Gun violence has been all over the news as of late, and it's no wonder in light of the terrible news out of Florida. Listening to those only making political argument out of this tragic event feels to me, disrespectful to those we have lost and also seems counterproductive. I'm not a big gun guy, but do try to apply common sense in viewing the world. So here goes.....
A gun, any gun, cannot harm any person without an evil or irresponsible person to wield it. On this, can we all (Americans) agree?
However a person, any person, or people INTENT ON DOING HARM to others, can (and have) do great harm even without a gun. (trucks, knives, bombs, fire etc.) To me it seems like the PERSON is the common denominator.
Opinions differ on this subject, as can easily be seen on TV.
I side with our President, and MANY others, when he says we need to "harden up" these soft target schools called "Gun Free Zones". I'd like to see these teachers, who want to, have a chance to fight back against these shooters and have the possibility to save more lives than they can by just standing in front of their kids & taking the bullets for them.
We know, without a shadow of a doubt, that there will be other school shooters, who slip thru the cracks. The only question is: Will they face armed resistance, or again be able to shoot up all the ammo they have, at innocent unarmed kids & teachers ? I say, give the teachers a fighting chance, to save themselves & at least some of the kids. It's almost a no-brainer.
There are already lots of armed teachers, which until now, most didn't know about. And, there are lots more that know how to use hand guns, some with concealed carry license, who would love to be armed in school, so they could better protect their students, or at least have a chance to. Without guns to shoot back, those in the school are "sitting ducks". They don't have a chance. It just doesn't make any common sense to continue these "Gun Free Zone" policies, since it has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that a shooter can easily kill & maim lots of people, just by walking in the door & opening fire on all the unarmed people inside.
As has been said by many on TV, celebrities, politicians, sporting events, and lots of businesses have armed guards. So what sense does it make to leave the schools without any armed guards, inside the building, WITH the kids ???
It's really sad that it has come to this, in this country. But, that is the reality in which we now live.
I stand for our right to bear arms. That said, I'm pretty sure I don't want every Tom, Dick & Jane out there armed especially if not properly trained. IMO hardening soft targets is a slippery slope. Where does it end? Everyone straps on a side arm? Scares me. In time arming all may help stop some of the problem but it will not deter a crazy person hell bent on shooting up someplace if they have already decided to die in the process. Perhaps the shooting spree duration would be shortened but it will not stop it.
What I find disconcerting, in many cases, the shooter's instability is known yet there is seemingly no path to identify and/or treat these people. I can't help but wonder if poor parenting, overwhelmed school staffs and slashing of state mental health budgets aren't as much to blame as the guns are. CME-469 is correct. People kill people. Guns only make it easy. In any big city a nut can drive up onto a sidewalk and do uncalculated damage. Removing guns from the equation will just change the weapon of choice.
Then there is the Vegas shooter. Sadly, I don't believe that kind of event can be stopped without giving up far too much personal freedom. The odds of being caught in one of these events is so small I'd rather take my chances than give up all our personal freedoms.
So, my vote, keep our right to bear arms intact. Limit certain firearms/ammo. Create a real Federal registration and background check program. Reinstate local school staff and state mental health resources to help these kids before they get so far off track. Toughen penalties for violent crime including expedited death penalty in clear cut cases.
Yes Dennis, that's what I was trying to get at. I agree with oldskool that teachers (and staff) who are willing to carry should be allowed to do so if properly trained, this could be part of the answer. However, my bigger concern is the mentality of those who wish to do harm. In each of these cases many warning signs were present. On a campus this week a student was overheard talking about shooting up his school. He was questioned and his house searched. Found were several guns including an assault weapon and nearly 20 clips of ammo. Should not part of our approach be to allow law enforcement the ability to follow up on the signals that were obvious to so many? We recently had a teen death in our small town from an accidental shooting. Two friends fooling around with shotguns in their house while missing school. Where are our parents? There are many facets to this problem, and perhaps many parts to the solution. But no ones political objectives need be a part of it. This is to important.
This whole school shooting thing started in 1999. I think the whole this is being pushed by the people who want to take down our country. The same ones who are behind breaking apart the family unit and premoting degenerative behavior and trying to turn boys into chicks. When mom and dad have to both work leaves a child open to ro many unsupervised activities. Especially with the interwebs.
Its drugs...prescribed drugs for all kinds of ailments psychiatry type...we didn't have these shootings in the 50s....but we had the weapons...maybe not as automatic, but...weapons, weapons that didn't kill....not until the psyche drugs started....and its not the "tool" (as weapons are) that kill, its the person using the tool....making them illegal IMHO doesn't stop killings anymore than making killings illegal! stop the prescriptions of these drugs, you`ll stop the killings
Drugs? Good point, many people I know have been prescribed anti depressants. When somebody is down the doc says take this. Again, put on the bandaid and avoid the underlying problem. I believe indulging kids by giving them too much, to many outs, to much attention, to many trophies for nothing, lends to a feeling of self importance. Too much perceived self importance then grows into narcissism and the loss of empathy. When one believes he is the center of everything those around him lose thier importance. "When I'm pi##ed off everyone needs to know it!" And to them that justifies whatever they do to get attention. I love and support my kids, but the most important word I ever taught my kids is 'NO!"
"A WELL REGULATED MILITIA BEING NECESSARY TO THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE, THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" that it, 28 words.
how do you regulate something. maybe a true background check before joining. maybe keep track of your members, on a regular bases. maybe, see that they are well trained. maybe see that they are in a good mental and physical shape so they my serve when called on. maybe see that the weapons are stored and maintained properly, so they may be useful when needed, and not to be a hazzard to unknowing children, mentally or emotionally troubled people or the general public. maybe see that the weapons that are kept, are useful for there purpose. it says nothing about hunting. noting about bearing arms out side of said militia's duties, nothing about conceal carry. nothing about open carry. nothing about not using fed dollars to study gun violance. nothing about NOT overseeing that the guns that are produced in and imported into the US, are of a save design.
how can each of these help? true background check. not this 72 hr. bull shi!!t, that merchant can pretty much toss after short period. best of all if it's not back in 72hrs you still get your gun.
keep track of members.. well we would know who is on our side, how many we have. do we need more. maybe we need to recrute some more abled bodies. check that there up on there training. check the mental and emotional state. see if they have gone to the dark side of the law. so we can through them out. see that the weapon is stored and maintained properly, to be usefull when needed. to keep track of out weapons so that they may not be funneled to a anti state or government group who will do our union harm
i know this seems a little overboard but what we have is not working for our society as a whole. guns are the only merchandise that is not subject to any oversight of it's general safety. no under writers label or UL label. the only item sold in the USA that is not subject to a general safety review. that's why we have these millions of cheap saturday night specials on the streets and in the homes, that cost under $50. these are a majority of the guns that kill the people in accidents in the home and in unneeded violence in the street, . yes drugs are a part, yes ,fatherless homes are a problem, yes, or education system is a problem yes our welfare state is a problem, yes our tv is a problem . yes our music is a problem. yes the internet is a problem. yes our social media is the biggest problem of them all.
if you think that our founding father could foresee these issue taking hold in our society, along with foreseeing the advancement of our firearm technology, to create the killing machines we have today. and that they would not think ,this is not what we had in mind 240 years ago. you have your head in the sand or up your azz. sorry if i come off as an smart a?z. but if all people are created equal. my right to live free from persicution and live save in ones person, equals your right to bear arms, PERIOD.
“Well regulated militia†in 18th century English meant “Well equipped militiaâ€. It makes perfect sense that way. “Shall not be infringed†means shall not be infringed.
These are the meaning of those words 52 years after they were written. It is still there meaning today. There is nothing about well equipped in these definitions, or in the 2nd amendment.
What about our situation is in good order? Subject to rules or restrictions, that is what was meant. What is broken or violated by regulating These militias. That is what this single sentence says.These were the most advanced thinkers of there day. So I'm pretty sure they understood the meanings of the words they used.
These are the meaning of those words 52 years after they were written. It is still there meaning today. There is nothing about well equipped in these definitions, or in the 2nd amendment.
What about our situation is in good order? Subject to rules or restrictions, that is what was meant. What is broken or violated by regulating These militias. That is what this single sentence says.These were the most advanced thinkers of there day. So I'm pretty sure they understood the meanings of the words they used.
Drugs? Good point, many people I know have been prescribed anti depressants. When somebody is down the doc says take this. Again, put on the bandaid and avoid the underlying problem. I believe indulging kids by giving them too much, to many outs, to much attention, to many trophies for nothing, lends to a feeling of self importance. Too much perceived self importance then grows into narcission and the loss of empathy. When one believes he is the center of everything those around him lose thier importance. "When I'm pi##ed off everyone needs to know it!" And to them that justifies whatever they do to get attention. I love and support my kids, but the most important word I ever taught my kids is 'NO!"
I think prescription drugs have a lot more to do with it than media or anyone will tell you...50 years ago, kids didn't get all these drugs as they do now, and many kids try to commit suicide and /or have other behavioural problems...too many side effects which alter minds, behaviours, and you will find out all these shooters have had problems, have gotten prescribed meds...not trying to side step issues, but these drugs are more likely to affect the human behavior than gun ownership...50 yrs ago kids had guns but no violence, whats different? movies, prescription drugs... but the guns aren't the killer, just as cell phones aren't...texting and driving happens mostly by teens.....so they make that illegal, but they don't raise the age of cell phone ownership to 21 , as some propose for guns? why not? don't let kids have cell phones, they kill...just like guns....but then they say its not the phone, its the person!
District of Columbia v. Heller 2008 SCOTUS case held, in a 5–4 decision, that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban and requirement that lawfully-owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee.
Yes , this was just the one I could get to on my phone. I'll post a few writings from the papers of the continental congess, later when at my laptop. Yes the people who wrote the amendment. When giving there throughts and concerns on other matters. Dated months before and months just after the signing. Along with some writing by goerge washinton to some of the people in his comand or change . You can be the judge of what they say and what they ment.
All good points, and all well said. Facts certainly needed in the disscusion. I'm also hearing from my sons what their peers are saying in their universities. Parroting the media and professors talking points. What I hear missing in those arguments is the fact that gun control has been a political objetive for years. I remind my sons to remember when they debate these peers, to remember the opinions of these peers have been installed into them by higher-ups that had this political objective long before these school shootings!
Drugs are a huge problem. Through that activity violence has became normalized. The prescription drug problem is a true scherg on or society . Along with the lack of mental health care we all face. They all have a foot in the same hole. Money. Gangs fighting for turf to sell drugs, violence followed. Now we have corporate drug dealers getting in on it for the money. Saying there drugs are less adicktive. But still adicktive. But it's done with a white coat so no foul. Health care. Enough said about that. The NRA 5 million members do not donate the almost 500 million dollars they get a year. Maybe gun manufacturer, ammo manufacturer, the vast accessories manufacturer business. WE ARE ALL PAWNS IN THE GAME
Maybe we should have crime free zones instead... Or illegal immigrant free zones...
Now ya got me started. Grrr!
I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure. I feel like I am diagonally parked in a parallel universe. 1968 400 convertible (Scarlet) 1976 T/A - 455 LE (No Burt) 1976 T/A New baby, starting full restoration. 1968 350 - 4 speed 'vert - 400 clone (the Beast!) 1968 350 convertible - Wife's car now- 400 clone (Aleutian Blue) (Blue Angel) 2008 Durango - DD 2008 GXP - New one from NH is AWESOME! 2017 Durango Citadel - Modern is nice! HEMI is amazing! 1998 Silverado Z71 - Father-daughter project 1968 400 coupe - R/A clone (Blue Pearl) (sold) 1967 326 convertible - Sold 1980 T/A SE Bandit - Sold
perfect example of the problem. instead of trying to contribute to a dialog that was meant to help two lines of thought work through there issues, many throw mud into merky water. so, that no one can find the safety of common ground.
If you mean my comment, that was not "mud". It is quite significant to the issue. It exemplifies government's attempt to solve a problem but make it worse. It points out that previous attempts at restrictions with no enforcement made the law-abiding powerless and the criminals more powerful. It hints that a previous attempt to restrict rights failed miserably. (98% of mass murders have been in gun free zones.) More government is seldom the solution to anything. The problem is not firearms or the solution more weakening of the Constitution.
Actually, when I started this thread it was meant to point out that a gun is an inanimate object, incapable of doing harm by itself. To evoke discussion on the political objectives that are driving the issue of gun control. And that the person is the problem.
Back and forth goes the gun issue, with each tragedy being used to justify removing more freedoms. Again, the objective of removing our guns existed long before these shootings. World history of the 20th century can show us that this is not the first time citizens have been asked for their guns. They want us to argue with each other. To spin our wheels until smoke obscures the solution. Notice how these folks went strait to gun control, before any of us had time to mourn? Then even criticized us, saying "prayers are not enough" after not taking the time to do so themselves. What if we actually solved some of the violence problems we face? By recognizing the psychological, chemical, social and parenting problems we know exist. Not to mention noting the unheeded warning signs. We could make great strides. But wouldn't THAT take some of the wind out of the gun control sails? Hmmmm!
Actually, when I started this thread it was meant to point out that a gun is an inanimate object, incapable of doing harm by itself. To evoke discussion on the political objectives that are driving the issue of gun control. And that the person is the problem.
Back and forth goes the gun issue, with each tragedy being used to justify removing more freedoms. Again, the objective of removing our guns existed long before these shootings. World history of the 20th century can show us that this is not the first time citizens have been asked for their guns. They want us to argue with each other. To spin our wheels until smoke obscures the solution. Notice how these folks went strait to gun control, before any of us had time to mourn? Then even criticized us, saying "prayers are not enough" after not taking the time to do so themselves. What if we actually solved some of the violence problems we face? By recognizing the psychological, chemical, social and parenting problems we know exist. Not to mention noting the unheeded warning signs. We could make great strides. But wouldn't THAT take some of the wind out of the gun control sails? Hmmmm!
Excellent comments!
I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure. I feel like I am diagonally parked in a parallel universe. 1968 400 convertible (Scarlet) 1976 T/A - 455 LE (No Burt) 1976 T/A New baby, starting full restoration. 1968 350 - 4 speed 'vert - 400 clone (the Beast!) 1968 350 convertible - Wife's car now- 400 clone (Aleutian Blue) (Blue Angel) 2008 Durango - DD 2008 GXP - New one from NH is AWESOME! 2017 Durango Citadel - Modern is nice! HEMI is amazing! 1998 Silverado Z71 - Father-daughter project 1968 400 coupe - R/A clone (Blue Pearl) (sold) 1967 326 convertible - Sold 1980 T/A SE Bandit - Sold
I've always learned that the first step in any problem solving is to define the problem. Gun control is a solution before the problem is known. Gun control is a long-term political agenda looking for a crisis. Mass murders will find weapons. The real issue is how to identify and stop the mass murder from carrying out the crimes and/or how to stop a person from getting to that point.
And....as I grew up in Sweden...where its almost impossible to get a permit for guns....rifles, you need a hunting ground first, pistols , you need to show that your part of a club or such for target shooting.... but nowhere was there an age requirement (this was in the 60s)...BUT....I knew where I could get a semi automatic , like the army had, in 10 minutes , illegally! just because they are illegal doesn't mean you cannot get them....stolen goods sold on "black market' (= on the street somewhere), so it means ONLY people who break the law has them.....and todays Sweden , you read in the paper almost daily about "shootings"....
and if you gays recall, I think it was 1994, a Scot was shot in Houston while here as tourist...it was in my neighborhood...most of Europe kept saying US need gun regulations, this would never happen in Europe! about a year later later there was this school shooting in Scotland! 16 school children dead ! after that, not a word...I think it was callend Dunblane ...
We have the same problem in Canada with some differences. Automatic assault rifles are generally not used often. Don't know if we are limiting them more than US or not. Some examples of mass shootings in Canada:
1. Shooter went into a French Canadian University and shot only females (less than 30 I think). 2. Shooter shot unarmed serviceman at a Memorial in Ottawa and then crossed the street and entered the parliament buildings. He got in a struggle and shot the guard in the foot. Shooter walked by 2 meeting rooms that currently had the complete cabinet for the Conservatives and Liberals. If had he entered those rooms with a R15 we would have lost 90% of the government (ruling and opposition). He had a long rifle with 3 bullet clip. The sergeant-at-arms and his security staff ran after him with pistols and caught up to him and killed him in a hail of bullets. 3. Shooter got access to Quebec government buildings and caught most of the representatives, all sitting down in the legislature. ...like fish in a barrel ... luckily, the sergeant-at-arms talked to the shooter and was able to calm him down and give up his weapon. He had a hunting rifle I think.
NOTE: The formal role of a sergeant-at-arms in modern legislative bodies is to keep order during meetings, and, if necessary, forcibly remove any members or guests who are overly rowdy or disruptive. A sergeant-at-arms may thus be a retired soldier, police officer, or other official with experience in security.
So I can't say we are better, maybe just luckier so far.
I have noticed that the shooters generally only have the stomach for shooting for a short period of time. Perhaps they regret what they done soon after starting. If the cops can get there in less than 3 mins maybe most can be saved. Perhaps we should look at negotiation, understanding and try to limit how many bullets/sec a shooter can shoot. They don't wake up one day and decide to kill. They seem to be reaching out for quite some time before bad things happen. Identify problem people now and get them some help. Look at people around you and engage with some of the misfortune people suffering metal illness.
Engine Test Stand Playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwoxyUwptUcdqEb-o2ArqyiUaHW0G_C88 restoring my 1968 Firebird 400 HO convertible (Firedawg) 1965 Pontiac Catalina Safari Wagon 389 TriPower (Catwagon) 1999 JD AWS LX Lawn tractor 17hp (my daily driver) 2006 Sequoia 2017 Murano (wife's car) 202? Electric car 203? 68 Firebird /w electric engine 2007 Bayliner 175 runabout /w 3.0L Mercuiser__________________________________________________________
again, most of these looks to me like psychological problems...and many are on drugs to calm them down , to feel better about them selves etc..many kids on these kind of drugs try and some succeed w suicides....same stuff initiates the killing of others...too many out there with these prescriptions...before we gor these prescriptions and before parents were scolded for correcting their children...we had none of this...
let parents do parenting go after these doctors that when they see a kid w psycho problem , only prescribe these drugs that often do not have desired effect
Kinda strange...I put all my guns in a circle and sat in the middle of them. I spewed insult after insult at each one of them. Really cruel and hurtful things like,"your blue!", "nobody wants a single shot 1", "Belgium sucks!", "your bottom half is plastic!!!". ...and not one of them shot me.
Put any of those weapons in the hands of an impulsive human, and the story might be different.
Guns don't kill.
I'm a gun enthusiast. I reload, mold my own "boolits", as they're called when you do it yourself, and own more than a few weapons. I enjoy shooting, as much as I enjoy working on and driving my 'bird. I've never raised one of them to a human. (However, I would have if I had access to one on 1 occasion...and would have used it!)
That being said, the 2nd amendment needs to be revisited. There needs to be tighter controls on who can buy a gun. 21 year old minimum for long guns is reasonable start. (yea yea...you can serve in the military at 18...but you still can't buy a handgun until you're 21...so same for a long gun...or exempt active military at a younger age)
The NRA needs to chill out, and quit being radical if they want to maintain significant influence on behalf of it's members. They seem to be about as revered as a white supremacist group anymore. They really need to re-evaluate their purpose and approach to be more effective, and less polarizing.(yes, I'm a member...right now)
I'm kinda all over the place on this...just thinking out loud. But something needs to change. Parents need to do their job and raise their kids. Families need to stay together...the traditional family unit is decaying. Too many single parent families, too many children born to single mothers, no parental involvement in education, ... teachers afraid of their students. No GOD in our schools. Hell, some of these poor kids don't have a chance! Since when is it OK to smart back at a cop? What happened to respecting you elders?
OK...not much sense made above, but I feel better.
I'm a hobbyist. Not a professional. Don't be hatin'!
Kinda strange...I put all my guns in a circle and sat in the middle of them. I spewed insult after insult at each one of them. Really cruel and hurtful things like,"your blue!", "nobody wants a single shot 1", "Belgium sucks!", "your bottom half is plastic!!!". ...and not one of them shot me.
Put any of those weapons in the hands of an impulsive human, and the story might be different.
Guns don't kill.
I'm a gun enthusiast. I reload, mold my own "boolits", as they're called when you do it yourself, and own more than a few weapons. I enjoy shooting, as much as I enjoy working on and driving my 'bird. I've never raised one of them to a human. (However, I would have if I had access to one on 1 occasion...and would have used it!)
That being said, the 2nd amendment needs to be revisited. There needs to be tighter controls on who can buy a gun. 21 year old minimum for long guns is reasonable start. (yea yea...you can serve in the military at 18...but you still can't buy a handgun until you're 21...so same for a long gun...or exempt active military at a younger age)
The NRA needs to chill out, and quit being radical if they want to maintain significant influence on behalf of it's members. They seem to be about as revered as a white supremacist group anymore. They really need to re-evaluate their purpose and approach to be more effective, and less polarizing.(yes, I'm a member...right now)
I'm kinda all over the place on this...just thinking out loud. But something needs to change. Parents need to do their job and raise their kids. Families need to stay together...the traditional family unit is decaying. Too many single parent families, too many children born to single mothers, no parental involvement in education, ... teachers afraid of their students. No GOD in our schools. Hell, some of these poor kids don't have a chance! Since when is it OK to smart back at a cop? What happened to respecting you elders?
OK...not much sense made above, but I feel better.
👠Couldn't agree more... well written response! ðŸ‘
Has everone forgot about fast and furious? Why would the ones that say these so called assault weapons should be banned give them away to drug cartels and known murderer's using the American taxpayers money. Sorry to say Vegas was the same thing. Wake up fellas.
Fast and furious, was that another of the "my administration had no scandals" scandals Obama was talking about?
The DOJ just announced that they are going to hand over the documents associated with Fast and Furious to the House. The previous administration refused to let the House Oversight Committee see them. Maybe we will learn more soon.
Fast and furious, was that another of the "my administration had no scandals" scandals Obama was talking about?
The DOJ just announced that they are going to hand over the documents associated with Fast and Furious to the House. The previous administration refused to let the House Oversight Committee see them. Maybe we will learn more soon.
Glad to find out you guys feel generally the way I do. Lots of the time these shootings happen at soft targets, we need to make these targets harder, those spineless/gutless turds don't have the balls to take on anyone but the defenceless.
bill v
69 Firebird Convertible (wifes car since 1979) Goldenrod Yellow, 350, plain Jane Car was stored in garage since 1990
I need help, if anyone see's I'm going down the wrong road--Straighten me out!
for people who say "Americans kill because they have access to guns"...I typically ask them to look up "Dunblane, Scotland" on the web....it was only 12 years ago, but people forget so fast//for you who are not familiar, heres a link to Wiki.......
it says here that it made gun ownership harder....but it was almost impossible to ownhandgun in Scotland before....
Many scots complained about Texans..for maybe a year before , after a Scot got killed in my neighborhood in Houston.....he ran around drunk 4 am , banging on doors...ended up in a back yard trying to get in thru rear door , 2 blocks from my house , when the homeowner shot him...outcry...Europeans kept saying it could ONLY HAPPEN IN THE US, and it wouldn't happen in Europe as they had no guns.... then Dunblane happened, no more talk about not happening in Europe!