No simple answers

jrm30655 wrote:

seisdedos wrote:So what happens when an armed teacher goes berserk and shoots a bunch of students? All of this bullshit about everyone carrying a weapon is insane. Yeah, that's the solution, more focking guns.

One of the other teachers blows him away?

Do you not think that a teacher can bring in a gun if he wants to?

Sure they can. But you know that isn't what I was talking about. And as far as another teacher "blowing him away" wouldn't that be after he has a half a dozen dead kids?

Have you ever faced someone with a gun that wants to kill you?

seisdedos wrote:

jrm30655 wrote:

seisdedos wrote:So what happens when an armed teacher goes berserk and shoots a bunch of students? All of this bullshit about everyone carrying a weapon is insane. Yeah, that's the solution, more focking guns.

One of the other teachers blows him away?

Do you not think that a teacher can bring in a gun if he wants to?

Sure they can. But you know that isn't what I was talking about. And as far as another teacher "blowing him away" wouldn't that be after he has a half a dozen dead kids?

Have you ever faced someone with a gun that wants to kill you?

6 is better than 20.

Do surface to air missles count? If so, yes.

I flew SAM suppression missions in Vietnam. They had no problems shooting SAMs at bombers because they didn't shoot back. When we were in the area they turned off the radars and went on break because if they didn't we sent HARM missles right down the signals and blew up their SAM sites and the operators with them. Amazing how quiet they got with us on the prowl.

The guy in the mall recently killed himself when he spotted a shopper with a gun coming after him. The kid in CT killed himself when he heard the first sirens. Maybe that is significant, maybe not. I think they both wanted to commit suicide.

Jim:

Are you really equating your flying of SAM suppression missions in the 60's or early 70's (?) with a school massacre in 2012? You already tried equating it with the situations and proceedures in Israel and are following the very same "dipshit" methods followed by those who attempt to rationalize what happens in Mexico with those that happen in Detroit. Get a grip, each of these is a sovereign country and each has to stand on their own merits!

jrm30655 wrote:The second amendment was not put in for hunters, it was put in so the people could protect themselves from the government if necessary. It was so important that it was second, just after freedom of speech.

Go read Jeffersons and Hamiltons papers to see just what they were thinking.

Times change,I doubt the founding fathers had this current version of society in mind when they advocated the right to bear arms.
As far as armed citizens protecting themselves from the government,well that's just not realistic,is it?
As to your idea of arming school teachers,well that's just absurd.

"A well regulated militia......etc." There are no simple answers, only simple questions. Gun laws today bear no relation to the 2nd amendment. I'm a gun owner, have been since I was 12. However IMHO changes in gun laws are long overdue.

Here is a very thoughtful article that echos what I have been saying - it is time to defang the NRA NOW.

More than 30 years a gun owner

"it is time to defang the NRA NOW."

Flamingo:

During the last election cycle, the NRA spent $11.4+ million advocating against the Dems and $5.9 million advocating for the REPS. Money well spent? Doesn't appear so and they may be at their weakest in recent memory? Then again, when it is so easy to confuse ACLU with NRA, it may be difficult to determine the actual damages.

Flamingo wrote:Here is a very thoughtful article that echos what I have been saying - it is time to defang the NRA NOW.

More than 30 years a gun owner

Yep, I saw that article also and thought it was very good. A gun owner like this man is fine with me.
I'd be willing to bet that he doesn't take an AR-15 with high-capacity clips deer hunting with him.

Motor vehicle traffic deaths in 2009
•Number of deaths: 34,485
Gun deaths in 2010
•31,513 deaths from firearms (Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600)

(I realize it is 2009 compared to 20010 but it is all I could find at the moment)

According to some here, we should ban motor vehicles (guns) because THEY kill people. Are you serious??? Education is the only answer (IMO). NOT legislation!!!

‎"...car ownership and driving are highly regulated activities including an elaborate licensing system, insurance mandate, penalties and terms for getting licenses revoked. What we are saying, to quote my friend Mike Stafford, is like calling for seat belt laws after a car crash, not banning cars...Jim Sanches writes, 'If they're going to use the car analogy, fine, let's regulate them as well as we do cars then. We mandate seat belts, headlights, the licensing of every car yearly and liability insurance on every car for starters. Not to mention all the rules of the road, traffic lights, stops signs, etc we all must obey even if we've never violated any of them.'" And civilians don't drive military tanks on public roads.

http://www.coffeepartyusa.com/progun_friends

So you are saying we have no Gun regulations...?????????????

Given the number of guns smuggled into Mexico from the US - one could draw that conclusion!

It is amazing to me when people read something and draw a wild conclusion that is not even remotely mentioned in what they read.
But, CheenaGringo you bring up a good point. Yes, there is gun regulation in the U.S. but it is far too loose with loopholes and laxity that should be abhorrent to a civilized people.

Lady Otter Latté wrote:
But, CheenaGringo you bring up a good point. Yes, there is gun regulation in the U.S. but it is far too loose with loopholes and laxity that should be abhorrent to a civilized people.

See this is were I could agree with you. What you stated resulted in 31,513 deaths. What I can't understand is why no one is standing up SCREEMING for more vehicle legislation when the legislation we have has lead to 34,485 deaths. If you care about lives than what does it matter what TOOL caused them? I’m not saying we don’t need more gun legislation, I’m asking why do people get so upset when it comes to guns but every one of them breaks the law when it comes to cars and they think it is ok…?

I received the following re: Canadian gun laws. I am not clear if these are national regs or those for BC where this person happens to be from:

"In order to get your hands on the guns this lunatic had you must:

1. Take the unrestricted and restricted gun safety course, and pass the safety exams with an 80% mark at least on both
2. Have extensive mental health and criminal background checks done by the RCMP
3. Go through the 28 day waiting period
4. Do an interview, as well as have 2 references interviewed
5. You must be a member in good standing at an approved shooting range
6. You must have an authorization to transport to and from the range from your CFO
7. You must keep these guns locked up with trigger locks or in a secure safe
8. These guns are restricted and must be registered
9. The magazine on the rifle must be pinned to 5 rounds and 10 rounds on the handguns.

Yeah right.

Or buy them at the swap meet where the guy who sells car parts sells guns under the table. Or buy them from your neighborhood junkie.

Anybody can get a gun in the US any time they want - long as they have the money.

Lady Otter Latté wrote:It is amazing to me when people read something and draw a wild conclusion that is not even remotely mentioned in what they read.

Lady Otter Latté wrote:‎"...car ownership and driving are highly regulated activities including an elaborate licensing system, insurance mandate, penalties and terms for getting licenses revoked.

Your statement infers that NO regulations exist for gun control... No conclusion was drawn other than what you stated.

Trailrunner wrote:Yeah right.

Or buy them at the swap meet where the guy who sells car parts sells guns under the table. Or buy them from your neighborhood junkie.

Anybody can get a gun in the US any time they want - long as they have the money.

I completely agree. Anyone can break the law and kill someone (in a car or with a gun) anytime they want. Legislation is NOT going to stop them!!! Education is the only answer.

tictoc wrote: If you care about lives than what does it matter what TOOL caused them? I’m not saying we don’t need more gun legislation, I’m asking why do people get so upset when it comes to guns but every one of them breaks the law when it comes to cars and they think it is ok…?

That's a specious analogy,IMO.

tictoc wrote:Motor vehicle traffic deaths in 2009
•Number of deaths: 34,485
Gun deaths in 2010
•31,513 deaths from firearms (Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600)

(I realize it is 2009 compared to 20010 but it is all I could find at the moment)

According to some here, we should ban motor vehicles (guns) because THEY kill people. Are you serious??? Education is the only answer (IMO). NOT legislation!!!

Wow! Somebody has to explain this to you?



Cars and other motor vehicles are essential to commerce and life in general.
Guns are not.

Take ALL guns out of Mexico....peace and tranquility
Take ALL cars, buses, and trucks out of Mexico....chaos and pandemonium

Anbybody over 4 years old can figure that out

tictoc, though I usually choose not attempt reasoning with someone who is being deliberately obtuse or is woefully ignorant, I will say two things:
1) People die in car ACCIDENTS and are not willfully murdered by them.
2) The sentence said "HEAVILY regulated" not simply regulated. Read more carefully.

It is obvious that you simply want to try and convince others that you have a valid, sane argument. Where I am concerned that will not happen. Adios.

Lady Otter Latté wrote:tictoc, though I usually choose not attempt reasoning with someone who is being deliberately obtuse or is woefully ignorant, I will say two things:
1) People die in car ACCIDENTS and are not willfully murdered by them.
2) The sentence said "HEAVILY regulated" not simply regulated. Read more carefully.

It is obvious that you simply want to try and convince others that you have a valid, sane argument. Where I am concerned that will not happen. Adios.

Yes Mr. tictoc...compare apples to apples
Accidental traffic deaths to "ACCIDENTAL" gunshot deaths.

I'd just like to know why nobody is discussing the issue of psychotropic drugs here.

Let's put it this way. Guns+prozac, paxil,chantix,etc etc etc. DO NOT MIX.

SSRI's kill many people in many ways. Some slowly a lot quicker.

Why does anyone on an SSRI have a gun? Pretty unpredictable I'd say.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhO0Pul_FcE&feature=player_embedded

Seriously????

My ex-husband was on SSRIs, had a gun, and was a captain in the fire department.

Guns and ALCOHOL don't mix!

CheenaGringo wrote:I received the following re: Canadian gun laws. I am not clear if these are national regs or those for BC where this person happens to be from:

"In order to get your hands on the guns this lunatic had you must:

1. Take the unrestricted and restricted gun safety course, and pass the safety exams with an 80% mark at least on both
2. Have extensive mental health and criminal background checks done by the RCMP
3. Go through the 28 day waiting period
4. Do an interview, as well as have 2 references interviewed
5. You must be a member in good standing at an approved shooting range
6. You must have an authorization to transport to and from the range from your CFO
7. You must keep these guns locked up with trigger locks or in a secure safe
8. These guns are restricted and must be registered
9. The magazine on the rifle must be pinned to 5 rounds and 10 rounds on the handguns.

Thank you for sharing that with us Neil. Now, to further educated people on U.S. gun laws |vs. Canadian gun laws where guns are not a necessity since everybody is so nice just like in Connecticut , here is the the gun law in Alabama where The Dawg more-or-less matured and one must demonstrate the ability to actually breathe or, in the absence of said skill demonstrating viability, must be accompanied by a distant relative or paid advisor who can breathe and attest to the fact that at some time since 1938, the applicant actually did breathe and seemed at least moderately lucid except in the event the applicant is an African American or illegal immigrant of Latin American heritage in which case he must be able to cite from memory all 174 provisions of the Alabama state constitution in specific detail and pass a test proving he or she can shoot the eye out of duck at 300 yards.

We could at least start with personal responsibility:

If you have a child or other family member with emotional or behavioral problems--DO NOT HAVE A GUN COLLECTION AT HOME.

Luisa said: "We could at least start with personal responsibility:
If you have a child or other family member with emotional or behavioral problems--DO NOT HAVE A GUN COLLECTION AT HOME."

I think any parent who does not themselves have mental health issues knows that. It seems obvious that Adam did not grow up and live in a mentally healthy environment with someone who was capable of making good decisions. Do not paint the majority of other parents with that brush. I think most people assume personal responsibility (including most gun owners). We need help in protecting more people from those irresponsible few who can in minutes murder 26 people and emotionally devastate a community and a nation.