***OFFICIAL GUN CONTROL DEBATE*** (3 Viewers)

[maxwelledison]

FINAL TALLY:

With 15 incidents stopped by police with a total of 217 dead that’s an average of about 14.29 dead.

With 17 incidents stopped by civilians and 45 dead that’s an average of 2.33 dead.

When civilians wait for police to intervene, fatalities at the scene increase by nearly 700%

Sounds like we need to teach our teachers how to tackle.

No kidding. Is icon serious here? Virtually every civilian intervention was accomplished without firing a weapon.

 

[Slingblade]

Time to give the NRA some more cash.

Clearly, they're the victims in the last 7 days.

Where did I say they were?

 

[Slingblade]

well the other half of the country that does own a gun would sure appreciate it if the guys on your side of the discussion would at least learn the rudimentary facts of the matter here. I mean reading a Timsochet "analysis" on rates of fire is like watching a 3 year old trying to draw the Mona Lisa with an etch-a-sketch

What analysis? What I wrote is that if you have a weapon that is able to fire a bullet or more every second for a full minute or longer, that's too much. Nobody needs that much firepower in one weapon. The availability of such weapons are a threat to public safety. You can agree with this opinion or disagree, but what more analysis do you need?

Tim my man! This is where your analysis generally falls flat because you target the weapon platform based on estimated rate of fire. Your approach on high-cap mags is where this argument would hold water. Because to maintain that level of sustained fire you need a very high capacity magazine or belt, which if memory serves, were not used in any of the recent attacks. It has also been mentioned that such very high capacity mags/drums are prone to mechanical failure basically making them a liability and less reliable than just having multiple standard cap mags. Schlzm

High capacity magazines were used in every one of the most recent attacks. That's been my point all along.

30 round AR mags are not high capacity mags.

 

[Gopher State]

Time to give the NRA some more cash.

Clearly, they're the victims in the last 7 days.

The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters—and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown," the organization said in a statement emailed to reporters. "The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again," it said.Anyone who says the NRA is the 'victims' is out of touch with reality.

 

[sporthenry]

Time to give the NRA some more cash.

Clearly, they're the victims in the last 7 days.

The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters—and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown," the organization said in a statement emailed to reporters. "The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again," it said.Anyone who says the NRA is the 'victims' is out of touch with reality.

Well we will see how this progresses. Obviously, they are in the best position to provide meaningful legislation b/c they exist solely to deal with this issue. Many of us gun control advocates aren't gun experts, so I appreciate the input of some in regards to actually helping to prevent this from happening. So if they are able to provide their expertise, more power to them. But if they act like some in this thread, I'll be disappointed by them just dismissing all ideas and not really giving any options apart from arming more people and getting rid of "Gun Free Zones."

 

[lod01]

Time to give the NRA some more cash.

Clearly, they're the victims in the last 7 days.

The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters—and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown," the organization said in a statement emailed to reporters. "The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again," it said.Anyone who says the NRA is the 'victims' is out of touch with reality.

Matthias' statement went right over your head.

 

[Schlzm]

well the other half of the country that does own a gun would sure appreciate it if the guys on your side of the discussion would at least learn the rudimentary facts of the matter here. I mean reading a Timsochet "analysis" on rates of fire is like watching a 3 year old trying to draw the Mona Lisa with an etch-a-sketch

What analysis? What I wrote is that if you have a weapon that is able to fire a bullet or more every second for a full minute or longer, that's too much. Nobody needs that much firepower in one weapon. The availability of such weapons are a threat to public safety. You can agree with this opinion or disagree, but what more analysis do you need?

Tim my man! This is where your analysis generally falls flat because you target the weapon platform based on estimated rate of fire. Your approach on high-cap mags is where this argument would hold water. Because to maintain that level of sustained fire you need a very high capacity magazine or belt, which if memory serves, were not used in any of the recent attacks. It has also been mentioned that such very high capacity mags/drums are prone to mechanical failure basically making them a liability and less reliable than just having multiple standard cap mags. Schlzm

High capacity magazines were used in every one of the most recent attacks. That's been my point all along.

30 round AR mags are not high capacity mags.

Correct. "High Capacity" is completely subjective to a number of different things but for an AR-15 or AK-47, 30 rounds are standard cap.Schlzm

 

[Mr Two Cents]

Texas burglary suspect calls 911 on homeowner with gun

My link

Redford man foils robbery by shooting suspect

My link

ROCKFORD, IL: Don’t bring a pellet gun to gunfight

My link

AutoZone Fires Worker Who Stopped Robbery

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/autozone-fires-worker-who-stopped-robbery.html

Police: Clerk shoots would-be robber in head

My link

Deputies: Homeowner shoots burglar caught taking property

My link

81-year-old Detroit man shoots at intruder, scares him off

My link

Bessemer woman shoots armed intruder after struggle

My link

 

[[icon]]

FINAL TALLY:

With 15 incidents stopped by police with a total of 217 dead that’s an average of about 14.29 dead.

With 17 incidents stopped by civilians and 45 dead that’s an average of 2.33 dead.

When civilians wait for police to intervene, fatalities at the scene increase by nearly 700%

Sounds like we need to teach our teachers how to tackle.

Way to dismiss some facts with an insensitive statement.

I skimmed his piece. From my perusal, it reads like most of the people stopped by private citizens were tackled, not gunned down or stuck up by someone else with a gun.

15 Shooting rampages stopped by Police: 14.29 deaths per incident11 Shooting rampages stopped by unarmed civilians: 2.8 deaths per incident

6 Shooting rampages stopped by armed civilians: 1.6 deaths per incident

Fact: Armed civilians have been historically the most effective interventionists in minimizing body count in attempted mass shootings.

 

[[icon]]

]Fact: The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen.

Link to where I'm suggesting all teachers be armed? Captain straw man at it again. Ignore the facts and throw out stupid crap like this. Typical for you. Here I can play stupid analogies too. Guns stolen from police locker room. Guess we better not arm the police either... just in case. Wheeee!

 

[Glass Joe]

FINAL TALLY:

With 15 incidents stopped by police with a total of 217 dead that’s an average of about 14.29 dead.

With 17 incidents stopped by civilians and 45 dead that’s an average of 2.33 dead.

When civilians wait for police to intervene, fatalities at the scene increase by nearly 700%

Sounds like we need to teach our teachers how to tackle.

Way to dismiss some facts with an insensitive statement.

I skimmed his piece. From my perusal, it reads like most of the people stopped by private citizens were tackled, not gunned down or stuck up by someone else with a gun.

Shooting rampages stopped by Police: 14.29 deaths per incidentShooting rampages stopped by unarmed civilians: 2.8 deaths per incident

Shooting rampages stopped by armed civilians: 1.6 deaths per incident

Fact: Armed civilians have been historically the most effective interventionists in attempted mass shootings.

Fact: The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen.

No, they'll ask why the students weren't armed.

 

[[icon]]

No, they'll ask why the students weren't armed.

You guys are getting pretty desperate if you're throwing this crap out there.

 

[Mr Two Cents]

Robber shot dead after victim pulls out gun, opens fire

My link

Suspect shot, home invasion foiled in Upper Darby

My link

Muskogee homeowner shoots suspected intruder

My link

Homeowner Fires Gun at Burglar; Suspect Arrested after Police Chase

My link

 

[5 digit know nothing]

FINAL TALLY:

With 15 incidents stopped by police with a total of 217 dead that’s an average of about 14.29 dead.

With 17 incidents stopped by civilians and 45 dead that’s an average of 2.33 dead.

When civilians wait for police to intervene, fatalities at the scene increase by nearly 700%

Sounds like we need to teach our teachers how to tackle.

No kidding. Is icon serious here? Virtually every civilian intervention was accomplished without firing a weapon.

He was responding to this claim, why does a weapon need to be fired?

The fantasy of effective vigilantes is not. It makes no sense, has no statistical support

 

[5 digit know nothing]

]Fact: The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen.

Link to where I'm suggesting all teachers be armed? Captain straw man at it again. Ignore the facts and throw out stupid crap like this. Typical for you. Here I can play stupid analogies too. Gun stolen from police car. Guess we better not arm the police either... just in case. Wheeee!

Discussing, "Give teachers guns" or something along those lines seems to have been how the people here have spent the majority of their day. But ok. Say you didn't suggest it (I'm not going back to check). You now say that armed people on the scene results in the lowest casualties. Who do you picture these armed people on the scene being?

1 or 2 individuals in a school with approximately 40 adults working there

 

[[icon]]

]Fact: The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen.

Link to where I'm suggesting all teachers be armed? Captain straw man at it again. Ignore the facts and throw out stupid crap like this. Typical for you. Here I can play stupid analogies too. Gun stolen from police car. Guess we better not arm the police either... just in case. Wheeee!

Discussing, "Give teachers guns" or something along those lines seems to have been how the people here have spent the majority of their day. But ok. Say you didn't suggest it (I'm not going back to check). You now say that armed people on the scene results in the lowest casualties. Who do you picture these armed people on the scene being?

I could start with a pretty simple solution:Mandate every publicly funded school have at least 5-10% of staff undergo state funded certification that includes extensive background checks and specific training (that must be renewed every x years). These individuals carry in some manner (open or concealed... open to debate). I think an on campus security officer with tactical training would be wise as well... but generally speaking it's quicker to have several trained individuals staggered throughout the campus.

I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but it beats trying to make all guns illegal and relying on long-### police response times to stop these things.

 

[Mr Two Cents]

For all you folks that see no reason for weapons like AR15's. most home invasions occur with 2-4 people.

Another Home Invasion Reported in Huntington

My link

Armed Home Invasion in Huntington; Three Men Sought

My link

Baby Held at Gunpoint in Stamford Home Invasion

My link

Home Invasion and Shots Fired

My link

Child shot in attempted Sampson County home invasion

My link

Northeast home invasion injures one; Suspects at-large

My link

Man robs pawn shop, shoots manager in leg

My link

 

[timschochet]

well the other half of the country that does own a gun would sure appreciate it if the guys on your side of the discussion would at least learn the rudimentary facts of the matter here. I mean reading a Timsochet "analysis" on rates of fire is like watching a 3 year old trying to draw the Mona Lisa with an etch-a-sketch

What analysis? What I wrote is that if you have a weapon that is able to fire a bullet or more every second for a full minute or longer, that's too much. Nobody needs that much firepower in one weapon. The availability of such weapons are a threat to public safety. You can agree with this opinion or disagree, but what more analysis do you need?

Tim my man! This is where your analysis generally falls flat because you target the weapon platform based on estimated rate of fire. Your approach on high-cap mags is where this argument would hold water. Because to maintain that level of sustained fire you need a very high capacity magazine or belt, which if memory serves, were not used in any of the recent attacks. It has also been mentioned that such very high capacity mags/drums are prone to mechanical failure basically making them a liability and less reliable than just having multiple standard cap mags. Schlzm

High capacity magazines were used in every one of the most recent attacks. That's been my point all along.

30 round AR mags are not high capacity mags.

Correct. "High Capacity" is completely subjective to a number of different things but for an AR-15 or AK-47, 30 rounds are standard cap.Schlzm

The USA Today article referred to 100 rounds. In any case, I am in favor of reducing the number to 10. I think the Feinstein proposal is specifically either 10 or 15.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

]Fact: The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen.

Link to where I'm suggesting all teachers be armed? Captain straw man at it again. Ignore the facts and throw out stupid crap like this. Typical for you. Here I can play stupid analogies too. Gun stolen from police car. Guess we better not arm the police either... just in case. Wheeee!

Discussing, "Give teachers guns" or something along those lines seems to have been how the people here have spent the majority of their day. But ok. Say you didn't suggest it (I'm not going back to check). You now say that armed people on the scene results in the lowest casualties. Who do you picture these armed people on the scene being?

I could start with a pretty simple solution:Mandate every publicly funded school have at least 5-10% of staff undergo state funded certification that includes extensive background checks and specific training (that must be renewed every x years). These individuals carry in some manner (open or concealed... open to debate). I think an on campus security officer with tactical training would be wise as well... but generally speaking it's quicker to have several trained individuals staggered throughout the campus.

I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but it beats trying to make all guns illegal and relying on long-### police response times to stop these things.

Ok. So now can I say, "The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen."? Or are you going to laugh again.

Are you talking about a childen's prison?

 

[TwinTurbo]

Actually, this isn't that difficult to find the truth if you want it. All you need do is read up on the American occupation of Germany, in which the first thing the G.I.s did is make every family get all of their firearms and deliver them to the town or city square, where they were stacked in large piles and confiscated. If Hitler had seized all the guns years before like the NRA claims, where the heck did these large piles of weapons come from???? And if Stalin grabbed all the guns when he took power, then how did the citizens of Leningrad and Stalingrad defend their cities with rifles? What rifles? And if Saddam Hussein took everyone's guns away, then why did our troops again in that war confiscate as many weapons as they could find? What weapons? Why wasn't the population defenseless?? These claims are so absurd that in order to believe them, you have to be completely ignorant of history. Yet apparently many gun rights supporters are.

Tim, Hitler didn't need to impose gun controls because gun laws were already in effect. Ironically, the original laws were passed in part to disarm the Nazis. The existing law required a permit to have a gun, so it was easy for Hitler to ensure his opponents couldn't get permits and therefore had no access to firearms. There were lots of guns but only Nazi supporters had legal access to them. After his rise to power, Hitler did add restrictions aimed at Jews. For the rest of the population he relied on laws already in place to keep guns out of the hands of his opponents. I'm guessing the same was probably true for Stalin and Hussein. They didn't need to seize all of the guns, only prevent their enemies from having any access to the supply. You don't need a defenseless population if that population supports you. You only need to disarm the rebels.

 

[[icon]]

I could start with a pretty simple solution:

Mandate every publicly funded school have at least 5-10% of staff undergo state funded certification that includes extensive background checks and specific training (that must be renewed every x years). These individuals carry in some manner (open or concealed... open to debate). I think an on campus security officer with tactical training would be wise as well... but generally speaking it's quicker to have several trained individuals staggered throughout the campus.

I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but it beats trying to make all guns illegal and relying on long-### police response times to stop these things.

Ok. So now can I say, "The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen."? Or are you going to laugh again.

It's an asinine statement under these circumstances but hey, it's not like you've exactly been averse to that in the past and it's a free country.

 

[Neovivo]

So would NRA "meaningful contributions" be free shooting courses? I don't think the NRA is meaning giving up any of it's 2500 round clips/multiple barrel guns. I hope I am wrong.

 

[[icon]]

I could start with a pretty simple solution:

Mandate every publicly funded school have at least 5-10% of staff undergo state funded certification that includes extensive background checks and specific training (that must be renewed every x years). These individuals carry in some manner (open or concealed... open to debate). I think an on campus security officer with tactical training would be wise as well... but generally speaking it's quicker to have several trained individuals staggered throughout the campus.

I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but it beats trying to make all guns illegal and relying on long-### police response times to stop these things.

Ok. So now can I say, "The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen."? Or are you going to laugh again.

It's an asinine statement under these circumstances but hey, it's not like you've exactly been averse to that in the past and it's a free country.

It's not asinine. It's just saying, "Hey, guys on the Titanic, there's an iceberg. I bet you'll be really sad when you hit it."

It's a lot more likely than your fantasyland scenario of pushing the magic "Guns go away" button and saving the day. (See I can play the matthias hyperbole game too!)

 

[Glass Joe]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

 

[timschochet]

Time to give the NRA some more cash.

Clearly, they're the victims in the last 7 days.

The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters—and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown," the organization said in a statement emailed to reporters. "The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again," it said.Anyone who says the NRA is the 'victims' is out of touch with reality.

Well we will see how this progresses. Obviously, they are in the best position to provide meaningful legislation b/c they exist solely to deal with this issue. Many of us gun control advocates aren't gun experts, so I appreciate the input of some in regards to actually helping to prevent this from happening. So if they are able to provide their expertise, more power to them. But if they act like some in this thread, I'll be disappointed by them just dismissing all ideas and not really giving any options apart from arming more people and getting rid of "Gun Free Zones."

Exactly. If they are willing to concede now on proposals they have previously opposed, such as limiting magazine capacity and, even more important, removing the private sales "gun show" loophole, I will applaud their efforts and take back anything I have written about them. Now is the time for them to redeem themselves and be the responsible citizens they claim they are. On the other hand, if their only "solution" is to remove gun free zones and arm teachers, while continuing to oppose everything else, then they deserve only scorn.

 

[Glass Joe]

Time to give the NRA some more cash.

Clearly, they're the victims in the last 7 days.

The National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters—and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown," the organization said in a statement emailed to reporters. "The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again," it said.Anyone who says the NRA is the 'victims' is out of touch with reality.

Well we will see how this progresses. Obviously, they are in the best position to provide meaningful legislation b/c they exist solely to deal with this issue. Many of us gun control advocates aren't gun experts, so I appreciate the input of some in regards to actually helping to prevent this from happening. So if they are able to provide their expertise, more power to them. But if they act like some in this thread, I'll be disappointed by them just dismissing all ideas and not really giving any options apart from arming more people and getting rid of "Gun Free Zones."

Exactly. If they are willing to concede now on proposals they have previously opposed, such as limiting magazine capacity and, even more important, removing the private sales "gun show" loophole, I will applaud their efforts and take back anything I have written about them. Now is the time for them to redeem themselves and be the responsible citizens they claim they are. On the other hand, if their only "solution" is to remove gun free zones and arm teachers, while continuing to oppose everything else, then they deserve only scorn.

Based on what you've seen on this board, do you have reason to be optimistic?

 

[parasaurolophus]

]Fact: The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen.

Link to where I'm suggesting all teachers be armed? Captain straw man at it again. Ignore the facts and throw out stupid crap like this. Typical for you. Here I can play stupid analogies too. Gun stolen from police car. Guess we better not arm the police either... just in case. Wheeee!

Discussing, "Give teachers guns" or something along those lines seems to have been how the people here have spent the majority of their day. But ok. Say you didn't suggest it (I'm not going back to check). You now say that armed people on the scene results in the lowest casualties. Who do you picture these armed people on the scene being?

I could start with a pretty simple solution:Mandate every publicly funded school have at least 5-10% of staff undergo state funded certification that includes extensive background checks and specific training (that must be renewed every x years). These individuals carry in some manner (open or concealed... open to debate). I think an on campus security officer with tactical training would be wise as well... but generally speaking it's quicker to have several trained individuals staggered throughout the campus.

I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but it beats trying to make all guns illegal and relying on long-### police response times to stop these things.

Ok. So now can I say, "The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen."? Or are you going to laugh again.

There are plenty of schools that already have armed security guards. You don't really hear about instances where students get their guns. Why do you think they would be so likely to get them away from properly trained faculty or are you just making stuff up again?ETA looks like 34% of all public schools report having security staff that carries a firearm.

http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ssocs/tables/all_2008_tab_33.asp?referrer=css

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

I assume they'll allow grandfathering at first (so it passes) and then the next time something makes the news move to confiscate.

 

[Bonezerelli]

This thread is f**ked

If you are truly suggesting that the solution to the problem is to arm teachers, to bring guns into a school, to increase the number of weapons available in a school, then you are completely clueless, should not be allowed a gun and are under some delusion that the prevalence of weapons has no bearing on risks of gun violence.

It's harsh, but the world mourns with you on the terrible tragedy, but if you take such stupid action as above, the world no longer mourns, but instead shakes its head and wonders how such a powerful nation can be so stupid.

You have the chance to set the bar high here. To show other countries without a sustainable form of government just what good can be accomplished. In some countries, children by the age if 12 are forced to fire a gun and fight for a cause they know little about, wishing instead for something different, and here done if you are saying teachers should be packing????

You truly have a chance to re-tweak an old, rusty document that needs clarification, a chance to lead the world in how to peacefully accomplish peace, truly have the chance to lead the way. Don't ruin that by getting lost in rhetoric, blinded by rights vs. safety. You can do it!

 

[BeTheMatch]

This whole thing just screams that "gun people" are simply saying the right things now, that they'll agree to changes, and then that way everyone will go away, and when the time comes to actually change things, they won't do it and people will have moved on to the next thing by then.

I find it impossible to believe that any meaningful change will take place.

 

[Glass Joe]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

I assume they'll allow grandfathering at first (so it passes) and then the next time something makes the news move to confiscate.

So sad.

 

[Slingblade]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

The only way this will happen if anything is passed is grandfathering. Forcing guns to be surrendered would never happen in a million years.

 

[thayman]

Actually, this isn't that difficult to find the truth if you want it. All you need do is read up on the American occupation of Germany, in which the first thing the G.I.s did is make every family get all of their firearms and deliver them to the town or city square, where stupid were stacked in large piles and confiscated. If Hitler had seized all the guns years before like the NRA claims, where the heck did these large piles of weapons come from???? And if Stalin grabbed all the guns when he took power, then how did the citizens of Leningrad and Stalingrad defend their cities with rifles? What rifles? And if Saddam Hussein took everyone's guns away, then why did our troops again in that war confiscate as many weapons as they could find? What weapons? Why wasn't the population defenseless?? These claims are so absurd that in order to believe them, you have to be completely ignorant of history. Yet apparently many gun rights supporters are.

My god you are stup

 

[Slingblade]

Can anyone explain why they're against limits on gun magazines to 10 rounds and under? I am having a difficult time wrapping my head around why that would be an issue? It seems like 10 rounds should be sufficient for any situation?

I bought a 9mm Glock that holds 15 rounds. It is my carry gun. I went with a lower caliber so I could have more rounds without reloading.I might as well use a 10mm or .45 if I can only have 10 rounds.

 

[BeTheMatch]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

The only way this will happen if anything is passed is grandfathering. Forcing guns to be surrendered would never happen in a million years.

I agree, but then what's the point? This whole thing will be an exercise in "doing something" only in name so politicians can say they did something. Nothing meaningful will happen. Nothing that will actually make a difference. No chance.

 

[ATC1]

]Fact: The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen.

Link to where I'm suggesting all teachers be armed? Captain straw man at it again. Ignore the facts and throw out stupid crap like this. Typical for you. Here I can play stupid analogies too. Gun stolen from police car. Guess we better not arm the police either... just in case. Wheeee!

Discussing, "Give teachers guns" or something along those lines seems to have been how the people here have spent the majority of their day. But ok. Say you didn't suggest it (I'm not going back to check). You now say that armed people on the scene results in the lowest casualties. Who do you picture these armed people on the scene being?

I could start with a pretty simple solution:Mandate every publicly funded school have at least 5-10% of staff undergo state funded certification that includes extensive background checks and specific training (that must be renewed every x years). These individuals carry in some manner (open or concealed... open to debate). I think an on campus security officer with tactical training would be wise as well... but generally speaking it's quicker to have several trained individuals staggered throughout the campus.

I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but it beats trying to make all guns illegal and relying on long-### police response times to stop these things.

Ok. So now can I say, "The first time some kid filches a gun from a teacher or a principal and uses it in school, every damn single one of you are going to be chiming in a 50-page outrage thread on how did we allow this to happen."? Or are you going to laugh again.

How will the student know a teacher is armed? Let's say the student finds out a teacher is armed, that student has to make judgement to grab a concealed gun from the teacher and proceed to go on a shooting spee at that time.

Maybe it has happened were a student has unholstered a police officer's gun on his hip in the past and decided to shoot him. Just having trouble finding the words to use to search google.

 

[rascal]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

probably not, but i would require transfer of ownership to require the background check I mentioned earlier.

 

[Slingblade]

Can anyone explain why they're against limits on gun magazines to 10 rounds and under? I am having a difficult time wrapping my head around why that would be an issue? It seems like 10 rounds should be sufficient for any situation?

I bought a 9mm Glock that holds 15 rounds. It is my carry gun. I went with a lower caliber so I could have more rounds without reloading.I might as well use a 10mm or .45 if I can only have 10 rounds.

Why do you need 15 rounds before reloading?

What If I get jumped by 2 or 3 guys? I feel better having 15 rounds.

 

[Glass Joe]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

The only way this will happen if anything is passed is grandfathering. Forcing guns to be surrendered would never happen in a million years.

I agree, but then what's the point? This whole thing will be an exercise in "doing something" only in name so politicians can say they did something. Nothing meaningful will happen. Nothing that will actually make a difference. No chance.

Yes. I agree - the gun nuts were NEVER open to significant change in gun law. Nothing will ever change - gun rights are worth more than those kindergartner children's lives.

 

[Slingblade]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

The only way this will happen if anything is passed is grandfathering. Forcing guns to be surrendered would never happen in a million years.

I agree, but then what's the point? This whole thing will be an exercise in "doing something" only in name so politicians can say they did something. Nothing meaningful will happen. Nothing that will actually make a difference. No chance.

Exactly. You would think 500 gun deaths in Chicago in one year would cause changes, but it takes kids dying before people want to pass through legislation that will do nothing solely so they can feel better.

 

[Neovivo]

Can anyone explain why they're against limits on gun magazines to 10 rounds and under? I am having a difficult time wrapping my head around why that would be an issue? It seems like 10 rounds should be sufficient for any situation?

I bought a 9mm Glock that holds 15 rounds. It is my carry gun. I went with a lower caliber so I could have more rounds without reloading.I might as well use a 10mm or .45 if I can only have 10 rounds.

Why do you need 15 rounds before reloading?

What If I get jumped by 2 or 3 guys? I feel better having 15 rounds.

Or attacked by an angry pack of Chupacabra's

 

[Slingblade]

Can anyone explain why they're against limits on gun magazines to 10 rounds and under? I am having a difficult time wrapping my head around why that would be an issue? It seems like 10 rounds should be sufficient for any situation?

I bought a 9mm Glock that holds 15 rounds. It is my carry gun. I went with a lower caliber so I could have more rounds without reloading.I might as well use a 10mm or .45 if I can only have 10 rounds.

Why do you need 15 rounds before reloading?

What If I get jumped by 2 or 3 guys? I feel better having 15 rounds.

Are these guys zombies? I'm pretty sure if you blew off one guys head that would settle things...

I could miss with adrenaline pumping, and you would be surprised how many shots some people can take before going down.

 

[Bonezerelli]

Please read this. It CAN be done. Question is, do you want it to be?

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/gun-laws-grew-from-dunblane-tragedy/article6504191/?service=mobile

Gun laws grew from Dunblane tragedy

PAUL WALDIE

DUNBLANE, SCOTLAND — THE GLOBE AND MAIL

Last updated Tuesday, Dec. 18 2012, 1:56 AM EST

A small girl looks at a poster by the European anti-gun lobby Sage (Society Against Guns in Europe), featuring one of the Dunblane school massacre victims, in Oxford Street August 15, 1996. (Russell Boyce /REUTERS)

When 16 children were gunned down in March, 1996, at the local elementary school, the people of Dunblane decided to do something historic. They put aside their grief as much as possible and used their energy to push for a ban on all handguns in Britain.

“Dunblane presented us with the opportunity to ride the tide of media and public outrage and carry the politicians with us,” said Gill Marshall-Andrews who helped launch the effort. Ms. Marshall-Andrews said people in Newtown, Conn., should take note: “These terrible events present a sort of once in a generation opportunity to turn the gun laws around. And that is what happened.”

Across the ocean, Dunblane parents relive grief of Newtown

Legal hurdles get in the way of U.S. gun-control advocates

Tears, kindness as Newtown begins saying goodbye to its children

The Snowdrop Campaign, launched in the wake of the Dunblane shooting, became one of the most effective gun-control efforts in British history, and it continues to reverberate. The campaign not only succeeded in getting the Labour government of Tony Blair to ban handguns, it also won more regulation of rifles and shotguns, new school safety measures and background checks for volunteers who work with children. Now called the Gun Control Network, it continues to lobby for stricter gun regulations.

Dunblane “was a massive turning point in gun legislation,” said Peter Squires, a criminology professor at the University of Brighton. Prof. Squires said the Snowdrop drive, named after the only flower in bloom at the time of the killings, struck a nerve with Britons who were beginning to worry about the country’s gun culture

By the mid-1990s, British gun violence was approaching levels of those in the United States. The massacre at Dunblane proved to be a tipping point because it involved children and the 43-year-old shooter, Thomas Hamilton, used four legally owned handguns when he opened fire during gym class at the Dunblane Primary School, killing one teacher and 16 students. It was the second mass shooting in less than a decade, coming after Michael Ryan killed 16 people in 1987 in the streets of Hungerford, roughly 100 kilometres west of London.

Today Britain has one of the lowest murder rates among G8 countries and offences involving firearms have fallen steadily, dropping by nearly half since 2005. Last year, there were 550 homicides across England and Wales, and 60 involved a gun. That was the lowest murder rate since 1983. Scotland had 88 murders, 11 fewer than the previous year, with five involving a gun.

For many Dunblane residents such as Steve Birnie, the success of the Snowdrop Campaign came as a surprise. He got involved mainly as a diversion, something to take his mind off the horrible tragedy. His son, Matt, survived the shooting that morning, taking bullets in the shoulder and chest.

“I think it’s almost like a natural process of grieving when something tragic happen is to focus your attention on something you can control,” said Mr. Birnie, a business consultant who chairs the Dunblane Centre, a community centre built with nearly $5-million in donations in the aftermath of the killing. But he never thought the campaign would succeed in banning handguns. “I just felt that maybe we wouldn’t get that far. Maybe we’d get some restrictions. I certainly was surprised [at the ban].”

To the people of Newtown, he offered this advice: “What I would say is that you’ve got to try to do what you feel is right at the time. And go as far as you can to get these things done. So don’t think it’s impossible, give it a go.”

For Mr. Birnie, the gun-control campaign’s success – as well as tennis star and hometown boy Andy Murray – have helped remove some of the stigma of Dunblane. For years, whenever someone asked him where he was from, Mr. Birnie would say “outside Stirling,” referring to a city nearby. Telling people he was from Dunblane was just too awkward.

But the real pain will never go away, he added. Even in the Dunblane Centre, a sprawling complex with a gym, dance studio, music recording venue and art room, reminders of that day are everywhere. There’s a line of windows dedicated to the fallen children, each pane decorated with a small animal, flower, superhero or angel for a child who died. Another row of windows is lined with snowdrops, one for each survivor.

For Mr. Birnie, the memories are never far away. The mere mention of Newtown had him pausing to collect himself. “I’m not really giving them the best advert for somebody who has moved on,” he said wiping away tears. “I think out of the most tragic circumstances some good does appear and hopefully that will happen for them.”

 

[timschochet]

Can anyone explain why they're against limits on gun magazines to 10 rounds and under? I am having a difficult time wrapping my head around why that would be an issue? It seems like 10 rounds should be sufficient for any situation?

What if 3 pit bulls attack you at the same time?

 

[[icon]]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

The only way this will happen if anything is passed is grandfathering. Forcing guns to be surrendered would never happen in a million years.

I agree, but then what's the point? This whole thing will be an exercise in "doing something" only in name so politicians can say they did something. Nothing meaningful will happen. Nothing that will actually make a difference. No chance.

Exactly. You would think 500 gun deaths in Chicago in one year would cause changes, but it takes kids dying before people want to pass through legislation that will do nothing solely so they can feel better.

Guns are already illegal in Chicago. Worked awesome.

 

[Slingblade]

It amazes me..the ignorance of people that know nothing about guns or gun culture.

 

[timschochet]

Actually, this isn't that difficult to find the truth if you want it. All you need do is read up on the American occupation of Germany, in which the first thing the G.I.s did is make every family get all of their firearms and deliver them to the town or city square, where stupid were stacked in large piles and confiscated. If Hitler had seized all the guns years before like the NRA claims, where the heck did these large piles of weapons come from???? And if Stalin grabbed all the guns when he took power, then how did the citizens of Leningrad and Stalingrad defend their cities with rifles? What rifles? And if Saddam Hussein took everyone's guns away, then why did our troops again in that war confiscate as many weapons as they could find? What weapons? Why wasn't the population defenseless?? These claims are so absurd that in order to believe them, you have to be completely ignorant of history. Yet apparently many gun rights supporters are.

My god you are stup

Well, that's a strong argument.

 

[Slingblade]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

The only way this will happen if anything is passed is grandfathering. Forcing guns to be surrendered would never happen in a million years.

I agree, but then what's the point? This whole thing will be an exercise in "doing something" only in name so politicians can say they did something. Nothing meaningful will happen. Nothing that will actually make a difference. No chance.

Exactly. You would think 500 gun deaths in Chicago in one year would cause changes, but it takes kids dying before people want to pass through legislation that will do nothing solely so they can feel better.

Guns are already illegal in Chicago. Worked awesome.

Exactly! And we have no drug problems in the US either because they are illegal! How great is that?!

 

[Neovivo]

Ok, so for those of you gun fans agreeing to some sort of gun ban...would you agree to NO grandfathering? Would we force illegal guns to be surrendered, or would everyone get to keep their now illegal gun?

The only way this will happen if anything is passed is grandfathering. Forcing guns to be surrendered would never happen in a million years.

I agree, but then what's the point? This whole thing will be an exercise in "doing something" only in name so politicians can say they did something. Nothing meaningful will happen. Nothing that will actually make a difference. No chance.

Exactly. You would think 500 gun deaths in Chicago in one year would cause changes, but it takes kids dying before people want to pass through legislation that will do nothing solely so they can feel better.

I think it is because the children are the most innocent of our society. It strikes a cord with everyone. Also, makes people feel really uneasy when children are at school and being gunned down. Also, the amount of children at one time sickens people. Probably wouldn't have had the same impact if it was 1 child and a couple of adults. I don't know what the magic number is to get people riled up about gun control, but this time it was surpassed.

 

[Glass Joe]

It amazes me..the ignorance of people that know nothing about guns or gun culture.

Please - explain gun culture and how it's part of the discussion.