***OFFICIAL GUN CONTROL DEBATE*** (5 Viewers)

[Ursa M]

BTW, I think Wayne LaPierre would probably refuse an invitation to the White House. IIRC, he is a Birther.

Automatic disqualification from being taken in any way seriously.

 

[Otis]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

It would help if people would give them up. Look at the stats in the UK since they banned guns.

This seems pretty much indisputable to me, but the guys in here who like guns refuse to acknowledge it as an option. Why? Just because they like guns?

 

[Glass Joe]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

Responsible gun owner? Are you ####### kidding me??? Fact - she had an emotionally ill child with a history of anti social behavior, and perhaps even violent tendencies. And she keeps within his reach a Bushmaster which by design is not for home protection, but for mass murder. Responsible??? Give me a ####### break. This is exactly why we need more gun control. This was preventable. If he just brings the handguns to school maybe he only kills 10 kids instead of 10.The only good thing to come out of this horrible tragedy is that we have one less "gun enthusiast" to worry about.

If she was responsible she wouldn't have owned any guns, knowing her son.

 

[General Tso]

I think it's terrible, overblown rhetoric to say that the NRA has "blood on their hands". I disagree with the NRA more often than not, and at times I find their positions to be a product of absurd paranoia. But they didn't kill those children.

They absolutely have blood on their hands.they have had their way in this country for the last 200 years and their policies have failed miserably. They faught like hell to keep weapons like the Bushmaster legal. And that weapon was just used by a mentally ill person to kill 20 children.

 

[sporthenry]

What mature solutions have we developed so far? 30 pages, we've got to have something....

Here are a few that maybe should be on the table:No private sales

Licensing and periodic renewal

Mandated gun safes / trigger locks with severe penalties for violation

There are others but all these have been floated

These sound like a reasonable starting point. 1and 3seem fair. 2 would need to be tested to see if licensing would be worth all the added red tape.

Yeah, do everything to get rid of the gun show loophole. Probably redo the AWB and ban all guns not needed for hunting/self protection. Add in either a mental health check or at t he very least, a black flag if a guy has a mental health history. Many other countries have mandatory classes on guns. I'd add a bit more to the idea of gun safe/trigger lock that you are held liable if you are negligent with your gun. I.e. if someone breaks into your safe, not your fault. If you leave your gun in a closet and a friend takes it, you are held liable. Also mandatory gun tracing/tracking and wherever the paperwork stops, that is where some of the buck should stop.

Re: the bolded, it would not have helped in this situation. And I suspect in many situations.

I understand that. As Obama said, there is no way to ensure that every tragedy doesn't happen. But adding in a gun safe and a ban on assault weapons would have also gone very far to stop this. I said I wasn't getting much into the mental health side of things but I think that also needs to be talked about, in light of the Anarchist Soccer Mom's blog, that we need to have a place to send these mentally disturbed before they commit crimes.

It's not so much the mental health aspect I have a problem with, it's the focus on the gun owner as an applicant. I guess it can't hurt, but in so many of these situations it's not the gun owner who did the shooting. Everyone else in that household often has access (as was the case here), and that seems to be frequently where there is a problem. So all this application stuff doesn't do much. It's fine, and I think we need to do it, but we just need to keep in mind the limitations.

That would be where requiring gun safes or trigger locks would come into play. Additionally, banning assault weapons would also be a step in the right direction. I would also do something about the amount of guns one can obtain before raising a flag in the system. After a certain point, I would think you should have to prove a need for another gun. Perhaps if this kid doesn't have a sig sauer rifle and a shot gun, he doesn't feel as empowered to do this? Or perhaps it is even one death less effective? I just don't see how anyone can argue for assault weapons or even the mass acquiring of guns. Do they need 5 guns? 10 guns? 15 guns?

 

[eoMMan]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

Responsible gun owner? Are you ####### kidding me??? Fact - she had an emotionally ill child with a history of anti social behavior, and perhaps even violent tendencies. And she keeps within his reach a Bushmaster which by design is not for home protection, but for mass murder. Responsible??? Give me a ####### break. This is exactly why we need more gun control. This was preventable. If he just brings the handguns to school maybe he only kills 10 kids instead of 10.The only good thing to come out of this horrible tragedy is that we have one less "gun enthusiast" to worry about.

Remember the VA Tech shootings? Remember what guns were used there and how many people died?And how wasn't she a responsible gun owner? You can obviously make a case of her being an unfit parent in regards to not paying attention to her son's "signs" but she had the guns legally and tried to educate her sons about them.

 

[Glass Joe]

Is a definition of assault weapons as automatic and semi-automatic a reasonable one?

 

[Otis]

What mature solutions have we developed so far? 30 pages, we've got to have something....

Here are a few that maybe should be on the table:No private sales

Licensing and periodic renewal

Mandated gun safes / trigger locks with severe penalties for violation

There are others but all these have been floated

These sound like a reasonable starting point. 1and 3seem fair. 2 would need to be tested to see if licensing would be worth all the added red tape.

Yeah, do everything to get rid of the gun show loophole. Probably redo the AWB and ban all guns not needed for hunting/self protection. Add in either a mental health check or at t he very least, a black flag if a guy has a mental health history. Many other countries have mandatory classes on guns. I'd add a bit more to the idea of gun safe/trigger lock that you are held liable if you are negligent with your gun. I.e. if someone breaks into your safe, not your fault. If you leave your gun in a closet and a friend takes it, you are held liable. Also mandatory gun tracing/tracking and wherever the paperwork stops, that is where some of the buck should stop.

Re: the bolded, it would not have helped in this situation. And I suspect in many situations.

I understand that. As Obama said, there is no way to ensure that every tragedy doesn't happen. But adding in a gun safe and a ban on assault weapons would have also gone very far to stop this. I said I wasn't getting much into the mental health side of things but I think that also needs to be talked about, in light of the Anarchist Soccer Mom's blog, that we need to have a place to send these mentally disturbed before they commit crimes.

It's not so much the mental health aspect I have a problem with, it's the focus on the gun owner as an applicant. I guess it can't hurt, but in so many of these situations it's not the gun owner who did the shooting. Everyone else in that household often has access (as was the case here), and that seems to be frequently where there is a problem. So all this application stuff doesn't do much. It's fine, and I think we need to do it, but we just need to keep in mind the limitations.

That would be where requiring gun safes or trigger locks would come into play. Additionally, banning assault weapons would also be a step in the right direction. I would also do something about the amount of guns one can obtain before raising a flag in the system. After a certain point, I would think you should have to prove a need for another gun. Perhaps if this kid doesn't have a sig sauer rifle and a shot gun, he doesn't feel as empowered to do this? Or perhaps it is even one death less effective? I just don't see how anyone can argue for assault weapons or even the mass acquiring of guns. Do they need 5 guns? 10 guns? 15 guns?

Re: the bolded, there's no "need" for the first gun. These guys acquire arsenals of these things. One isn't enough. Take a look at the gun nerd thread in this very forum for some insight into what this culture is like. I was considering buying a gun a year or two ago and made some posts in there and read it. It's a little loony.

 

[Otis]

Is a definition of assault weapons as automatic and semi-automatic a reasonable one?

I think so. You don't need those capabilities to hunt, unless you're looking to hunt large quantities of human beings.

 

[eoMMan]

What mature solutions have we developed so far? 30 pages, we've got to have something....

Here are a few that maybe should be on the table:No private sales

Licensing and periodic renewal

Mandated gun safes / trigger locks with severe penalties for violation

There are others but all these have been floated

These sound like a reasonable starting point. 1and 3seem fair. 2 would need to be tested to see if licensing would be worth all the added red tape.

Yeah, do everything to get rid of the gun show loophole. Probably redo the AWB and ban all guns not needed for hunting/self protection. Add in either a mental health check or at t he very least, a black flag if a guy has a mental health history. Many other countries have mandatory classes on guns. I'd add a bit more to the idea of gun safe/trigger lock that you are held liable if you are negligent with your gun. I.e. if someone breaks into your safe, not your fault. If you leave your gun in a closet and a friend takes it, you are held liable. Also mandatory gun tracing/tracking and wherever the paperwork stops, that is where some of the buck should stop.

Re: the bolded, it would not have helped in this situation. And I suspect in many situations.

I understand that. As Obama said, there is no way to ensure that every tragedy doesn't happen. But adding in a gun safe and a ban on assault weapons would have also gone very far to stop this. I said I wasn't getting much into the mental health side of things but I think that also needs to be talked about, in light of the Anarchist Soccer Mom's blog, that we need to have a place to send these mentally disturbed before they commit crimes.

It's not so much the mental health aspect I have a problem with, it's the focus on the gun owner as an applicant. I guess it can't hurt, but in so many of these situations it's not the gun owner who did the shooting. Everyone else in that household often has access (as was the case here), and that seems to be frequently where there is a problem. So all this application stuff doesn't do much. It's fine, and I think we need to do it, but we just need to keep in mind the limitations.

That would be where requiring gun safes or trigger locks would come into play. Additionally, banning assault weapons would also be a step in the right direction. I would also do something about the amount of guns one can obtain before raising a flag in the system. After a certain point, I would think you should have to prove a need for another gun. Perhaps if this kid doesn't have a sig sauer rifle and a shot gun, he doesn't feel as empowered to do this? Or perhaps it is even one death less effective? I just don't see how anyone can argue for assault weapons or even the mass acquiring of guns. Do they need 5 guns? 10 guns? 15 guns?

Re: the bolded, there's no "need" for the first gun. These guys acquire arsenals of these things. One isn't enough. Take a look at the gun nerd thread in this very forum for some insight into what this culture is like. I was considering buying a gun a year or two ago and made some posts in there and read it. It's a little loony.

Home protection, hunting, etc. aren't good enough reasons for you?

 

[General Malaise]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

It would help if people would give them up. Look at the stats in the UK since they banned guns.

This seems pretty much indisputable to me, but the guys in here who like guns refuse to acknowledge it as an option. Why? Just because they like guns?

Because that's what they think they're supposed to say. It's right wing vs. left wing manifested in another debatable topic. The guys who want to keep things the way they are currently are told to hold that view sacred as a 'right'. I bet half of them don't even own guns. They just want to walk the party line. It's what they are told to do.

 

[General Malaise]

What mature solutions have we developed so far? 30 pages, we've got to have something....

Here are a few that maybe should be on the table:No private sales

Licensing and periodic renewal

Mandated gun safes / trigger locks with severe penalties for violation

There are others but all these have been floated

These sound like a reasonable starting point. 1and 3seem fair. 2 would need to be tested to see if licensing would be worth all the added red tape.

Yeah, do everything to get rid of the gun show loophole. Probably redo the AWB and ban all guns not needed for hunting/self protection. Add in either a mental health check or at t he very least, a black flag if a guy has a mental health history. Many other countries have mandatory classes on guns. I'd add a bit more to the idea of gun safe/trigger lock that you are held liable if you are negligent with your gun. I.e. if someone breaks into your safe, not your fault. If you leave your gun in a closet and a friend takes it, you are held liable. Also mandatory gun tracing/tracking and wherever the paperwork stops, that is where some of the buck should stop.

Re: the bolded, it would not have helped in this situation. And I suspect in many situations.

I understand that. As Obama said, there is no way to ensure that every tragedy doesn't happen. But adding in a gun safe and a ban on assault weapons would have also gone very far to stop this. I said I wasn't getting much into the mental health side of things but I think that also needs to be talked about, in light of the Anarchist Soccer Mom's blog, that we need to have a place to send these mentally disturbed before they commit crimes.

It's not so much the mental health aspect I have a problem with, it's the focus on the gun owner as an applicant. I guess it can't hurt, but in so many of these situations it's not the gun owner who did the shooting. Everyone else in that household often has access (as was the case here), and that seems to be frequently where there is a problem. So all this application stuff doesn't do much. It's fine, and I think we need to do it, but we just need to keep in mind the limitations.

That would be where requiring gun safes or trigger locks would come into play. Additionally, banning assault weapons would also be a step in the right direction. I would also do something about the amount of guns one can obtain before raising a flag in the system. After a certain point, I would think you should have to prove a need for another gun. Perhaps if this kid doesn't have a sig sauer rifle and a shot gun, he doesn't feel as empowered to do this? Or perhaps it is even one death less effective? I just don't see how anyone can argue for assault weapons or even the mass acquiring of guns. Do they need 5 guns? 10 guns? 15 guns?

Re: the bolded, there's no "need" for the first gun. These guys acquire arsenals of these things. One isn't enough. Take a look at the gun nerd thread in this very forum for some insight into what this culture is like. I was considering buying a gun a year or two ago and made some posts in there and read it. It's a little loony.

Home protection, hunting, etc. aren't good enough reasons for you?

How many times have you needed your gun for home protection. Be honest.

 

[Otis]

What mature solutions have we developed so far? 30 pages, we've got to have something....

Here are a few that maybe should be on the table:No private sales

Licensing and periodic renewal

Mandated gun safes / trigger locks with severe penalties for violation

There are others but all these have been floated

These sound like a reasonable starting point. 1and 3seem fair. 2 would need to be tested to see if licensing would be worth all the added red tape.

Yeah, do everything to get rid of the gun show loophole. Probably redo the AWB and ban all guns not needed for hunting/self protection. Add in either a mental health check or at t he very least, a black flag if a guy has a mental health history. Many other countries have mandatory classes on guns. I'd add a bit more to the idea of gun safe/trigger lock that you are held liable if you are negligent with your gun. I.e. if someone breaks into your safe, not your fault. If you leave your gun in a closet and a friend takes it, you are held liable. Also mandatory gun tracing/tracking and wherever the paperwork stops, that is where some of the buck should stop.

Re: the bolded, it would not have helped in this situation. And I suspect in many situations.

I understand that. As Obama said, there is no way to ensure that every tragedy doesn't happen. But adding in a gun safe and a ban on assault weapons would have also gone very far to stop this. I said I wasn't getting much into the mental health side of things but I think that also needs to be talked about, in light of the Anarchist Soccer Mom's blog, that we need to have a place to send these mentally disturbed before they commit crimes.

It's not so much the mental health aspect I have a problem with, it's the focus on the gun owner as an applicant. I guess it can't hurt, but in so many of these situations it's not the gun owner who did the shooting. Everyone else in that household often has access (as was the case here), and that seems to be frequently where there is a problem. So all this application stuff doesn't do much. It's fine, and I think we need to do it, but we just need to keep in mind the limitations.

That would be where requiring gun safes or trigger locks would come into play. Additionally, banning assault weapons would also be a step in the right direction. I would also do something about the amount of guns one can obtain before raising a flag in the system. After a certain point, I would think you should have to prove a need for another gun. Perhaps if this kid doesn't have a sig sauer rifle and a shot gun, he doesn't feel as empowered to do this? Or perhaps it is even one death less effective? I just don't see how anyone can argue for assault weapons or even the mass acquiring of guns. Do they need 5 guns? 10 guns? 15 guns?

Re: the bolded, there's no "need" for the first gun. These guys acquire arsenals of these things. One isn't enough. Take a look at the gun nerd thread in this very forum for some insight into what this culture is like. I was considering buying a gun a year or two ago and made some posts in there and read it. It's a little loony.

Home protection, hunting, etc. aren't good enough reasons for you?

When the counter-balance is the potential slaughter of innocents? No, no they aren't.Re: hunting, I already said I think it's sensible to allow hunting rifles.

 

[General Tso]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

Responsible gun owner? Are you ####### kidding me??? Fact - she had an emotionally ill child with a history of anti social behavior, and perhaps even violent tendencies. And she keeps within his reach a Bushmaster which by design is not for home protection, but for mass murder. Responsible??? Give me a ####### break. This is exactly why we need more gun control. This was preventable. If he just brings the handguns to school maybe he only kills 10 kids instead of 10.The only good thing to come out of this horrible tragedy is that we have one less "gun enthusiast" to worry about.

Remember the VA Tech shootings? Remember what guns were used there and how many people died?And how wasn't she a responsible gun owner? You can obviously make a case of her being an unfit parent in regards to not paying attention to her son's "signs" but she had the guns legally and tried to educate her sons about them.

Are you ####### kidding me? Are you really that dense? You think someone can be a responsible gun owner keeping a Bushmaster around a mentally ill child with anti social behavior and Aspurger's syndrome? I can't believe what I'm hearing in here.

 

[Otis]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

Responsible gun owner? Are you ####### kidding me??? Fact - she had an emotionally ill child with a history of anti social behavior, and perhaps even violent tendencies. And she keeps within his reach a Bushmaster which by design is not for home protection, but for mass murder. Responsible??? Give me a ####### break. This is exactly why we need more gun control. This was preventable. If he just brings the handguns to school maybe he only kills 10 kids instead of 10.The only good thing to come out of this horrible tragedy is that we have one less "gun enthusiast" to worry about.

Remember the VA Tech shootings? Remember what guns were used there and how many people died?And how wasn't she a responsible gun owner? You can obviously make a case of her being an unfit parent in regards to not paying attention to her son's "signs" but she had the guns legally and tried to educate her sons about them.

Are you ####### kidding me? Are you really that dense? You think someone can be a responsible gun owner keeping a Bushmaster around a mentally ill child with anti social behavior and Aspurger's syndrome? I can't believe what I'm hearing in here.

Go back and read this thread from page 1. Your mind will be totally blown.

 

[cobalt_27]

I think it's terrible, overblown rhetoric to say that the NRA has "blood on their hands". I disagree with the NRA more often than not, and at times I find their positions to be a product of absurd paranoia. But they didn't kill those children.

They didn't directly kill those kids. They advocate for and pay huge money to create the culture and widespread availability of killing instruments. They pay money to finance legislative attempts to prohibit doctors and psychologists like myself to ask about guns in the home. Yes, without a doubt, it is my strong belief that the NRA has blood on its hands.

 

[eoMMan]

What mature solutions have we developed so far? 30 pages, we've got to have something....

Here are a few that maybe should be on the table:No private sales

Licensing and periodic renewal

Mandated gun safes / trigger locks with severe penalties for violation

There are others but all these have been floated

These sound like a reasonable starting point. 1and 3seem fair. 2 would need to be tested to see if licensing would be worth all the added red tape.

Yeah, do everything to get rid of the gun show loophole. Probably redo the AWB and ban all guns not needed for hunting/self protection. Add in either a mental health check or at t he very least, a black flag if a guy has a mental health history. Many other countries have mandatory classes on guns. I'd add a bit more to the idea of gun safe/trigger lock that you are held liable if you are negligent with your gun. I.e. if someone breaks into your safe, not your fault. If you leave your gun in a closet and a friend takes it, you are held liable. Also mandatory gun tracing/tracking and wherever the paperwork stops, that is where some of the buck should stop.

Re: the bolded, it would not have helped in this situation. And I suspect in many situations.

I understand that. As Obama said, there is no way to ensure that every tragedy doesn't happen. But adding in a gun safe and a ban on assault weapons would have also gone very far to stop this. I said I wasn't getting much into the mental health side of things but I think that also needs to be talked about, in light of the Anarchist Soccer Mom's blog, that we need to have a place to send these mentally disturbed before they commit crimes.

It's not so much the mental health aspect I have a problem with, it's the focus on the gun owner as an applicant. I guess it can't hurt, but in so many of these situations it's not the gun owner who did the shooting. Everyone else in that household often has access (as was the case here), and that seems to be frequently where there is a problem. So all this application stuff doesn't do much. It's fine, and I think we need to do it, but we just need to keep in mind the limitations.

That would be where requiring gun safes or trigger locks would come into play. Additionally, banning assault weapons would also be a step in the right direction. I would also do something about the amount of guns one can obtain before raising a flag in the system. After a certain point, I would think you should have to prove a need for another gun. Perhaps if this kid doesn't have a sig sauer rifle and a shot gun, he doesn't feel as empowered to do this? Or perhaps it is even one death less effective? I just don't see how anyone can argue for assault weapons or even the mass acquiring of guns. Do they need 5 guns? 10 guns? 15 guns?

How many times have you needed your gun for home protection. Be honest.

Haven't used it. My bucket over the door ala Home Alone has worked great so far.Serious answer, never had to use it for home protection. And that's a good thing.....just like it's a good thing that I have it in case.

 

[Otis]

I really enjoy playing my guitar. And if one day, I learned that a guitar was actually a secret killing machine, and was being used to slaughter children, and the president therefore decided to outlaw guitars, I'd be the first one to pack them in my trunk and drive them down to the local police station.

This debate boggles the mind.

 

[John Bender]

Wow. When did Otis go from a cool dude to one of the political crazies?

 

[eoMMan]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

Responsible gun owner? Are you ####### kidding me??? Fact - she had an emotionally ill child with a history of anti social behavior, and perhaps even violent tendencies. And she keeps within his reach a Bushmaster which by design is not for home protection, but for mass murder. Responsible??? Give me a ####### break. This is exactly why we need more gun control. This was preventable. If he just brings the handguns to school maybe he only kills 10 kids instead of 10.The only good thing to come out of this horrible tragedy is that we have one less "gun enthusiast" to worry about.

Remember the VA Tech shootings? Remember what guns were used there and how many people died?And how wasn't she a responsible gun owner? You can obviously make a case of her being an unfit parent in regards to not paying attention to her son's "signs" but she had the guns legally and tried to educate her sons about them.

Are you ####### kidding me? Are you really that dense? You think someone can be a responsible gun owner keeping a Bushmaster around a mentally ill child with anti social behavior and Aspurger's syndrome? I can't believe what I'm hearing in here.

It was handguns. The VA Tech ahole killed a bunch of people with handguns, not a Bushmaster.

 

[Otis]

Are you ####### kidding me? Are you really that dense? You think someone can be a responsible gun owner keeping a Bushmaster around a mentally ill child with anti social behavior and Aspurger's syndrome? I can't believe what I'm hearing in here.

I would have to say that the woman who bought the guns that were just used in a mass slaughter of elementary school students is probably about the least responsible gun owner in the whole damn nation. And currently it isn't close.

Pro -- interesting to see you in here and also in the gun buyer thread talking about the new guns you are buying. Not a knock, but it would be interesting to learn that a guy who is interested in guns as a hobby still has the sense to understand and better yet support the other side in this.

 

[John Bender]

I really enjoy playing my guitar. And if one day, I learned that a guitar was actually a secret killing machine, and was being used to slaughter children, and the president therefore decided to outlaw guitars, I'd be the first one to pack them in my trunk and drive them down to the local police station. This debate boggles the mind.

You'll get nowhere. I'm amazed you're still in here. You aren't going to change anyone's mind; are you just bored? You're better than this GB

 

[eoMMan]

Wow. When did Otis go from a cool dude to one of the political crazies?

I know, right?He's acting like a mega dork in this thread with his ools and OMG.

 

[John Bender]

Wow. When did Otis go from a cool dude to one of the political crazies?

I know, right?He's acting like a mega dork in this thread with his ools and OMG.

JFC. What a total nerd.Member name PostsOtis  177BassNBrew  90sporthenry  84Rayderr  77Apple Jack  47ATC1 

 

[Otis]

Wow. When did Otis go from a cool dude to one of the political crazies?

I'm not even a little bit political. Politics bore the crap out of me and I could usually care less (other than when fools were willing to pay me money because they believed Romney could win).This is about dead children. I'm not very interested in politics, but as a father this kind of thing hits home. There is very little in this forum I've taken seriously over the years. It's just horrifying how people care so much more about their hobbies and their politics than about dead children.

 

[cobalt_27]

What mature solutions have we developed so far? 30 pages, we've got to have something....

Here are a few that maybe should be on the table:No private sales

Licensing and periodic renewal

Mandated gun safes / trigger locks with severe penalties for violation

There are others but all these have been floated

These sound like a reasonable starting point. 1and 3seem fair. 2 would need to be tested to see if licensing would be worth all the added red tape.

Yeah, do everything to get rid of the gun show loophole. Probably redo the AWB and ban all guns not needed for hunting/self protection. Add in either a mental health check or at t he very least, a black flag if a guy has a mental health history. Many other countries have mandatory classes on guns. I'd add a bit more to the idea of gun safe/trigger lock that you are held liable if you are negligent with your gun. I.e. if someone breaks into your safe, not your fault. If you leave your gun in a closet and a friend takes it, you are held liable. Also mandatory gun tracing/tracking and wherever the paperwork stops, that is where some of the buck should stop.

Re: the bolded, it would not have helped in this situation. And I suspect in many situations.

I understand that. As Obama said, there is no way to ensure that every tragedy doesn't happen. But adding in a gun safe and a ban on assault weapons would have also gone very far to stop this. I said I wasn't getting much into the mental health side of things but I think that also needs to be talked about, in light of the Anarchist Soccer Mom's blog, that we need to have a place to send these mentally disturbed before they commit crimes.

It's not so much the mental health aspect I have a problem with, it's the focus on the gun owner as an applicant. I guess it can't hurt, but in so many of these situations it's not the gun owner who did the shooting. Everyone else in that household often has access (as was the case here), and that seems to be frequently where there is a problem. So all this application stuff doesn't do much. It's fine, and I think we need to do it, but we just need to keep in mind the limitations.

That would be where requiring gun safes or trigger locks would come into play. Additionally, banning assault weapons would also be a step in the right direction. I would also do something about the amount of guns one can obtain before raising a flag in the system. After a certain point, I would think you should have to prove a need for another gun. Perhaps if this kid doesn't have a sig sauer rifle and a shot gun, he doesn't feel as empowered to do this? Or perhaps it is even one death less effective? I just don't see how anyone can argue for assault weapons or even the mass acquiring of guns. Do they need 5 guns? 10 guns? 15 guns?

Re: the bolded, there's no "need" for the first gun. These guys acquire arsenals of these things. One isn't enough. Take a look at the gun nerd thread in this very forum for some insight into what this culture is like. I was considering buying a gun a year or two ago and made some posts in there and read it. It's a little loony.

Home protection, hunting, etc. aren't good enough reasons for you?

No. Your hobby is not worth saving at the expense of these kids that were blown up on Friday and the countless other episodes we're hearing about with more and more regularity.

 

[MaxThreshold]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

It would help if people would give them up. Look at the stats in the UK since they banned guns.

This seems pretty much indisputable to me, but the guys in here who like guns refuse to acknowledge it as an option. Why? Just because they like guns?

Because that's what they think they're supposed to say. It's right wing vs. left wing manifested in another debatable topic. The guys who want to keep things the way they are currently are told to hold that view sacred as a 'right'. I bet half of them don't even own guns. They just want to walk the party line. It's what they are told to do.

Ahh...that works both ways, y'know. You hold the line that "all guns are evil" because, well, that's what you're currently told.This is an easy game to play.

 

[Otis]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

Responsible gun owner? Are you ####### kidding me??? Fact - she had an emotionally ill child with a history of anti social behavior, and perhaps even violent tendencies. And she keeps within his reach a Bushmaster which by design is not for home protection, but for mass murder. Responsible??? Give me a ####### break. This is exactly why we need more gun control. This was preventable. If he just brings the handguns to school maybe he only kills 10 kids instead of 10.The only good thing to come out of this horrible tragedy is that we have one less "gun enthusiast" to worry about.

Remember the VA Tech shootings? Remember what guns were used there and how many people died?And how wasn't she a responsible gun owner? You can obviously make a case of her being an unfit parent in regards to not paying attention to her son's "signs" but she had the guns legally and tried to educate her sons about them.

Are you ####### kidding me? Are you really that dense? You think someone can be a responsible gun owner keeping a Bushmaster around a mentally ill child with anti social behavior and Aspurger's syndrome? I can't believe what I'm hearing in here.

It was handguns. The VA Tech ahole killed a bunch of people with handguns, not a Bushmaster.

Well by all means then, leave handguns legal. Who cared about those people.

 

[Henry Ford]

What mature solutions have we developed so far? 30 pages, we've got to have something....

At a minimum:1. Ban assault weapons. The gun hobby guys want to fight about what this means, but I say any rifles or weapons that are automatic or semi-automatic and capable of mowing down innocents the way it happened last week. I'm sure the gun folks can come up with the right definition.

Beyond that:

2. I think you really need to look at banning handguns. They're always involved in these sorts of things. It's too easy to hide them and take them anywhere. Yes, some people will be bummed they can't have their target practice hobby anymore, but they can find another hobby, and if less people are killed, that's an OK trade off. The handgun ban in England is a good model, and gun homicides are breathtakingly low.

I can see some exceptions, because an outright ban would drive the far right bonkers. Hunting rifles seem relatively unproblematic. Leave them legal but regulated.

Try it out for 5 or 10 years. Let's see what happens.

I rest my case. Next time you might want to refrain from calling someone out for saying the left wants to ban guns, and then turn around and offer up as one of your solutions a BAN ON GUNS.

You know that there are guns other than handguns, right? Like all handguns could be banned, and you'd still be able to buy guns?

 

[General Tso]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

Responsible gun owner? Are you ####### kidding me??? Fact - she had an emotionally ill child with a history of anti social behavior, and perhaps even violent tendencies. And she keeps within his reach a Bushmaster which by design is not for home protection, but for mass murder. Responsible??? Give me a ####### break. This is exactly why we need more gun control. This was preventable. If he just brings the handguns to school maybe he only kills 10 kids instead of 10.The only good thing to come out of this horrible tragedy is that we have one less "gun enthusiast" to worry about.

Remember the VA Tech shootings? Remember what guns were used there and how many people died?And how wasn't she a responsible gun owner? You can obviously make a case of her being an unfit parent in regards to not paying attention to her son's "signs" but she had the guns legally and tried to educate her sons about them.

Are you ####### kidding me? Are you really that dense? You think someone can be a responsible gun owner keeping a Bushmaster around a mentally ill child with anti social behavior and Aspurger's syndrome? I can't believe what I'm hearing in here.

It was handguns. The VA Tech ahole killed a bunch of people with handguns, not a Bushmaster.

We're not talking about VA Tech. We're talking about your statement that the mother of Adam Lanza was a "responsible gun owner". Twice.

 

[John Bender]

Wow. When did Otis go from a cool dude to one of the political crazies?

I'm not even a little bit political. Politics bore the crap out of me and I could usually care less (other than when fools were willing to pay me money because they believed Romney could win).This is about dead children. I'm not very interested in politics, but as a father this kind of thing hits home. There is very little in this forum I've taken seriously over the years. It's just horrifying how people care so much more about their hobbies and their politics than about dead children.

I know but you know how it is. I think everyone's got your opinion by now and you're incredulousness to the opinions that don't sync up with yoursGo hang out in the wagering thread for a bit and give me a turn,ARs should be banned.Ok bye,

 

[timschochet]

I think it's terrible, overblown rhetoric to say that the NRA has "blood on their hands". I disagree with the NRA more often than not, and at times I find their positions to be a product of absurd paranoia. But they didn't kill those children.

They didn't directly kill those kids. They advocate for and pay huge money to create the culture and widespread availability of killing instruments. They pay money to finance legislative attempts to prohibit doctors and psychologists like myself to ask about guns in the home. Yes, without a doubt, it is my strong belief that the NRA has blood on its hands.

I get what you're saying, but I just can't get behind it. Do you believe the NRA wants innocent people to die at the hands of a crazy with an automatic weapon?

 

[Abraham]

I think it's terrible, overblown rhetoric to say that the NRA has "blood on their hands". I disagree with the NRA more often than not, and at times I find their positions to be a product of absurd paranoia. But they didn't kill those children.

They didn't directly kill those kids. They advocate for and pay huge money to create the culture and widespread availability of killing instruments. They pay money to finance legislative attempts to prohibit doctors and psychologists like myself to ask about guns in the home. Yes, without a doubt, it is my strong belief that the NRA has blood on its hands.

I get what you're saying, but I just can't get behind it. Do you believe the NRA wants innocent people to die at the hands of a crazy with an automatic weapon?

That's what is bizarre - it's in the nra's interest for events like this to never happen. So they should be front and center in the fight to reduce gun violence.

 

[sporthenry]

I think it's terrible, overblown rhetoric to say that the NRA has "blood on their hands". I disagree with the NRA more often than not, and at times I find their positions to be a product of absurd paranoia. But they didn't kill those children.

They didn't directly kill those kids. They advocate for and pay huge money to create the culture and widespread availability of killing instruments. They pay money to finance legislative attempts to prohibit doctors and psychologists like myself to ask about guns in the home. Yes, without a doubt, it is my strong belief that the NRA has blood on its hands.

I get what you're saying, but I just can't get behind it. Do you believe the NRA wants innocent people to die at the hands of a crazy with an automatic weapon?

So they want to ban automatic weapons? And I'm less concerned with their intentions but the end result. I don't want terrorists blowing up planes, but if we get rid of any screening to flight security, I would feel that I am contributing to the cause.

 

[Otis]

Are you ####### kidding me? Are you really that dense? You think someone can be a responsible gun owner keeping a Bushmaster around a mentally ill child with anti social behavior and Aspurger's syndrome? I can't believe what I'm hearing in here.

I would have to say that the woman who bought the guns that were just used in a mass slaughter of elementary school students is probably about the least responsible gun owner in the whole damn nation. And currently it isn't close.

Pro -- interesting to see you in here and also in the gun buyer thread talking about the new guns you are buying. Not a knock, but it would be interesting to learn that a guy who is interested in guns as a hobby still has the sense to understand and better yet support the other side in this.

I like shooting every so often, it's a good time, and my wife's family is really into it. I've got a few guns, but I don't keep ammo for them in the house anymore. I will buy ammo on my way to the range, shoot them at the range, and bring them home. I enjoy guns, but I also rent rooms out in my house, and with other people living here I decided a little bit ago that I don't want loaded weapons around. Way more bad that can happen than good.I don't see any reason for assault weapons, large magazines, guns that can hold grenade launchers, or any of this other crap. While I enjoy going to the range and shooting, that doesn't really have anything to do with my opinion on gun control. If something can be done to prevent tragedies like what happened in CT and the only bad thing that happens to me is that I have to get rid of my handgun, I think that's kind of a no brainer.

Right now it's legal, I enjoy it, and I take great care to be responsible with my guns. So I own them. I don't find that to be inconsistent with my position that we need more regulation.

Amen. And I'm 100% with this view on the bolded part. I just don't understand how other gun owners don't feel the same way.

 

[sporthenry]

I think it's terrible, overblown rhetoric to say that the NRA has "blood on their hands". I disagree with the NRA more often than not, and at times I find their positions to be a product of absurd paranoia. But they didn't kill those children.

They didn't directly kill those kids. They advocate for and pay huge money to create the culture and widespread availability of killing instruments. They pay money to finance legislative attempts to prohibit doctors and psychologists like myself to ask about guns in the home. Yes, without a doubt, it is my strong belief that the NRA has blood on its hands.

I get what you're saying, but I just can't get behind it. Do you believe the NRA wants innocent people to die at the hands of a crazy with an automatic weapon?

That's what is bizarre - it's in the nra's interest for events like this to never happen. So they should be front and center in the fight to reduce gun violence.

But this is just a microcosm of how they do politics. Instead of electing sane people to Congress, they elect Tea Partiers that view bans on assault weapons as infringing on their 2nd amendment rights. But this is what I don't understand. Many of us gun control activists don't know much about guns. What is automatic, semi-automatc, etc. So I would think they would want to actually be in on the whole discussion of what to do as opposed to just putting their heels in the sand and daring people to come get their guns.

 

[eoMMan]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

Responsible gun owner? Are you ####### kidding me??? Fact - she had an emotionally ill child with a history of anti social behavior, and perhaps even violent tendencies. And she keeps within his reach a Bushmaster which by design is not for home protection, but for mass murder. Responsible??? Give me a ####### break. This is exactly why we need more gun control. This was preventable. If he just brings the handguns to school maybe he only kills 10 kids instead of 10.The only good thing to come out of this horrible tragedy is that we have one less "gun enthusiast" to worry about.

Remember the VA Tech shootings? Remember what guns were used there and how many people died?And how wasn't she a responsible gun owner? You can obviously make a case of her being an unfit parent in regards to not paying attention to her son's "signs" but she had the guns legally and tried to educate her sons about them.

Are you ####### kidding me? Are you really that dense? You think someone can be a responsible gun owner keeping a Bushmaster around a mentally ill child with anti social behavior and Aspurger's syndrome? I can't believe what I'm hearing in here.

It was handguns. The VA Tech ahole killed a bunch of people with handguns, not a Bushmaster.

We're not talking about VA Tech. We're talking about your statement that the mother of Adam Lanza was a "responsible gun owner". Twice.

Sigh.Nevermind. I don't have the time or energy for you.

Good night all.

 

[Joe T]

How many times have you needed your gun for home protection. Be honest.

Only once for me. Unfortunately I didn't own a gun at the time.

 

[derek245583]

We should ban murdering other humans

 

[General Tso]

I think it's terrible, overblown rhetoric to say that the NRA has "blood on their hands". I disagree with the NRA more often than not, and at times I find their positions to be a product of absurd paranoia. But they didn't kill those children.

They didn't directly kill those kids. They advocate for and pay huge money to create the culture and widespread availability of killing instruments. They pay money to finance legislative attempts to prohibit doctors and psychologists like myself to ask about guns in the home. Yes, without a doubt, it is my strong belief that the NRA has blood on its hands.

I get what you're saying, but I just can't get behind it. Do you believe the NRA wants innocent people to die at the hands of a crazy with an automatic weapon?

That's what is bizarre - it's in the nra's interest for events like this to never happen. So they should be front and center in the fight to reduce gun violence.

But this is just a microcosm of how they do politics. Instead of electing sane people to Congress, they elect Tea Partiers that view bans on assault weapons as infringing on their 2nd amendment rights. But this is what I don't understand. Many of us gun control activists don't know much about guns. What is automatic, semi-automatc, etc. So I would think they would want to actually be in on the whole discussion of what to do as opposed to just putting their heels in the sand and daring people to come get their guns.

I think many pro gun enthusiasts, and the NRA in particular, are composed of people who tend to be a little on the paranoid side. They honestly think that ANY regulation at all is a Trojan horse designed to eventually ban all their precious weapons. They don't care about doing what is right for the rest of us. Their selfish, paranoid needs take precedence over the lives of innocent children. It's that simple really.

 

[shader]

What mature solutions have we developed so far? 30 pages, we've got to have something....

Here are a few that maybe should be on the table:No private sales

Licensing and periodic renewal

Mandated gun safes / trigger locks with severe penalties for violation

There are others but all these have been floated

These sound like a reasonable starting point. 1and 3seem fair. 2 would need to be tested to see if licensing would be worth all the added red tape.

Yeah, do everything to get rid of the gun show loophole. Probably redo the AWB and ban all guns not needed for hunting/self protection. Add in either a mental health check or at t he very least, a black flag if a guy has a mental health history. Many other countries have mandatory classes on guns. I'd add a bit more to the idea of gun safe/trigger lock that you are held liable if you are negligent with your gun. I.e. if someone breaks into your safe, not your fault. If you leave your gun in a closet and a friend takes it, you are held liable. Also mandatory gun tracing/tracking and wherever the paperwork stops, that is where some of the buck should stop.

Re: the bolded, it would not have helped in this situation. And I suspect in many situations.

I understand that. As Obama said, there is no way to ensure that every tragedy doesn't happen. But adding in a gun safe and a ban on assault weapons would have also gone very far to stop this. I said I wasn't getting much into the mental health side of things but I think that also needs to be talked about, in light of the Anarchist Soccer Mom's blog, that we need to have a place to send these mentally disturbed before they commit crimes.

It's not so much the mental health aspect I have a problem with, it's the focus on the gun owner as an applicant. I guess it can't hurt, but in so many of these situations it's not the gun owner who did the shooting. Everyone else in that household often has access (as was the case here), and that seems to be frequently where there is a problem. So all this application stuff doesn't do much. It's fine, and I think we need to do it, but we just need to keep in mind the limitations.

That would be where requiring gun safes or trigger locks would come into play. Additionally, banning assault weapons would also be a step in the right direction. I would also do something about the amount of guns one can obtain before raising a flag in the system. After a certain point, I would think you should have to prove a need for another gun. Perhaps if this kid doesn't have a sig sauer rifle and a shot gun, he doesn't feel as empowered to do this? Or perhaps it is even one death less effective? I just don't see how anyone can argue for assault weapons or even the mass acquiring of guns. Do they need 5 guns? 10 guns? 15 guns?

Re: the bolded, there's no "need" for the first gun. These guys acquire arsenals of these things. One isn't enough. Take a look at the gun nerd thread in this very forum for some insight into what this culture is like. I was considering buying a gun a year or two ago and made some posts in there and read it. It's a little loony.

Home protection, hunting, etc. aren't good enough reasons for you?

What's wrong with you people that you can't sleep at night without a gun. Must be miserable to be so paranoid that you are going to die that you need an armory in your home.

 

[General Tso]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

Responsible gun owner? Are you ####### kidding me??? Fact - she had an emotionally ill child with a history of anti social behavior, and perhaps even violent tendencies. And she keeps within his reach a Bushmaster which by design is not for home protection, but for mass murder. Responsible??? Give me a ####### break. This is exactly why we need more gun control. This was preventable. If he just brings the handguns to school maybe he only kills 10 kids instead of 10.The only good thing to come out of this horrible tragedy is that we have one less "gun enthusiast" to worry about.

Remember the VA Tech shootings? Remember what guns were used there and how many people died?And how wasn't she a responsible gun owner? You can obviously make a case of her being an unfit parent in regards to not paying attention to her son's "signs" but she had the guns legally and tried to educate her sons about them.

Are you ####### kidding me? Are you really that dense? You think someone can be a responsible gun owner keeping a Bushmaster around a mentally ill child with anti social behavior and Aspurger's syndrome? I can't believe what I'm hearing in here.

It was handguns. The VA Tech ahole killed a bunch of people with handguns, not a Bushmaster.

We're not talking about VA Tech. We're talking about your statement that the mother of Adam Lanza was a "responsible gun owner". Twice.

Sigh.Nevermind. I don't have the time or energy for you.

Good night all.

Correction, you don't have the mental abilities. Good night to you as well. And make sure you tuck in your Bushmaster and give him a good night kiss. You may not be seeing him much longer.

 

[Abraham]

One question for the, "no private sale" crowd.

How do you dispose of a gun you no longer want to keep? Forced to resell to a licensed dealer? Unable to give away as gifts or sell to your neighbor?

And I think the, "more safety classes/more training" is smokescreen to not do anything and to say, "No, if someone is a responsible gun owner [like me!], then everything will be just fine.

Turn it in at a police station for a $100 tax credit voucher.

 

[General Malaise]

How many times have you needed your gun for home protection. Be honest.

Only once for me. Unfortunately I didn't own a gun at the time.

Story please.

 

[General Malaise]

make sure they go through safety classes and screenings.

+1

The mother who owned these guns was a gun enthusiast, purchased them legally, went all the proper procedures. She was maybe a much more responsible and educated gun owner than many. Where did that get us? I don't think classes and the like are even close to enough.

Yes. She was a responsible gun owner and a tragic event happened. However, you are acting we need to implement some outrageous ban, like your no handgun suggestion. I think we need to realize that #### like this is going to happen and unfortunately, you're not going to be able to stop every tragedy. We need to educate our kids and talk to them about guns (if they are in the household). From all reports so far, this ahole didn't exhibit many warning signs. He was an honors student and didn't have a criminal record. Unfortunately, I really don't think much could have been done to prevent this, aside from the mother being a better parent. A ban on guns isn't the answer, Otis. It really isn't.

It would help if people would give them up. Look at the stats in the UK since they banned guns.

This seems pretty much indisputable to me, but the guys in here who like guns refuse to acknowledge it as an option. Why? Just because they like guns?

Because that's what they think they're supposed to say. It's right wing vs. left wing manifested in another debatable topic. The guys who want to keep things the way they are currently are told to hold that view sacred as a 'right'. I bet half of them don't even own guns. They just want to walk the party line. It's what they are told to do.

Ahh...that works both ways, y'know. You hold the line that "all guns are evil" because, well, that's what you're currently told.This is an easy game to play.

I wanted guns outlawed after Columbine. I didn't need a radio talk show host to tell me that. It's just the way I believe. I'd love nothing more than an outright ban on guns. How many more incidents do we need to endure as a society before we get to a point where common sense takes over? Ban the guns. Ban the bullets. Put an end to it now. Save future children.

 

[BassNBrew]

I really enjoy playing my guitar. And if one day, I learned that a guitar was actually a secret killing machine, and was being used to slaughter children, and the president therefore decided to outlaw guitars, I'd be the first one to pack them in my trunk and drive them down to the local police station. This debate boggles the mind.

Packed up your booze yet gb???

 

[timschochet]

Despite some of the insults flying around, I think this has been a pretty good debate so far. There are knowledgeable people on both/all sides here, and while it's rare than anybody convinces anyone else, it's always instructive to reach a clarity of disagreement, especially when facts and statistics are provided for those of us who want to learn something new.

 

[BassNBrew]

I wanted guns outlawed after Columbine. I didn't need a radio talk show host to tell me that. It's just the way I believe. I'd love nothing more than an outright ban on guns. How many more incidents do we need to endure as a society before we get to a point where common sense takes over? Ban the guns. Ban the bullets. Put an end to it now. Save future children.

You realize this applies to alcohol to?Just seems weird that people crack on the FBG gun buyers thread after a tragedy like this yet the What beer are you drinking tonite thread is cool when just as many people are dying from alcohol accidents and abuse. Your I don't own them we don't need them stance is probably the same thing said by those who are dry.Much like BA level limits, I can get on board with a compromise that balances personal freedoms and public safety. However if you're going to get on the public safety kick first and foremost, alcohol would be the low hanging fruit.

 

[cobalt_27]

I think it's terrible, overblown rhetoric to say that the NRA has "blood on their hands". I disagree with the NRA more often than not, and at times I find their positions to be a product of absurd paranoia. But they didn't kill those children.

They didn't directly kill those kids. They advocate for and pay huge money to create the culture and widespread availability of killing instruments. They pay money to finance legislative attempts to prohibit doctors and psychologists like myself to ask about guns in the home. Yes, without a doubt, it is my strong belief that the NRA has blood on its hands.

I get what you're saying, but I just can't get behind it. Do you believe the NRA wants innocent people to die at the hands of a crazy with an automatic weapon?

No. I don't think that would be at all consistent with what they are doing. Instead, I feel they suffer from a form of anosognosia that renders them incapable of identifying the unintentional outcomes of their policies and advocacy. And this is worsened by their strident absolutism. Denying any rolenthese killing machines havebin these massacres. but they know, just like the tobacco industry knew the health risks associated with cigarette use. out of self interest, they hide away, obfuscate, and lie. That's what puts blood on their hands.

 

[jonessed]

I think it's terrible, overblown rhetoric to say that the NRA has "blood on their hands". I disagree with the NRA more often than not, and at times I find their positions to be a product of absurd paranoia. But they didn't kill those children.

They didn't directly kill those kids. They advocate for and pay huge money to create the culture and widespread availability of killing instruments. They pay money to finance legislative attempts to prohibit doctors and psychologists like myself to ask about guns in the home. Yes, without a doubt, it is my strong belief that the NRA has blood on its hands.

I get what you're saying, but I just can't get behind it. Do you believe the NRA wants innocent people to die at the hands of a crazy with an automatic weapon?

That's what is bizarre - it's in the nra's interest for events like this to never happen. So they should be front and center in the fight to reduce gun violence.

But this is just a microcosm of how they do politics. Instead of electing sane people to Congress, they elect Tea Partiers that view bans on assault weapons as infringing on their 2nd amendment rights. But this is what I don't understand. Many of us gun control activists don't know much about guns. What is automatic, semi-automatc, etc. So I would think they would want to actually be in on the whole discussion of what to do as opposed to just putting their heels in the sand and daring people to come get their guns.

I think many pro gun enthusiasts, and the NRA in particular, are composed of people who tend to be a little on the paranoid side. They honestly think that ANY regulation at all is a Trojan horse designed to eventually ban all their precious weapons. They don't care about doing what is right for the rest of us. Their selfish, paranoid needs take precedence over the lives of innocent children. It's that simple really.

You guys have done a pretty fantastic job of proving it's not paranoia.