Is it time for a serious conversation about Gun Control?

[TigerNBham 3]

Yes, like everyone else in America I read that he had I think four pistols.

However the weapon choice and the ones bringing the most firepower to our streets are the military grade assault

rifles or those civilian models that can be made automatic.

My point was that as long as there profit and making and selling those weapons they will be made and sold.

And if we want to wring our hands and cry, " Why and how " we are only doing it to delude ourselves.

[Ouchyfish 67]

Yes, like everyone else in America I read that he had I think four pistols.

However the weapon choice and the ones bringing the most firepower to our streets are the military grade assault

rifles or those civilian models that can be made automatic.

My point was that as long as there profit and making and selling those weapons they will be made and sold.

And if we want to wring our hands and cry, " Why and how " we are only doing it to delude ourselves.

Well if everyone else in America read that why the hell is the big gun crybabies coming out of the woodwork like it's some kind of liberal roll call?

Would you rather Remington got the profits or Big Skeezy on the corner, or Jimmy Jack in the alley because let me tell you now, there will still be guns no matter what the laws say.

The wonderful bans on cocaine, heroin, ecstasy, pcp, etc are working so well and there is no more of it in America thanks to those wonderful bans! Praise the law!

Oh..wait..it's not gone..people...are...still...bringing...it...in...illegally...shucks...and guess what? Law abiding citizens can't or won't buy it but guess who can and does?

When the s*** hits the fan do you want a pitchfork or do you want a shiny broadsword?

There's a reason the 2nd Amendment is there. The Founding Fathers knew it.

[leglessdan 1,934]

Yes, like everyone else in America I read that he had I think four pistols.

However the weapon choice and the ones bringing the most firepower to our streets are the military grade assault

rifles or those civilian models that can be made automatic.

My point was that as long as there profit and making and selling those weapons they will be made and sold.

And if we want to wring our hands and cry, " Why and how " we are only doing it to delude ourselves.

Well if everyone else in America read that why the hell is the big gun crybabies coming out of the woodwork like it's some kind of liberal roll call?

Would you rather Remington got the profits or Big Skeezy on the corner, or Jimmy Jack in the alley because let me tell you now, there will still be guns no matter what the laws say.

The wonderful bans on cocaine, heroin, ecstasy, pcp, etc are working so well and there is no more of it in America thanks to those wonderful bans! Praise the law!

Exactly...they can pull all "assault" rifles off the shelves and there will still be "assault" rifles in the public. Any semi-automatic hunting rifle can be modified to fit that description. The Government will NEVER be able to stop it, just like drugs. The importantance of a positive reinforcing culture is needed more than ever. When parents and society stop advocating sex, drugs, and violence and start advocating fellowship and humanity, then and only then will positive strides be made. IMO.

[tgr4lfe 220]

I own a few guns, all hunting related. I guess some folks want to own the semi automatic but they are not for hunting. I do not own a handgun but am considering one for the personal protection. That said I don't think I would ever wear it to a movie theater. What gets me is the purchasing of the body armor. That is a huge red flag and I would think should only be sold to those in law enforcement. As said the problem with additional regulation is only law abiders would follow it.

Agree. That's certainly a red flag. Also buying a ton of ammunition at one time is a red flag. These guys had some serious ammunition stockpiled. IMO no one solution will solve this issue b/c it is clear that many of these mass killers would not have had an issue getting a gun even with harder restrictions b/c they didn't have a criminal record. Yes we can do backgrounds but several other things need to be combined to help slow this issue down.

There is NO reason why a civilian should have an assault rifle. If people want to shot one...go the the range or join the military. I don't like the idea of licensed gun owners taking guns into public places. True if someone at the movie theatre would've had a gun they could've shot that guy but I see worse things happening when people take guns in public places: More innocent people could be shot, Somone could mistake an innocent person for the real shooter; You have more bullets flying everywhere. Just don't like that idea.

However, I do think that schools and colleges need to no longer be gun free zones. These shooters go to schools and colleges b/c they know that there is no one there with a gun. They can kill as many as they wish...then kill themselves..only to have to police come after it is all over to count the bodies. I think ONLY 1 gun should be in every school and only be accessable to the Principle and Asst. Principle. Admin. and NOT teachers should have access to the gun and know where it is kept. It will not solve the entire problem but it can help b/c students are sitting ducks! Unless they start building schools like prisons....they will be a major risk of these shootings at schools.

That is the stupider thing I've ever read. You don't want people, who legally can, to have a gun in a public place, but you are ok with guns on educational facilities?!? Educators have no training in defensive tactics, hell most probably wouldn't want that responsibility or feel comfortable with it. One gun? Unless it is a larger school district most elementary, middle, high schools don't have police or armed security present. Most universities do have that presence & train to respond, but there is no magic predictor do it has to be a reactive, but proactive response. There is no more wait on SWAT, first responding officers tactucall train to respond to active shooters immediately upon arrival.

There is NO way to prevent these senseless acts of violence. Gun laws aren't going to do it. That will only make it more difficult for law abiding citizens. Criminals and those who want to get a firearm will always be able to. The best prevention is to harden the physical security infrastructure of the facilities, though access control, surveillance, armed trained officers on premises. All of these things require significant funding, that administrators are not always gonna let go of until something happens. Administrators are way to reactive instead of listening to those responders and their needs.

[TigerNBham 3]

Yes, like everyone else in America I read that he had I think four pistols.

However the weapon choice and the ones bringing the most firepower to our streets are the military grade assault

rifles or those civilian models that can be made automatic.

My point was that as long as there profit and making and selling those weapons they will be made and sold.

And if we want to wring our hands and cry, " Why and how " we are only doing it to delude ourselves.

Well if everyone else in America read that why the hell is the big gun crybabies coming out of the woodwork like it's some kind of liberal roll call?

Would you rather Remington got the profits or Big Skeezy on the corner, or Jimmy Jack in the alley because let me tell you now, there will still be guns no matter what the laws say.

The wonderful bans on cocaine, heroin, ecstasy, pcp, etc are working so well and there is no more of it in America thanks to those wonderful bans! Praise the law!

Oh..wait..it's not gone..people...are...still...bringing...it...in...illegally...shucks...and guess what? Law abiding citizens can't or won't buy it but guess who can and does?

When the s*** hits the fan do you want a pitchfork or do you want a shiny broadsword?

There's a reason the 2nd Amendment is there. The Founding Fathers knew it.

Well I'll say this for you you shotgunned your response all over the board on this one.

Where shall I start ?

An armed ciitizenry was never intended to include state of the art military arms.

It was to insure that the ciitizenry could be called upon to defend their country and homes in the absence of professional soldiers.

It carries then as now the implicite warning that every home had them and was prepared to use them.

Quit confusing the issue with cries of we'll be outgunned and only the outlaws will have them. So, throw their butts in jail for a long time .

On the first, a well armed ciitzenry with accurately scoped in large caliber hunting rifles would be sufficient to stop a lot of people from a long way away.

A multishot shotgun at close quarters is very effective, so much for your pitchfork arguement.

The US is the world's largest arms manufactorer and we make a lot of money selling them to anyone with money.

Do I expect us to stop, no.

Do I expect our society to to have the will to or ability to stop making nut jobs who will acquire and use them, no.

All I am saying is what I am saying,

there is money in it, we are making a lot of it off it, and don't expect it to stop.

[TigerNBham 3]

I own a few guns, all hunting related. I guess some folks want to own the semi automatic but they are not for hunting. I do not own a handgun but am considering one for the personal protection. That said I don't think I would ever wear it to a movie theater. What gets me is the purchasing of the body armor. That is a huge red flag and I would think should only be sold to those in law enforcement. As said the problem with additional regulation is only law abiders would follow it.

Agree. That's certainly a red flag. Also buying a ton of ammunition at one time is a red flag. These guys had some serious ammunition stockpiled. IMO no one solution will solve this issue b/c it is clear that many of these mass killers would not have had an issue getting a gun even with harder restrictions b/c they didn't have a criminal record. Yes we can do backgrounds but several other things need to be combined to help slow this issue down.

There is NO reason why a civilian should have an assault rifle. If people want to shot one...go the the range or join the military. I don't like the idea of licensed gun owners taking guns into public places. True if someone at the movie theatre would've had a gun they could've shot that guy but I see worse things happening when people take guns in public places: More innocent people could be shot, Somone could mistake an innocent person for the real shooter; You have more bullets flying everywhere. Just don't like that idea.

However, I do think that schools and colleges need to no longer be gun free zones. These shooters go to schools and colleges b/c they know that there is no one there with a gun. They can kill as many as they wish...then kill themselves..only to have to police come after it is all over to count the bodies. I think ONLY 1 gun should be in every school and only be accessable to the Principle and Asst. Principle. Admin. and NOT teachers should have access to the gun and know where it is kept. It will not solve the entire problem but it can help b/c students are sitting ducks! Unless they start building schools like prisons....they will be a major risk of these shootings at schools.

That is the stupider thing I've ever read. You don't want people, who legally can, to have a gun in a public place, but you are ok with guns on educational facilities?!? Educators have no training in defensive tactics, hell most probably wouldn't want that responsibility or feel comfortable with it. One gun? Unless it is a larger school district most elementary, middle, high schools don't have police or armed security present. Most universities do have that presence & train to respond, but there is no magic predictor do it has to be a reactive, but proactive response. There is no more wait on SWAT, first responding officers tactucall train to respond to active shooters immediately upon arrival.

There is NO way to prevent these senseless acts of violence. Gun laws aren't going to do it. That will only make it more difficult for law abiding citizens. Criminals and those who want to get a firearm will always be able to. The best prevention is to harden the physical security infrastructure of the facilities, though access control, surveillance, armed trained officers on premises. All of these things require significant funding, that administrators are not always gonna let go of until something happens. Administrators are way to reactive instead of listening to those responders and their needs.

There was a time when guns in a school would have been unthinkable.

Now, we have armed policemen called resource officers in almost every school and for a reason.

Unless you, " harden the physical security infrastructure of the facilities", I do not know what the next step is either.

[Ouchyfish 67]

An armed ciitizenry was never intended to include state of the art military arms.

It was to insure that the ciitizenry could be called upon to defend their country and homes in the absence of professional soldiers.

It carries then as now the implicite warning that every home had them and was prepared to use them.

That is YOUR interpretation of it. My interpretation is that our founding fathers were revolutionaries and had experienced a tyrannical government first hand and then gave us protection for when/if it happened again. personal protection was a no-brainer.

Quit confusing the issue with cries of we'll be outgunned and only the outlaws will have them. So, throw their butts in jail for a long time .

Have you read the newspapers, internet news, or watched tv? The jails are overcrowded, sir! "Send them all to jail" mentality would be a nightmare.

On the first, a well armed ciitzenry with accurately scoped in large caliber deep rifles would be sufficient to stop a lot of people from a long way away.

A multishot shotgun at close quarters is very effective, so much for your pitchfork arguement.

What I was referring to was what do you do when your little multishot shotgun is up against something much more powerful. (See my 2nd amendment interpretation above.)

The US is the world's largest arms manufactorer and we make a lot of money selling them to anyone with money.

Do I expect us to stop, no. Do I expect our society to to have the will to or ability to stop making nut jobs who will acquire and use them, no. All I am saying is what I am saying, there is money in it, we are making a lot of it off it, and don't expect it to stop.

The same could be said for cigarettes..or alcohol..I wonder which kills more in the ATF+E...pretty sure it isn't the F.

[TigerNBham 3]

I did not believe I'd change anyones minds, just was tired of the hypocricy.

I do not expect assault rifes to be illegal and drugs to be legal.

Personally, I think we ought to decrimialize most drugs and that would free up a lot of jail space.

Have a nice life.

[aubfaninga 16]

It's funny how these "nuts" keep choosing targets that prohibit concealed weapons and other deterrents or resistance. In addition, locations that maximize casualties and response time from law enforcement. Must be a big ole coincidence.

I agree with all of your views that you have written but comments like this still raise questions for me.

"choosing targets that prohibit concealed weapons and other deterrents or resistance" etc... In most all these cases the target and location seem to be picked with specific targets in mind or (in the random cases) just a case of familiarity with the location. If we made a list of potential targets, the ones like you describe would dominate the list. I can only think of law enforcement facilities and military bases that would not.

[TastesLikeChicken 0]

I agree with what someone else has posted already in this thread. Have two to three people in each school go through regular mandatory firearm training with handguns and AR-15 type weaponry, and place a sign in front of the school indicating that a licensed expert is on the grounds at all times and will kill an attacker.

Also, these video games that A4E spoke of need to go. It desensitizes the people who play them to violence against others with how real and how graphic they are. It all starts in the home though.

This was an elementary school, not a prison. As if teachers don't have enough to watch, for example... 25 of your kids for 8 hours a day, you want to arm and train teachers and put a sign on the front door of the elementary school saying you'll be killed, all while 5-10 yr olds walk past it each morning???? Good grief. Do you have kids?

As the spouse of a kindergarten teacher, I assure you that arming her with a weapon isn't safe for anyone. The school had security procedures in place and trained regularly, both students and teachers. The cowardly gunman in this case busted the glass to break in the school and picked 2 classrooms and murdered every student and teacher in the room. In reality this was about 2 minutes.

So arming teachers with weapons is ridiculous, hiring more cops to guard schools is expensive, and there's already laws and safety procedures in place that seemed to have worked (Dick's sporting goods denying access to buy a gun and not allowing the gunman inside the school). What can you can control? The cowardly murderer's family was dysfunctional, his mother owned the 3 murder weapons and kept them in the house with the coward, and the older brother said he hadn't spoke to his younger cowardly brother in over 2 years. Family is so critical, and by all accounts this coward came from a family with issues. I do believe lack of church, lack of family discipline, soaring divorce rate with kids involved, solitary video games is the root of the problem.

[Weegle777 78]

I agree with what someone else has posted already in this thread. Have two to three people in each school go through regular mandatory firearm training with handguns and AR-15 type weaponry, and place a sign in front of the school indicating that a licensed expert is on the grounds at all times and will kill an attacker.

Also, these video games that A4E spoke of need to go. It desensitizes the people who play them to violence against others with how real and how graphic they are. It all starts in the home though.

This was an elementary school, not a prison. As if teachers don't have enough to watch, for example... 25 of your kids for 8 hours a day, you want to arm and train teachers and put a sign on the front door of the elementary school saying you'll be killed, all while 5-10 yr olds walk past it each morning???? Good grief. Do you uhave kids?

As the spouse of a kindergarten teacher, I assure you that arming her with a weapon isn't safe for anyone. The school had security procedures in place and trained regularly, both students and teachers. The cowardly gunman in this case busted the glass to break in the school and picked 2 classrooms and murdered every student and teacher in the room. In reality this was about 2 minutes.

So arming teachers with weapons is ridiculous, hiring more cops to guard schools is expensive, and there's already laws and safety procedures in place that seemed to have worked (Dick's sporting goods denying access to buy a gun and not allowing the gunman inside the school). What can you can control? The cowardly murderer's family was dysfunctional, his mother owned the 3 murder weapons and kept them in the house with the coward, and the older brother said he hadn't spoke to his younger cowardly brother in over 2 years. Family is so critical, and by all accounts this coward came from a family with issues. I do believe lack of church, lack of family discipline, soaring divorce rate with kids involved, solitary video games is the root of the problem.

Yes I do have kids as a matter of fact. And just because your wife isn't capable of using weapons, doesn't mean that others aren't. And I have said many other times that it starts in the family, but I guess you just chose to ignore those posts and rant about ONE sentence in ONE of my posts. Excellent work. Good grief.

[TigerNBham 3]

I have a retired school teacher in my house and I've been around one or two others.

And I am talking about practical people with the ability to understand how to use a firearm.

Arming teachers ? Let me say, that idea is nuts.

I realize that is a knee jerk reaction to a tragedy and maybe a ligitimate point to consider.

But NO.

We have an armed police resource officer in all schools in our district .

It is a felony to have a gun on school property for a reason.

No school district would open itself up to that liability and v. few teachers would want the risk

of having a loaded gun in their classroom.

Stop and think of the day in and day out nightmare that would be to keep it away from the students.

Plus, overnight breakins to get the teacher's guns.

By the time a weapon was removed from a secure box, etc. a gunman would have done his worst.

[TastesLikeChicken 0]

I agree with what someone else has posted already in this thread. Have two to three people in each school go through regular mandatory firearm training with handguns and AR-15 type weaponry, and place a sign in front of the school indicating that a licensed expert is on the grounds at all times and will kill an attacker.

Also, these video games that A4E spoke of need to go. It desensitizes the people who play them to violence against others with how real and how graphic they are. It all starts in the home though.

This was an elementary school, not a prison. As if teachers don't have enough to watch, for example... 25 of your kids for 8 hours a day, you want to arm and train teachers and put a sign on the front door of the elementary school saying you'll be killed, all while 5-10 yr olds walk past it each morning???? Good grief. Do you uhave kids?

As the spouse of a kindergarten teacher, I assure you that arming her with a weapon isn't safe for anyone. The school had security procedures in place and trained regularly, both students and teachers. The cowardly gunman in this case busted the glass to break in the school and picked 2 classrooms and murdered every student and teacher in the room. In reality this was about 2 minutes.

So arming teachers with weapons is ridiculous, hiring more cops to guard schools is expensive, and there's already laws and safety procedures in place that seemed to have worked (Dick's sporting goods denying access to buy a gun and not allowing the gunman inside the school). What can you can control? The cowardly murderer's family was dysfunctional, his mother owned the 3 murder weapons and kept them in the house with the coward, and the older brother said he hadn't spoke to his younger cowardly brother in over 2 years. Family is so critical, and by all accounts this coward came from a family with issues. I do believe lack of church, lack of family discipline, soaring divorce rate with kids involved, solitary video games is the root of the problem.

Yes I do have kids as a matter of fact. And just because your wife isn't capable of using weapons, doesn't mean that others aren't. And I have said many other times that it starts in the family, but I guess you just chose to ignore those posts and rant about ONE sentence in ONE of my posts. Excellent work. Good grief.

It's not that teachers couldn't use a weapon. Its their natural innocence as elementary teachers. Most of them become teachers because they love children, they have great patience, and are full of love and kindness, the majority aren't into weapons. The thought of aiming, pulling the trigger, and shooting another person does not cooperate with their wiring. Thats why we have police, security, military, and other types of protective personnel who are willing to be trained to protect others. I agree with you that the root cause is the crumbling of the family.. The only way this would've been prevented is if no guns existed. But as someone who grew up around weapons, I know its possible to treat them with great caution and utilize them properly.

[CCTAU 3,287]

I own a few guns, all hunting related. I guess some folks want to own the semi automatic but they are not for hunting. I do not own a handgun but am considering one for the personal protection. That said I don't think I would ever wear it to a movie theater. What gets me is the purchasing of the body armor. That is a huge red flag and I would think should only be sold to those in law enforcement. As said the problem with additional regulation is only law abiders would follow it.

Agree. That's certainly a red flag. Also buying a ton of ammunition at one time is a red flag. These guys had some serious ammunition stockpiled. IMO no one solution will solve this issue b/c it is clear that many of these mass killers would not have had an issue getting a gun even with harder restrictions b/c they didn't have a criminal record. Yes we can do backgrounds but several other things need to be combined to help slow this issue down.

There is NO reason why a civilian should have an assault rifle. If people want to shot one...go the the range or join the military. I don't like the idea of licensed gun owners taking guns into public places. True if someone at the movie theatre would've had a gun they could've shot that guy but I see worse things happening when people take guns in public places: More innocent people could be shot, Somone could mistake an innocent person for the real shooter; You have more bullets flying everywhere. Just don't like that idea.

However, I do think that schools and colleges need to no longer be gun free zones. These shooters go to schools and colleges b/c they know that there is no one there with a gun. They can kill as many as they wish...then kill themselves..only to have to police come after it is all over to count the bodies. I think ONLY 1 gun should be in every school and only be accessable to the Principle and Asst. Principle. Admin. and NOT teachers should have access to the gun and know where it is kept. It will not solve the entire problem but it can help b/c students are sitting ducks! Unless they start building schools like prisons....they will be a major risk of these shootings at schools.

That is the stupider thing I've ever read. You don't want people, who legally can, to have a gun in a public place, but you are ok with guns on educational facilities?!? Educators have no training in defensive tactics, hell most probably wouldn't want that responsibility or feel comfortable with it. One gun? Unless it is a larger school district most elementary, middle, high schools don't have police or armed security present. Most universities do have that presence & train to respond, but there is no magic predictor do it has to be a reactive, but proactive response. There is no more wait on SWAT, first responding officers tactucall train to respond to active shooters immediately upon arrival.

There is NO way to prevent these senseless acts of violence. Gun laws aren't going to do it. That will only make it more difficult for law abiding citizens. Criminals and those who want to get a firearm will always be able to. The best prevention is to harden the physical security infrastructure of the facilities, though access control, surveillance, armed trained officers on premises. All of these things require significant funding, that administrators are not always gonna let go of until something happens. Administrators are way to reactive instead of listening to those responders and their needs.

There was a time when guns in a school would have been unthinkable.

Now, we have armed policemen called resource officers in almost every school and for a reason.

Unless you, " harden the physical security infrastructure of the facilities", I do not know what the next step is either.

There was a time when guns were at school every day and nobody even thought of using them on another human being. This time was as recent as 1984!

You arguments are uninformed and pretty much fall in line with the Brady campaigns first step in confiscation.

[WarEagle1983 2,185]

I agree with what someone else has posted already in this thread. Have two to three people in each school go through regular mandatory firearm training with handguns and AR-15 type weaponry, and place a sign in front of the school indicating that a licensed expert is on the grounds at all times and will kill an attacker.

Also, these video games that A4E spoke of need to go. It desensitizes the people who play them to violence against others with how real and how graphic they are. It all starts in the home though.

Yeah that would be more feasible than having on duty police. I was just throwing that out there instead of going along with the media drum beat of more gun-control.

That would probably be the best way. Have a a few teachers that are trained on how to use handguns. It would be the most efficient and affective way to help protect schools.

+1. I said this too. It's not realistic that EVERY school can have a guard. As long as no guns are kept in the classrooms....I like that idea b/c no cameras, buzzers and medal detectors are going to stop someone from getting in if they want to. Yes, someone can still come in and try to shoot students but I believe that cut down on these occurances and save more lives if it did happen. Put up a sign that says the school is armed and "nutty" people will think twice. Yes, they could pick another place to go but I think the #1 priority should be to protect our children first; all the way up to the college level.

[homersapien 11,354]

I have suggested that the 10 commandments be taught in schools along with as many laws as any group of atheists can come up with. In fact if you are an atheist please give me a list of moral and ethical codes that I can teach my children. I will gladly welcome the added insight. What is wrong with teaching how to love and protect your neighbor everyday?

If you don't want to go down the religious vortex stop here...

Well, I am certainly not interested in going down the "religious vortex" but I can assure you that human moral standards have evolved naturally as a part of evolution. But I don't want to hijack the thread.

That's interesting to me. Evolution with a purpose. Very interesting!!!

So the killer was a product of evolution as well. Why do we care anyway? Evolution must run it's course for us to survive. Which I find to be an interesting thought as well. The best way to survive would have been to not evolve from the simple yet hardy organism we once was. Or still might become!!! I enjoy the evolution vortex as well.

I didn't propose that evolution had a purpose.

However, evolution operates on multiple levels. Individuals and societies with effective morals did better than individuals and societies without them. Heck even ants can be altruistic.

[homersapien 11,354]

Guns are inextricably wrapped up in psychology.

It's that feeling of power you get when holding a locked and loaded weapon (which should actually be said as loaded and locked - never could understand that....) We all feel this power. Some of us get addicted to it and become "gun nuts".

It is the combination of capability and the empowerment fantasy these guns create that makes them a threat to our society.

Granted, there is a legitimate desire to be capable of self defense, but weapons basically designed for military offense (after all they are called "assault" rifles) are not a good choice for self defense. If you discharge one in your house you are liable to take out someone in your own family sleeping in the next room, or the house next door for that matter.

People desire these weapons because of the feeling it gives them. They are dwelling in a world of fantasy imagining themselves fighting other organized militias - or even the U.S. Army for crissakes - instead of simply defending hearth and home. After all, you don't need high power rifles to target shoot. And you certainly don't need high capacity magazines and a harness to carry them.

Yeah it's fun, but it's more than fun. Its psychological masturbation.

We need greater restrictions on the availability of semiautomatic with detachable magazines. Please spare me the education. I am one of you. I know this stuff. I grew up with it. Some might say that I am a gun nut.

BAR (sporting) unrestricted. M1's unrestricted. AR's, HKs, AK's, Mini 14's and the like, restricted. The main feature of these military style weapons is the speed of reloading them. (I won't bother with the psychological mystique of using them.)

Likewise, I would establish greater user restrictions on semi-automatic pistols. Hell, a lot of the people who own them are so improficient with these that they present a greater danger to themselves, family and bystanders than to a threat. But those pistols are just so much sexier than a revolver I suppose.

So bottom line, increase licensing and training requirements for magazine fed semi-autos pistol or rifle. Really need self defense? Buy yourself a shotgun and/or revolver. Want to play and fantasize with high capacity military assault weapons with thousands of rounds? Get licensed, trained and monitored.

This is simply my opinion of what would make a better U.S. society when it comes to firearms. Please spare me the lectures on how effective a semi-automatic shotgun would be in a school shooting such as this. Believe me, there is nothing you can point out that I am not completely aware of.

Most agree that we need to draw a line somewhere - fully automatic weapons? explosive rounds? RPG's? Why not at least restrict (license) this class of weapons?

Flame away.

[CCTAU 3,287]

Please don't identify yourself as "one of us". You are the most dangerous kind of self proclaimed "gun nut". The kind that proclaims to know the underlying psychological and cultural ins and outs of brother "gun nuts".

We do not need your support. You are not one of us and you do not know us!

[Weegle777 78]

It has more to do with how gun play is sensationalized in movies, dramas, and video games in my opinion. I mean think about when most of us in our 30's and 40's were young. This stuff wasn't applauded and glorified like it is now. Look at action movies now. A hero is one that is gunning down police officers or security guards, people that are the villians being made out to be admired for killing people. Dramas coming on at prime time glorifying guns. Police dramas, FBI dramas, CSI dramas, this stuff is all a contributing factor, yet we want to blame guns themselves for the issues we have in society today. And don't get me started on these video games. Modern Warfare, Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Assassins Creed, REALLY? These games are being played by kids and adults that are from 6-50, and we wonder why kids have zero regard for human life? They immerse themselves in these games for hours on end and eventually it becomes a reality to them instead of a fantasy.

We need to stop blaming guns for the issues we have in society and start blaming parents, video game makers, Hollywood, and ourselves for allowing society to go down this road because we don't want little Johnny to not be allowed to "express himself".

When we as a society finally sober up and realizes that WE are to blame, and that WE can stop this crap if WE take a stand against the glorification of taking lives, then WE can start to end this cancer that has been allowed to infiltrate our world. But we have to be willing to say no to our kids and start taking an interest in their lives instead of letting PS3, XBox, and Hollywood raise them by their standards. Rant off.

[TigerNBham 3]

It would be a good place to start. Society is the problem both is acceptable forms of "entertainment" and the $$$ incentive .

BTW, I think homersapien makes some valid points.

[AUloggerhead 2,225]

Guns are inextricably wrapped up in psychology.

It's that feeling of power you get when holding a locked and loaded weapon (which should actually be said as loaded and locked - never could understand that....) We all feel this power. Some of us get addicted to it and become "gun nuts".

It is the combination of capability and the empowerment fantasy these guns create that makes them a threat to our society.

Granted, there is a legitimate desire to be capable of self defense, but weapons basically designed for military offense (after all they are called "assault" rifles) are not a good choice for self defense. If you discharge one in your house you are liable to take out someone in your own family sleeping in the next room, or the house next door for that matter.

People desire these weapons because of the feeling it gives them. They are dwelling in a world of fantasy imagining themselves fighting other organized militias - or even the U.S. Army for crissakes - instead of simply defending hearth and home. After all, you don't need high power rifles to target shoot. And you certainly don't need high capacity magazines and a harness to carry them.

Yeah it's fun, but it's more than fun. Its psychological masturbation.

We need greater restrictions on the availability of semiautomatic with detachable magazines. Please spare me the education. I am one of you. I know this stuff. I grew up with it. Some might say that I am a gun nut.

BAR (sporting) unrestricted. M1's unrestricted. AR's, HKs, AK's, Mini 14's and the like, restricted. The main feature of these military style weapons is the speed of reloading them. (I won't bother with the psychological mystique of using them.)

Likewise, I would establish greater user restrictions on semi-automatic pistols. Hell, a lot of the people who own them are so improficient with these that they present a greater danger to themselves, family and bystanders than to a threat. But those pistols are just so much sexier than a revolver I suppose.

So bottom line, increase licensing and training requirements for magazine fed semi-autos pistol or rifle. Really need self defense? Buy yourself a shotgun and/or revolver. Want to play and fantasize with high capacity military assault weapons with thousands of rounds? Get licensed, trained and monitored.

This is simply my opinion of what would make a better U.S. society when it comes to firearms. Please spare me the lectures on how effective a semi-automatic shotgun would be in a school shooting such as this. Believe me, there is nothing you can point out that I am not completely aware of.

Most agree that we need to draw a line somewhere - fully automatic weapons? explosive rounds? RPG's? Why not at least restrict (license) this class of weapons?

Flame away.

Spare you the lectures? While you lecture us with your pop- psychology psycho babble?

Let's look at the facts of this shooting incident. The pistols & ammo this coward used belonged to his mother. She owned them for self-defense as she was a "prepper" - one prepared for anarchy/lawlessness resulting from an apocalypse. She was proficient with them and used to take her kids to the shooting range. All perfectly legal so far, right? If anything we could say that the mother was being pro-active about self-defense as well as responsible. Unfortunately, she didn't consider her own son would murder her then go on a rampage at a local school. And that's the crux of the problem right there -- no restrictive gun laws have been able to address prohibiting use by psychotic cowards determined to massacre innocents in "gun-free zones."

If you want to initiate a new law to ban something then let's start by banning gun-free zones. The evidence is overwhelming that they directly contribute to these types of massacres.

[AUloggerhead 2,225]

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2012/12/16/virtually-unreported-ccw-holder-likely-prevented-larger-clackamas-mall-d

Please read the story linked above. A concealed carry weapon (CCW) permit holder drew his weapon in the Clackamas Mall but didn't fire on the cowardly shooter because he didn't want to hit innocent bystanders. The coward saw the CCW holder and shot himself shortly thereafter.

We don't know if the coward would have offed himself if he didn't first spot the CCW holder, but still ... It's unmistakeable that at the first sign of armed resistance, the coward packed it in. Ironically, those who advocate banning semi- automatics would have made this CCW holder a criminal rather than the hero he is.

[ToomersRevenge 284]

Video games and movies are an easy scapegoat whenever this happens in the same way guns are. But either way the key isn't to tone down games, it's to up your parenting.

Don't want your 5 year old to play Call of Duty? Good, I don't either because I have to put up with their asses on Xbox Live. Video games are entertainment, not a babysitter or replacement for actual human interaction. They have M for Mature written on the box for a reason; yet parents buy them without a problem then act horrified to see that it is in fact dealing with mature themes.

BTW: Modern Warfare IS a Call of Duty game.

[aubfaninga 16]

Video games and movies are an easy scapegoat whenever this happens in the same way guns are. But either way the key isn't to tone down games, it's to up your parenting.

Don't want your 5 year old to play Call of Duty? Good, I don't either because I have to put up with their asses on Xbox Live. Video games are entertainment, not a babysitter or replacement for actual human interaction. They have M for Mature written on the box for a reason; yet parents buy them without a problem then act horrified to see that it is in fact dealing with mature themes.

BTW: Modern Warfare IS a Call of Duty game.

Now thats funny!

I am currently not a gamer but I once played many hours of Mario Brothers. I can't recall having fantasies of breaking bricks with my head or jumping on every turtle and mushroom that I came across.

I live in a military town. Most of my friends and neighbors are in the Army. Most of them have and do spend alot of time playing shooter games. And I stress TOO MUCH TIME playing and talking about shooter games!!! They have access to weapons and are trained to use them. Why are they not all flipping out? Most of them are already mentally challenged(i say that with love) in the first place.

"Video games are entertainment, not a babysitter or replacement for actual human interaction."

+1000

[Weegle777 78]

Video games and movies are an easy scapegoat whenever this happens in the same way guns are. But either way the key isn't to tone down games, it's to up your parenting.

Don't want your 5 year old to play Call of Duty? Good, I don't either because I have to put up with their asses on Xbox Live. Video games are entertainment, not a babysitter or replacement for actual human interaction. They have M for Mature written on the box for a reason; yet parents buy them without a problem then act horrified to see that it is in fact dealing with mature themes.

BTW: Modern Warfare IS a Call of Duty game.

I'm glad that we agree.