction. Instead, I'd put into place a law that said anyone found possessing a gun would face mandatory, significant jail time. If the police are called to your house for an unrelated issue, but guns are found, you're going to face the penalties.

My only concern is that the honest people would do as asked and then that would leave us the criminals who don't care about any law and the peel it off my dead hands crowd still owning them.Personally I would feel safer with my own protection but toally get where you're coming from but in reality think that is a longshot to ever be implemented.

I think the more likely to happen is stricter laws to limit sales,better background checks and to close to loopholes as have been discussed here.

And even that going down I highly doubt simply because of my lack of faith in the government doing anything right.

 

[General Tso]

Greetings from Ground Zero here in CT. Been out and about all day, and all I can say is that the game has changed. This "gun control debate" isn't going to be much of a debate anymore if it is shown that the Bushmaster was used extensively during this shooting. The police got to the scene quickly. It sounds like the killer fired a ton of bullets during this brief rampage. Children shot 3-10 times!!!! The Mom had 6 guns.

I for one am getting more outraged at the minute. If all this is true the NRA is going to have blood on its hands. Mark my words, if all of the above is true then you are going to see substantial gun control reform. The scenario that just played out is the NRA's worst nightmare.

 

[Sammy3469]

Lot of good the mom's guns did in protecting her.

How about this for an easy start, make gun owners culpable for someone else committing crimes with their guns. And before you say, no way, bar and restaurant owners are culpable for over serving alcohol.

 

[sporthenry]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_stateWhy is that?I'll hang up and listen.

http://apt46.net/2011/12/13/correlation-is-not-causation/And babies named Ava caused the housing bubble.

So you're saying that state gun laws have nothing to do with the gun murder rate?Please stop trying to be cute and say what you mean.

I'm saying correlation doesn't imply causation. Gun violence has as much if not more to do with other variables like poverty and socioeconomic backgrounds so it isn't fair to just use more guns, less crime. http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/

Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).

 

[eoMMan]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_stateWhy is that?I'll hang up and listen.

Couldn't possibly be because there are lots of other variables involved right?

Of course. You mean like people not committing murders with guns because they think someone else might be armed? I agree. Good point.

So I'm not going to shoot someone in South Dakota for fear they have a gun. But I'm going to go in the middle of Chicago or New York or Philly and shoot someone b/c nobody in New York or Chicago has a gun? When we've already proven that gun violence is high in these cities, so I should know that odds are people have guns? Now I'm just confused.

Yes, if you know that someone could have a gun, you will be less likely to pull our yours. It doesn't take a brainiac to figure that one out.And you didn't prove anything.

 

[eoMMan]

Lot of good the mom's guns did in protecting her.How about this for an easy start, make gun owners culpable for someone else committing crimes with their guns. And before you say, no way, bar and restaurant owners are culpable for over serving alcohol.

Good idea, but it doesn't mean much if the original gun owner is now dead at the hands of their own guns.

 

[Mr Two Cents]

I don't get why people are taking a position of regulating use of guns. Problem is that as soon as you forbid certain types of guns, manufacturers tweak designs to skirt the law.

I don't see a middle ground here. Ban them completely.

Putting aside the 2nd Amendment issue, and also the even larger issue of whether or not it would benefit society to ban all private guns- it's impossible to do so. It's a logistical impossibility, as ridiculous as the proposals to arrest and deport 12 million illegal immigrants. It's pointless to even discuss it.

How is it impossible to ban private guns? Repeal the Second Amendment...voila...private guns are banned.

Exactly how dense are you? It requires two/thirds of both federal legislative bodies -- House and Senate -- to vote in the affirmative (two/thirds in the House, two/thirds in the Senate). It also requires two/thirds of the state legislatures of the 50 states to vote in the affirmative.

It will not happen, period.

 

[shader]

Greetings from Ground Zero here in CT. Been out and about all day, and all I can say is that the game has changed. This "gun control debate" isn't going to be much of a debate anymore if it is shown that the Bushmaster was used extensively during this shooting. The police got to the scene quickly. It sounds like the killer fired a ton of bullets during this brief rampage. Children shot 3-10 times!!!! The Mom had 6 guns.I for one am getting more outraged at the minute. If all this is true the NRA is going to have blood on its hands. Mark my words, if all of the above is true then you are going to see substantial gun control reform. The scenario that just played out is the NRA's worst nightmare.

Yes I agree this is a game changer.Reminds me of the 1996 school massacre in Dunblane, Scotland where 16 kids were killed.In 1997, two amendments were passed in The UK effectively banning handguns.http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre

 

[General Tso]

Bushmaster - capable of holding TWO 30 round magazines. The weapon is legal and NOT banned either federally or in CT.

Can we all agree that this type of weapon needs to be banned? Is anyone in here insane enough to argue for the continued sale of these weapons?

 

[BassNBrew]

Lot of good the mom's guns did in protecting her.How about this for an easy start, make gun owners culpable for someone else committing crimes with their guns. And before you say, no way, bar and restaurant owners are culpable for over serving alcohol.

Yes/NoI shouldn't have to secure a firearm from a criminal or adult anymore than bar owner should never serve a drink to someone driving. I can get on board with securing them around kids or regulating private sales better.

 

[eoMMan]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_stateWhy is that?I'll hang up and listen.

http://apt46.net/2011/12/13/correlation-is-not-causation/And babies named Ava caused the housing bubble.

So you're saying that state gun laws have nothing to do with the gun murder rate?Please stop trying to be cute and say what you mean.

I'm saying correlation doesn't imply causation. Gun violence has as much if not more to do with other variables like poverty and socioeconomic backgrounds so it isn't fair to just use more guns, less crime. http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/

Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).

Did you read the comments on your link?

 

[Mr Two Cents]

Greetings from Ground Zero here in CT. Been out and about all day, and all I can say is that the game has changed. This "gun control debate" isn't going to be much of a debate anymore if it is shown that the Bushmaster was used extensively during this shooting. The police got to the scene quickly. It sounds like the killer fired a ton of bullets during this brief rampage. Children shot 3-10 times!!!! The Mom had 6 guns.I for one am getting more outraged at the minute. If all this is true the NRA is going to have blood on its hands. Mark my words, if all of the above is true then you are going to see substantial gun control reform. The scenario that just played out is the NRA's worst nightmare.

Keep dreaming.

 

[shader]

Bushmaster - capable of holding TWO 30 round magazines. The weapon is legal and NOT banned either federally or in CT.Can we all agree that this type of weapon needs to be banned? Is anyone in here insane enough to argue for the continued sale of these weapons?

I agree what is the point? If you are hunting deer you only get a shot or two in and the deer are gone. Why would anyone need that much ammo?

 

[sporthenry]

I think we all agree that Texas and Florida have some of the loosest gun laws around, right?Well, look at these stats from 2004 (couldn't find any other years).According to this, there were 13 states, that we can assume have tougher gun laws, that has more gun homicides.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_stateWhy is that?I'll hang up and listen.

Couldn't possibly be because there are lots of other variables involved right?

Of course. You mean like people not committing murders with guns because they think someone else might be armed? I agree. Good point.

So I'm not going to shoot someone in South Dakota for fear they have a gun. But I'm going to go in the middle of Chicago or New York or Philly and shoot someone b/c nobody in New York or Chicago has a gun? When we've already proven that gun violence is high in these cities, so I should know that odds are people have guns? Now I'm just confused.

Yes, if you know that someone could have a gun, you will be less likely to pull our yours. It doesn't take a brainiac to figure that one out.And you didn't prove anything.

I thought one of your arguments is that places with high gun restrictions have high gun violence. Didn't we establish earlier that Chicago's gun violence rate is high despite all the laws. So knowing these gun statistics, wouldn't it be prudent to think that these individuals probably have a gun, knowing the high gun violence rate? And then I also thought a common refrain was that someone who was going to commit a crime with a gun was going to do so regardless of whether they could obtain a gun? I believe I saw this argument many times. So knowing that, why would it matter whether the other person was carrying, they were going to commit a crime and nothing was going to stop them. Or is that what was going to stop them?

 

[Sammy3469]

Lot of good the mom's guns did in protecting her.How about this for an easy start, make gun owners culpable for someone else committing crimes with their guns. And before you say, no way, bar and restaurant owners are culpable for over serving alcohol.

Yes/NoI shouldn't have to secure a firearm from a criminal or adult anymore than bar owner should never serve a drink to someone driving. I can get on board with securing them around kids or regulating private sales better.

Well owning the gun is a right, securing it can be made law...and those bartenders should be culpable.

 

[BassNBrew]

Greetings from Ground Zero here in CT. Been out and about all day, and all I can say is that the game has changed. This "gun control debate" isn't going to be much of a debate anymore if it is shown that the Bushmaster was used extensively during this shooting. The police got to the scene quickly. It sounds like the killer fired a ton of bullets during this brief rampage. Children shot 3-10 times!!!! The Mom had 6 guns.I for one am getting more outraged at the minute. If all this is true the NRA is going to have blood on its hands. Mark my words, if all of the above is true then you are going to see substantial gun control reform. The scenario that just played out is the NRA's worst nightmare.

Actually your wrong on all accounts in the second paragraph. 47% of Americans own a gun, heavily in the moderate to independant groups. Gun control debate getting fired up is the NRA's best dream...it increase membership.

 

[General Tso]

Greetings from Ground Zero here in CT. Been out and about all day, and all I can say is that the game has changed. This "gun control debate" isn't going to be much of a debate anymore if it is shown that the Bushmaster was used extensively during this shooting. The police got to the scene quickly. It sounds like the killer fired a ton of bullets during this brief rampage. Children shot 3-10 times!!!! The Mom had 6 guns.I for one am getting more outraged at the minute. If all this is true the NRA is going to have blood on its hands. Mark my words, if all of the above is true then you are going to see substantial gun control reform. The scenario that just played out is the NRA's worst nightmare.

Keep dreaming.

Your precious Bushmaster is going bye bye my friend. Right to hell. With the likes of all the people who have supported it over the years.

 

[BassNBrew]

Lot of good the mom's guns did in protecting her.How about this for an easy start, make gun owners culpable for someone else committing crimes with their guns. And before you say, no way, bar and restaurant owners are culpable for over serving alcohol.

Yes/NoI shouldn't have to secure a firearm from a criminal or adult anymore than bar owner should never serve a drink to someone driving. I can get on board with securing them around kids or regulating private sales better.

Well owning the gun is a right, securing it can be made law...and those bartenders should be culpable.

We may have different definitions of secure.The later won't play out because the alcohol and bar lobby is bigger than the gun lobby.

 

[Abraham]

Greetings from Ground Zero here in CT. Been out and about all day, and all I can say is that the game has changed. This "gun control debate" isn't going to be much of a debate anymore if it is shown that the Bushmaster was used extensively during this shooting. The police got to the scene quickly. It sounds like the killer fired a ton of bullets during this brief rampage. Children shot 3-10 times!!!! The Mom had 6 guns.I for one am getting more outraged at the minute. If all this is true the NRA is going to have blood on its hands. Mark my words, if all of the above is true then you are going to see substantial gun control reform. The scenario that just played out is the NRA's worst nightmare.

Actually your wrong on all accounts in the second paragraph. 47% of Americans own a gun, heavily in the moderate to independant groups. Gun control debate getting fired up is the NRA's best dream...it increase membership.

Gallup in July reported that less than 1/3 of households owned a gun. Not sure where you see 47%

 

[BassNBrew]

Greetings from Ground Zero here in CT. Been out and about all day, and all I can say is that the game has changed. This "gun control debate" isn't going to be much of a debate anymore if it is shown that the Bushmaster was used extensively during this shooting. The police got to the scene quickly. It sounds like the killer fired a ton of bullets during this brief rampage. Children shot 3-10 times!!!! The Mom had 6 guns.I for one am getting more outraged at the minute. If all this is true the NRA is going to have blood on its hands. Mark my words, if all of the above is true then you are going to see substantial gun control reform. The scenario that just played out is the NRA's worst nightmare.

Keep dreaming.

Your precious Bushmaster is going bye bye my friend. Right to hell. With the likes of all the people who have supported it over the years.

Looky here...a liberal Mike Huckabee

 

[Mr Two Cents]

Bushmaster - capable of holding TWO 30 round magazines. The weapon is legal and NOT banned either federally or in CT.

Can we all agree that this type of weapon needs to be banned? Is anyone in here insane enough to argue for the continued sale of these weapons?

No we cannot agree, any AR15 or AK47 has 30 round clips.

Normally stressed in this amendment are the two obvious assertions: 1. We possess "the right to keep and bear arms" and, 2. That right "shall not be infringed." But of crucial importance is the fact that this amendment is the only one which protects a right our Founders considered "necessary to the security of a free state."

Obvious implications: No armed citizenry = no free state.

This is why the Founders made this amendment so difficult to change or eliminate. Therefore, although it can be changed, the requirements for doing so are near herculean, especially in our day.

 

[BassNBrew]

Greetings from Ground Zero here in CT. Been out and about all day, and all I can say is that the game has changed. This "gun control debate" isn't going to be much of a debate anymore if it is shown that the Bushmaster was used extensively during this shooting. The police got to the scene quickly. It sounds like the killer fired a ton of bullets during this brief rampage. Children shot 3-10 times!!!! The Mom had 6 guns.I for one am getting more outraged at the minute. If all this is true the NRA is going to have blood on its hands. Mark my words, if all of the above is true then you are going to see substantial gun control reform. The scenario that just played out is the NRA's worst nightmare.

Actually your wrong on all accounts in the second paragraph. 47% of Americans own a gun, heavily in the moderate to independant groups. Gun control debate getting fired up is the NRA's best dream...it increase membership.

Gallup in July reported that less than 1/3 of households owned a gun. Not sure where you see 47%

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/self-reported-gun-ownership-highest-1993.aspx